EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 2643
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27415 Posts
On September 19 2020 08:09 NewSunshine wrote: I love the implication that there can never be markets in strong social systems. Good one. But seriously, what do you think is happening right now re: billionaires in corporate capitalist America? Do they not have all the real power? Hell, I see Libertarians actually worship them like gods for the most part. It's not far off. And, since the average American's tax money gets lifted to help socialize the already super-wealthy and super-powerful, why can't that work downwards? Everything's hunky-dorey when we bail out ultra-rich assholes who don't need it year after year, but goodness forbid we do the same for normal working-class people. Heh. Trickle Down was always a lie. Every benefit you give to working people at the bottom always makes its way to the wealthy people at the top anyway. It just doesn't stay there, and get stuck in offshore bank accounts instead. Money needs to pass through people's hands. It's called currency for a reason. There need to be certain rules in place to prevent toxic levels of economic stagnation, because that's what you get in a totally free market. Money consolidates at the top once powerful interests emerge, and they just keep it when nothing stops them. The anvil of market competition is a lie. The number of budding competitors that Wal-Mart has crushed using their vast power and money, as an example, is a case in point. There need to be social mechanisms in place that allow for genuine competition. And yes, that means markets. You can have strong social components in a politico-economic system without it being capital S Socialism, or Stalin's Russia. It's a lazy argument that comes from a can. For all libertarians like to claim us lefties worship the state as a God substitute, their faith in the free market fixing literally everything is just as slavish, and at least I have the excuse in my utopian vision as being largely untested, their ideas are being continually disproven in real time. Economies of scale are a thing. My chances of seducing Sofia Vergara aren’t high, unless I find out she’s a huge closet Liquid HerO fan, but they’re still absolute leagues above any kind of new delivery startup competing with Amazon, to take one example. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On September 19 2020 08:49 NewSunshine wrote: After all the bullshit they gave Obama over a Supreme Court pick that was vaguely close to an election, you know they're gonna shove a new choice through behind closed doors and pretend they never said all of it. Get ready for the worst. Yeah, the Republican argument in 2016 was that because it was an election year, a vacant seat should not be filled until after the election. They now claim that their argument was that the vacancy should be left open because the Senate was held by a different party than the White House during an election year. But that was not their actual argument - it was only that it was an election year. There will be riots. Rarely does a Supreme Court vacancy occur in the final year of a presidential term, and the Senate has not confirmed a nominee to fill a vacancy arising in such circumstances for the better part of a century. So the American people have a particular opportunity now to make their voice heard in the selection of Scalia’s successor as they participate in the process to select their next president — as they decide who they trust to both lead the country and nominate the next Supreme Court justice. | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6223 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27415 Posts
Does he get confirmed? | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24367 Posts
On September 19 2020 08:49 NewSunshine wrote: After all the bullshit they gave Obama over a Supreme Court pick that was vaguely close to an election, you know they're gonna shove a new choice through behind closed doors and pretend they never said all of it. Get ready for the worst. We sure about this? Is replacing RBG a bigger vote draw for Trump or Biden? Strategically, replacing RBG now locks up the Supreme Court for Republicans for the foreseeable future iirc. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On September 19 2020 08:58 GreenHorizons wrote: We sure about this? Is replacing RBG a bigger vote draw for Trump or Biden? Strategically, replacing RBG now locks up the Supreme Court for Republicans for the foreseeable future iirc. Why make it an issue to vote on, when the chance is already right in front of them? They get an extra lifetime of conservative hardline rulings if they pack the court now. There's no reason not to do it, especially if they're worried they're going to lose in November. | ||
KwarK
United States44325 Posts
On September 19 2020 08:58 GreenHorizons wrote: We sure about this? Is replacing RBG a bigger vote draw for Trump or Biden? Strategically, replacing RBG now locks up the Supreme Court for Republicans for the foreseeable future iirc. They'll have someone in her seat before it gets cold. Her replacement was lined up years ago. | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46475 Posts
| ||
|
Gahlo
United States35174 Posts
On September 19 2020 08:58 GreenHorizons wrote: We sure about this? Is replacing RBG a bigger vote draw for Trump or Biden? Strategically, replacing RBG now locks up the Supreme Court for Republicans for the foreseeable future iirc. Trump conveniently said he had a shortlist for the SC what... a week or two ago? They're gonna put somebody in. People didn't stomach Trump for the judge appointments, and anybody who says otherwise is a liar. It was, however, how I was able to stomach voting for Biden. Hurray, PA. =\ | ||
|
HelpMeGetBetter
United States766 Posts
| ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
On September 19 2020 08:58 NewSunshine wrote: McConnell is 100% going to do a Donald Trump and get owned by himself 4 years ago. Not that they give a shit of course. Why make it an issue to vote on, when the chance is already right in front of them? They get an extra lifetime of conservative hardline rulings if they pack the court now. There's no reason not to do it, especially if they're worried they're going to lose in November. Mitch already confirmed he would do that a few months ago. | ||
|
micronesia
United States24800 Posts
On September 19 2020 09:05 HelpMeGetBetter wrote: Trump is at a rally blabbing about whatever. apparently he hasnt been told about RGB yet I think it's smart not to tell him. If an aid walked up to him right now and whispered into his ear "RBG just passed away from medical complications" he would yell to the crowd "hey everyone, RBG just died! Guess what that means!? <loud cheering>" and the optics would be poor. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27415 Posts
On September 19 2020 09:06 micronesia wrote: I think it's smart not to tell him. If an aid walked up to him right now and whispered into his ear "RBG just passed away from medical complications" he would yell to the crowd "hey everyone, RBG just died! Guess what that means!? <loud cheering>" and the optics would be poor. I mean do optics even matter? With a normal politician/human yeah probably judicious. Trump could come out with ‘I’ve just been informed RBG has passed away... guess it was her Jew date’ before segueing into talking about making the best SC appointment, I always pick the best people. Very strong people’ and his audience would absolutely lap it up. | ||
|
KwarK
United States44325 Posts
By the way, if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks. Though the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know. It's not hopeless, there's something you can do. If it's not clear what can be done to resolve the other party stacking the court with lifetime appointments Trump helpfully clarified later that the Second Amendment people could work together and lobby for change or something. | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
On September 19 2020 09:12 WombaT wrote: I mean do optics even matter? With a normal politician/human yeah probably judicious. Trump could come out with ‘I’ve just been informed RBG has passed away... guess it was her Jew date’ before segueing into talking about making the best SC appointment, I always pick the best people. Very strong people’ and his audience would absolutely lap it up. He basically spit on McCain's grave and it didn't hurt him Trump will probably laugh and thank Obama for leaving him a dying SC Judge and point it out as another reason why Obama and democrats are stupid. He already always boasts about Obama leaving him judicial appointments. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27415 Posts
On September 19 2020 09:12 Mohdoo wrote: This is an absolute disaster. Deeply heartbroken. Gonna take me a bit. See you guys once I'm better. Take care man. I think I sunk like, 15 beers after the Brexit vote, would not recommend that coping mechanism Aside from the personal tragedy of the passing of somebody, how is this a good system at all? We’re having people crossing their fingers that an 87 year old can cling on a bit longer (or not) so their replacement can be locked in for the foreseeable? I’m all for independence from the whims of the public and government and the benefits of experience, but why can’t it be a 15/20 year term or something instead of a lifetime gig? | ||
|
HelpMeGetBetter
United States766 Posts
If this is true, did she mean a new president who is not Trump, or until after the election/inauguration? | ||
| ||
