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.
On August 22 2024 03:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: There are a lot of rumors circulating that RFK Jr. will drop out, so that Trump has a better chance of beating Harris. RFK Jr. might even formally endorse Trump.
Yeah, this isn't surprising at all, considering how excited conservatives were at the prospect of RFK in the 2020 Democratic primary. They wanted a right wing conspiracy theorist on the Democratic ticket, but now that he's independent, he only stands to split votes off of Trump.
Putting aside him being a Kennedy, lifelong Democrat and environmental lawyer, were conservatives more interested in having Biden or Kennedy on the Democratic ticket?
On August 22 2024 03:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: There are a lot of rumors circulating that RFK Jr. will drop out, so that Trump has a better chance of beating Harris. RFK Jr. might even formally endorse Trump.
Yeah, this isn't surprising at all, considering how excited conservatives were at the prospect of RFK in the 2020 Democratic primary. They wanted a right wing conspiracy theorist on the Democratic ticket, but now that he's independent, he only stands to split votes off of Trump.
Putting aside him being a Kennedy, lifelong Democrat and environmental lawyer, were conservatives more interested in having Biden or Kennedy on the Democratic ticket?
You can say you're either party with essentially 0 consequences. Kwark is a Republican. This is an empty appeal to things that don't make a candidate appealing. If you're trying to argue that RFK is still somehow a liberal, show me how his policy aligns with Democratic voters. Go ahead.
On August 22 2024 03:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: There are a lot of rumors circulating that RFK Jr. will drop out, so that Trump has a better chance of beating Harris. RFK Jr. might even formally endorse Trump.
Yeah, this isn't surprising at all, considering how excited conservatives were at the prospect of RFK in the 2020 Democratic primary. They wanted a right wing conspiracy theorist on the Democratic ticket, but now that he's independent, he only stands to split votes off of Trump.
Putting aside him being a Kennedy, lifelong Democrat and environmental lawyer, were conservatives more interested in having Biden or Kennedy on the Democratic ticket?
You can say you're either party with essentially 0 consequences. Kwark is a Republican. This is an empty appeal to things that don't make a candidate appealing. If you're trying to argue that RFK is still somehow a liberal, show me how his policy aligns with Democratic voters. Go ahead.
In the meantime, folks can watch this:
You didn't answer the question because I think you see the paradox you drew for yourself, if "conservatives" are equally happy with both the deranged leftist Biden or the "right wing" (give me a break) RFK as the Democratic nominee, it means conservatives are happy no matter who the Democratic nominee is so there was never any difference. Unless your point was that true conservatives would vote for an actual right winger like Kennedy, rather than the wolf in sheep's clothing Democrat that is Drumpf, but that would suggest Democrats should vote for Drumpf which I doubt was your intended implication, so I'm at a loss here.
Invoking Kwark also, I don't see the point. Are you trying to say people would vote for Kwark if he ran as a Republican rather than RFK if he had been able to run as a Democrat as an example?
If "folks" want to learn about candidates, they're better off reading or listening to the actual candidates and their life's work, and not getting fed from a talking head who probably didn't even know who the fuck Kennedy was a year ago.
For example, Drumpf just went on Theo Von's podcast (he's on something of a podcast tour inspired by Barron that no other major candidate has done or is capable of, except Kennedy, but people will object to the label "major" in that context - basically only Obama would have been capable of this in recent memory but the space just wasn't near as big even in 2012), said a lot of interesting things 1) Should have a lifetime ban on government/lobbyist pipeline 2) Need to enforce healthcare price transparency (says his administration enacted it, Biden's wouldn't enforce it) 3) Biggest lobbies are lawyers, then teachers - need universal rule of loser paying lawyer fees to reduce 80% of frivolous lawsuits
I invoke Kwark being a Republican because he obviously is one for reasons that have nothing to do with his values or how he plans to vote. RFK being "a Democrat" is the same idea. He shot his shot, it didn't take. He's not someone that resonates with Democratic voters, I thought I was clear on that much. I could call him a DINO, in the way that John McCain was a RINO.
Also, in what bizarro world is Biden a deranged left wing anything?
About John Oliver's RFK piece - he does give him some credit for things he's stated in the past, and his introduction of him makes him sound very sympathetic. It's when you delve deeper that you realize he's consistently pandering and largely full of shit. But hey, I think he does have some genuine concerns for the environment, I'll give him that!
Adressing those three: 1) I dunno what is a good way to solve the problems relating to lobbyism in american politics, but I agree that something should be done. Maybe this is a good approach, I dunno. 2) More transparency regarding healthcare prices sounds good. No idea about whether the secondary claim is true, as with any Trump statement it's at best a coinflip. 3) loser paying lawyer fees sounds like a way of ensuring that only rich people can sue. If you're some poor person who has been wronged by a company worth billions who might have 6+ digit lawyer costs then that sounds like it doesn't block frivolous lawsuits: If I'm risking my net worth, I'd need to be extremely certain I'm winning to engage.
Walz having members from his state championship team around and the kid whom he helped out of the ditch was pretty cool. I mean of course the track team he coached on the side to help pay for someones lunch debt would be successful. It really is a thing in rual minnesota where if you get stuck on the side of the road people do jump out and help you if you can get out. I slid off the road once on my way to school and just needed some more weight on my trunk to get traction and I had two cars stop to help me on my way.
Don't think anyone from where JD vance grew up would want anything to do with him. What an insane difference between vp picks.
On August 22 2024 06:03 Gorsameth wrote: I'm reasonable sure some form of 'loser pays' already exists and it sure isn't stopping Trump for filling endless frivolous lawsuits.
The US justice system is set up in a way that it profits rich people. If rich people fight other rich people, it is often about the law. When poor people fight poor people, it can also be fair.
But when rich people fight poor people, the poor people usually lose. Because you can stretch the fight out forever and make it ever more expensive, until the poor people or smaller corporation just have to give up because they cannot afford the fees that they have to pay now, even if they would get them back eventually after winning.
Sometimes poor people can get into the "rich people" category with regards to the law if some big interest group finds their case interesting and bankrolls the lawyers.
But if that doesn't happen, and Elon Musk decides to sue you, you are kind fucked. Because he can just keep the shit going until you are bancrupt and then win by default, feeling nice about having ruined you.
On August 22 2024 06:03 Gorsameth wrote: I'm reasonable sure some form of 'loser pays' already exists and it sure isn't stopping Trump for filling endless frivolous lawsuits.
The US justice system is set up in a way that it profits rich people. If rich people fight other rich people, it is often about the law. When poor people fight poor people, it can also be fair.
But when rich people fight poor people, the poor people usually lose. Because you can stretch the fight out forever and make it ever more expensive, until the poor people or smaller corporation just have to give up because they cannot afford the fees that they have to pay now, even if they would get them back eventually after winning.
Sometimes poor people can get into the "rich people" category with regards to the law if some big interest group finds their case interesting and bankrolls the lawyers.
But if that doesn't happen, and Elon Musk decides to sue you, you are kind fucked. Because he can just keep the shit going until you are bancrupt and then win by default, feeling nice about having ruined you.
And none of that is relevant here.
Trump said there should be a law that says loser pays to stop frivolous lawsuits, I said something to that effect already exists is some form, and that it is not stopping Trump from filling frivolous lawsuits.
Hakeem Jeffries, to Trump: “Bro, we broke up with you for a reason” and then listed a ton of great reasons. Well done.
Bill Clinton + Nancy Pelosi was a solid pairing of the old guard, even though they weren’t particularly energizing, especially back-to-back. Their words for Biden and Harris and Walz were very kind, and it was pretty funny to realize that Trump is even older than Clinton. Clinton had a few good jabs at Trump too, like how Trump actually thought Hannibal Lecter was a good guy and… literally a *real* person. Yikes.
Kamala Harris, to Brett Kavanaugh: “Can you think of any laws that give government the power to make decisions about the *male* body?” BK: “I can’t think of any.”
Josh Shapiro’s speech, Amanda Gorman’s poem, and Oprah Winfrey’s existence all brought some serious back-to-back-to-back energy to the crowd. Oprah Winfrey, in particular, was electrifying. She called out JD Vance’s feckless comment by saying that we ought to help everyone, even if they’re childless cat ladies, and then told inspirational stories about women and the Black community. One of the best speeches of the day. “Values and character matter most of all … Decency and respect are on the ballot in 2024. … Let us choose loyalty to the constitution over loyalty to any individual … Let us choose optimism over cynicism.”
Wes Moore’s speech was short but very sweet and incisive. I want to hear more from him.
“I’m Pete Buttigieg and you might recognize me from Fox News” lol. He absolutely tore Trump and Vance to shreds in his speech, for the assholes that they are. “At least Pence was… polite” lmao. He also spoke very eloquently on inclusion and gay rights.
The montages and speeches by Tim Walz’s students and football team players and fellow military veterans and neighbors and wife were touching. That just doesn’t exist on the Republican side.
Tim Walz’s speech was excellent. Family. Neighbor. Military. Teaching. Political wins and vision. “Never underestimate a public school teacher.” Fuck yeah. “While other states were banning books from their schools, we were banishing hunger from ours.” Double fuck yeah. When Walz talked about his family and fertility treatments, the camera cut to his kids… his daughter is trying not to cry, and his son is standing and clapping and crying and you can see him saying “That’s my dad”. Literally the proudest kid in the entire world. That was raw, incredibly emotional. There’s such a stark contrast between Walz and Vance, almost as big as the contrast between Harris and Trump.
the Jan 6 ‘ad’ from the DNC was very sobering. sometimes hard to remember how violent it really was, and i lived only 10 miles away at the time. I can only imagine how little most folks who didn’t care about it in the first place really remember. which is weird, i remember getting the alerts at work. watching it on the news during happy hour like i remember watching 9/11, but i guess memory fades.
I guess that’s half the point of all the disinformation around it. really makes you feel for the MPD (the metro police dept,)they were so hamstrung by (alleged intentional?) lack of preparation and man power.
Holy shit they actually got Gabby Giffords on stage and she delivered a speech. I knew she was having a rough time after her assassination attempt I didn't think she would actually have been able to come back even like that.
Remember when we thought mark kelly would make a good vice presidential pick, good lord walz makes everyone look bad in comparison.
On August 23 2024 10:36 Sermokala wrote: Holy shit they actually got Gabby Giffords on stage and she delivered a speech. I knew she was having a rough time after her assassination attempt I didn't think she would actually have been able to come back even like that.
Remember when we thought mark kelly would make a good vice presidential pick, good lord walz makes everyone look bad in comparison.
Walz seems to have the Ned Flanders effect. Which is good until we catch him burying a body in an abandoned farmhouse.
E: I think with that Gaza piece, she just secured the presidency.
That was amazing. There is no shortage of people calling Trump out both for his weakness as a person, and the threat a second term would pose, even from Republicans. Kamala's speech was energized, it was focused on the fight ahead, and what she's going to bring for the nation. It's bringing people together and getting people excited in a way I haven't seen in my political life.
On August 23 2024 12:34 NewSunshine wrote: That was amazing. There is no shortage of people calling Trump out both for his weakness as a person, and the threat a second term would pose, even from Republicans. Kamala's speech was energized, it was focused on the fight ahead, and what she's going to bring for the nation. It's bringing people together and getting people excited in a way I haven't seen in my political life.
You must be young then. Because Obama brought that from 2004 through his entire presidency. I'm not saying anything bad, just observation. I remember in 2005 talking to a white girl at Nebraska (I'm black, again for those that didn't know). She was animated as fuck talking about Obama. She knew he'd be the next president.
On August 23 2024 12:34 NewSunshine wrote: That was amazing. There is no shortage of people calling Trump out both for his weakness as a person, and the threat a second term would pose, even from Republicans. Kamala's speech was energized, it was focused on the fight ahead, and what she's going to bring for the nation. It's bringing people together and getting people excited in a way I haven't seen in my political life.
You must be young then. Because Obama brought that from 2004 through his entire presidency. I'm not saying anything bad, just observation. I remember in 2005 talking to a white girl at Nebraska (I'm black, again for those that didn't know). She was animated as fuck talking about Obama. She knew he'd be the next president.
Relatively. I'm also relatively late to the game, it took Trump's presidency to wake me up to how much this stuff matters. I have memories of how excited others were in 2008, but I was also still in high school. I imagine this felt a lot like it must've then.
My memories of Obama's election in 2008 was mostly my HS English teacher spending an entire class going over his Inaugural Address in detail. We did have a pretty good hatred of Bush at the time so it wasn't super surprising how strongly Obama resonated with people.
The Trump presidency has shown me however just how far apart the GOP candidates in 2008/2012 were compared to the "average" candidate today.
That said, things feel a bit more positive than before Biden dropped/Harris delivered some solid performances, I’m still not sure how much that’s moved the needle
I’m still very much in the clutches of the cautious part of ‘cautious optimism’ haha. That looming spectre of a Trump second term hasn’t quite faded out yet for me
EPT
