EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 376
| 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 | ||
|
PhoenixVoid
Canada32740 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On June 29 2018 08:40 PhoenixVoid wrote: Regardless of Milo's statement being a possible influence on the shooter, or related to the shooter's opinions on journalism and fake news, it's a chilling incident. Reporters don't get paid enough or receive reasonable work hours to endure the slinging of insults ranging from trollish "hahaha fake news" to "I hope you all die your profession is a joke", and having their job debased, or being killed at work. It may be something you believe is all politically tinged and purely for profit now, but a small local newspaper? It's a pretty crappy state in the news industry right now in terms of finances and the mood set by the president, and being in a state of fear wondering if their newsroom will be the next crime scene compounds things. The internet has replaced the quality and variety of our local news outlets with volume and easy of access. It’s hard to say that it has improved news or made the public better informed. | ||
micronesia
United States24690 Posts
Schumer just introduced a bill to federally decriminalize marijuana. Apparently it's been in the works for a while. The law would still allow states to restrict marijuana if they want to, and would allow for federal enforcement of smuggling of weed into restricted states. How likely is this bill to make it through the process? What is the main opposition? | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On June 29 2018 08:49 micronesia wrote: https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/28/politics/schumer-bill-decriminalize-marijuana/index.html Schumer just introduced a bill to federally decriminalize marijuana. Apparently it's been in the works for a while. The law would still allow states to restrict marijuana if they want to, and would allow for federal enforcement of smuggling of weed into restricted states. How likely is this bill to make it through the process? What is the main opposition? There's still a lot of republicans opposed to such. I'd say near zero; because I don't think the republicans wnat to let Dems get anything they could call a win; and I doubt they'd get a majority of republicans on board with such a proposal (and past actions have shown the house won't let stuff pass unless the republicans support it) | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44368 Posts
In 'Major Step' Toward Making Democratic Party More Democratic, DNC Votes to Roll Back Power of Superdelegates https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/06/28/major-step-toward-making-democratic-party-more-democratic-dnc-votes-roll-back-power?amp "Thanks to all of the incredible activism, superdelegates will soon be a thing of the past." In an important and long-overdue step toward making the Democratic Party more accountable to voters and less captive to the interests of establishment insiders, the Democratic National Committee's (DNC) Rules and Bylaws arm voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday to drastically curtail the influence of superdelegates by barring them from voting on the first ballot of the presidential nomination. "This is a major step forward in making the Democratic Party more open and transparent, and I applaud their action." —Sen. Bernie SandersSen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who has long criticized the party's superdelegate system as undemocratic, congratulated DNC chair Tom Perez and the Rules and Bylaws Committee for the move in a statement following the 27-1 vote, saying the "decision will ensure that delegates elected by voters in primaries and caucuses will have the primary role in selecting the Democratic Party's nominee at the 2020 convention." "This is a major step forward in making the Democratic Party more open and transparent, and I applaud their action," Sanders added. Nomiki Konst, a Sanders appointee to the DNC's Unity Reform Commission, similarly praised the DNC's move to limit superdelegates' power in a series of tweets late Wednesday, attributing the nearly unanimous vote to a wave of grassroots activism that began during the 2016 Democratic presidential primary, when progressives recognized the way in which the system tilted the scales in favor of Hillary Clinton over Sanders' insurgent campaign. "This is a YUGE deal," Konst wrote shortly following the committee's vote. "Thanks to all of the incredible activism, superdelegates will soon be a thing of the past." The push by progressives to scale back the influence of superdelegates intensified in the wake of the heated 2016 Democratic primaries, when former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton secured the support of hundreds of superdelegates before a single vote was cast. "No candidate should have an accumulated lead, whether real or perceived, before a first ballot is cast," DNC chair Tom Perez said during a conference call about the new rule on Wednesday. "We have to make sure that we rebuild the trust among many who feel alienated from our party." The Rules and Bylaws Committee is set to officially certify the new superdelegate restrictions next month before they are adopted by the full DNC in August. Better late than never, I suppose. This is encouraging news, and a pretty big concession on the side of the DNC (assuming the power of the superdelegates truly is rolled back). | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
| ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
On June 29 2018 08:52 zlefin wrote: There's still a lot of republicans opposed to such. I'd say near zero; because I don't think the republicans wnat to let Dems get anything they could call a win; and I doubt they'd get a majority of republicans on board with such a proposal (and past actions have shown the house won't let stuff pass unless the republicans support it) But failing to vote for it, especially when the idea behind it is growing in popularity rapidly with the public, just gives creates another bloc of angry voters coming out for Dems. Republicans passing this and making it go away may be the safer political move. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On June 29 2018 08:56 On_Slaught wrote: But failing to vote for it, especially when the idea behind it is growing in popularity rapidly with the public, just gives creates another bloc of angry voters coming out for Dems. Republicans passing this and making it go away may be the safer political move. aye; that's why i'm saying near zero rather than zero. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44368 Posts
On June 29 2018 08:55 zlefin wrote: the superdelegates never had that much power to begin with; it was more nominal power than actual power. not that I mind them being removed/weakened. I agree, although I think there's a lot of power in the optics of who the superdelegates back in a primary (especially if it's against the popular candidate), in terms of how disillusioned and cynical potential voters become when it comes time for the general election. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On June 29 2018 08:58 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I agree, although I think there's a lot of power in the optics of who the superdelegates back in a primary (especially if it's against the popular candidate), in terms of how disillusioned and cynical potential voters become when it comes time for the general election. Perception is reality. The democrats lost sight of that and paid for it. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
The leader of our country cannot be bothered to answer a single question or make a single comment about the shooting. Not even a terrible. He can’t even compose his own tweet saying he feels bad about it. He will only say he feels bad about the dead reporters when forced. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15690 Posts
On June 29 2018 08:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/06/28/major-step-toward-making-democratic-party-more-democratic-dnc-votes-roll-back-power?amp Better late than never, I suppose. This is encouraging news, and a pretty big concession on the side of the DNC (assuming the power of the superdelegates truly is rolled back). It should be zero, but I will accept this. This is a step in the right direction and makes super delegates significantly weaker. The delegate count starting at +34235236 Clinton before any voting took place made the entire primary look like a joke. This still allows for the same shit to happen, just way less grotesquely. But fact remains, it should be zero. We should continue working towards zero, but be happy with this. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
| ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
You know, we all know that he's a despicable dickhole (well, the ones that actually have half a functioning brain anyway). But i mean, completely objectively now, republicans (and their supporters) should start reflecting very carefully now. It's their supporters who take up a gun and run into a building. Lets not forget that this wasn't the first swine that took his rifle and stormed into an establishment based on something absolutely retarded that some republicans vomited out and got spread on pro-trump websites. This should transcend party. But i guess thoughts and prayers, as usual, will do as well. And of course the obligatory "yeah totally mental health n shit". | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On June 29 2018 08:40 PhoenixVoid wrote: Regardless of Milo's statement being a possible influence on the shooter, or related to the shooter's opinions on journalism and fake news, it's a chilling incident. Reporters don't get paid enough or receive reasonable work hours to endure the slinging of insults ranging from trollish "hahaha fake news" to "I hope you all die your profession is a joke", and having their job debased, or being killed at work. It may be something you believe is all politically tinged and purely for profit now, but a small local newspaper? It's a pretty crappy state in the news industry right now in terms of finances and the mood set by the president, and being in a state of fear wondering if their newsroom will be the next crime scene compounds things. Yeah on that killed at work thing. But seriously, "endure slinging of insults" and "job debased" in this list? Are journalists overgrown children? Ideally, they speak truth to power (and frankly most have abandoned that responsibility), and it turns out the power really really doesn't quite like their deeds being exposed. I get the foundation of death threats chilling their gusto at the execution of the jobs, but please don't lump in a whole bunch of crap that detracts from your point. Obama's Eric Holder labeled a journalist a "criminal co-conspirator" to get his phone records. Holder also wiretapped many phone lines at the Associated Press. Nixon's VP smacked around the profession with "pusillanimous pussyfooters" and "nattering nabobs of negativism." Basically, if you're doing your job well, presidents will verbally insult you or spy and harass you. They're in an industry that sometimes requires "enduring the slinging of insults," and it's best to not let words hurt you. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
Basically, if you're doing your job well, presidents will verbally insult you or spy and harass you. By your own definition, journalists never have done a better job than now. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On June 29 2018 09:25 Mohdoo wrote: It should be zero, but I will accept this. This is a step in the right direction and makes super delegates significantly weaker. The delegate count starting at +34235236 Clinton before any voting took place made the entire primary look like a joke. This still allows for the same shit to happen, just way less grotesquely. But fact remains, it should be zero. We should continue working towards zero, but be happy with this. You know super delegates were always very weak, right? and that the issue is more about optics than reality? | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On June 29 2018 09:49 m4ini wrote: By your own definition, journalists never have done a better job than now. Hehe the conclusion does follow from that set of propositions, but many other propositions also include the verbal harassment. That includes a president that calls any bad coverage fake news, and when the news is really just fake news. + Show Spoiler [Recent exhibits] + But this is America. You can boldly assume an oppositional stance towards Trump. You can keep publishing all that drivel. Trump will bloviate but part of the incessant trolling that Trump is basically a nazi reminds you that they feel safe enough to say it publicly. That's freedom. | ||
| ||
