|
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 |
On July 25 2018 02:41 Plansix wrote:
He also called Planned Parenthood part of the establishment and problem in Washington. That cost him a lot of support with any of the women I work with.
Planned Parenthood supported Hillary because M4A would put them out of business.
I've already outlined extensively why I didn't support Hillary, but I didn't go and vote for a Nazi. I still supported the left. You do you though lol.
|
On July 25 2018 02:23 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2018 00:56 Simberto wrote:On July 25 2018 00:42 hunts wrote:
Yes I would consider bernie far left, and because of people like some of the posters here, and all of the never hillary bernie bros I've seen, I, a person of jewish descent who has had relatives die in concentration camps, would very seriously consider voting for a literal neo nazi over bernie. The far left never hillary people wanted to start a war within the democratic party, they wanted to show that they are ok with letting trump burn down the country just so they can pat themselves on the back. They falsly believed that the democrats would have to join them and vote for their far left populist but that they (the minority) did not have to join the democrats and vote for a reasonable candidate. They can reap what they sow, and know that the majority who are not happy with their abrasive and unhelpful rhetoric can play the same game. I am 100% serious in that I will not vote for a far left candidate, not until they and their supporters apologize for the fighting they have started, and apologize for letting trump win by not voting, and I know that will never happen.
edit: I have put quite a bit of time into what I believe, thanks for that disguised insult. What I believe happens to not align with the radical far left, but does align with the reasonable center left. Although with the way things are going, I may find myself more aligned with the center right than what the far left populists want to make of the democratic party. And to think that the whole problem could be avoided by having a multi-party system. Then the far left people could vote for their far-left party, and the center-left people could vote for their center-left party, and in the end the thing that matters is which parties have the most votes, and what coalitions they build out of that. But in a two-party system, both the center-left and the far-left feel way more threatened by the other left than even by nazis or trumps. And rightfully so, because in a two-party system there is always only the left and the right, there is no nuance. And if the left is not your left, it sucks to be you, because your choice is that left or the far right. You say that as if the same doesn't happen in multi-party systems. The social democrats try to get votes from the socialist parties, never from the Christian democrats or whatever you happen to have slightly to the right of the social democrats in your country. The in-fighting on the left has led to various failures to form coalitions when they arguably could have, but the socialists assert that the social-democrats betrayed "the left" by governing with neo-liberals in a previous coalition, and any negotiations break down before they even start (partially because the left is 4-5 different parties ranging from borderline anarcho-communists through green hippies to industry-promoting social democrats, all of which hate each other). Meanwhile the right, consisting of 2-3 parties tend to be far more pragmatic in their alliances: even if they exclude the far right from any coalition they still manage to broker a coaltion. often with the social democrats as a minority partner, leading to further hollowing out of the left.
I don't think that's true. The left did try to take voters from the right and was largely successful for a time with third way socialism where they tried to reconcile the market with socialism. Blair and our own PvdA are two examples. The right is often as fractured as the left as well with the emergence of the far right.
Of course after the crisis the centre left largely imploded due to a variety of reasons. Only after that implosion did a lot of the SD parties shift leftwards again.
|
Richard Painter abandoned the Republican Party in 2016, very publicly. He has not been happy with the GOP since the tea party took over and McConnell's stunt with the Supreme Court seat and Trump were the last straw. At least he is trying to do something about it, which is more than I can say for most GOP members angry about Trump.
|
On July 25 2018 02:51 screamingpalm wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2018 02:41 Plansix wrote:
He also called Planned Parenthood part of the establishment and problem in Washington. That cost him a lot of support with any of the women I work with. Planned Parenthood supported Hillary because M4A would put them out of business. I've already outlined extensively why I didn't support Hillary, but I didn't go and vote for a Nazi. I still supported the left. You do you though lol.
My guy, did I ever fucking say I would support a Nazi? Nope.
Please read carefully in the future and save us these discussions.
And PP wouldn’t have a problem with being put out of business by M4A since they women would have access to healthcare services. Sadly, that isn’t how state governments roll in the US.
|
On July 25 2018 02:59 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2018 02:51 screamingpalm wrote:On July 25 2018 02:41 Plansix wrote:
He also called Planned Parenthood part of the establishment and problem in Washington. That cost him a lot of support with any of the women I work with. Planned Parenthood supported Hillary because M4A would put them out of business. I've already outlined extensively why I didn't support Hillary, but I didn't go and vote for a Nazi. I still supported the left. You do you though lol. My guy, did I ever fucking say I would support a Nazi? Nope. Please read carefully in the future and save us these discussions.
Sorry, that wasn't directed at you, but rather hunts.
|
On July 25 2018 02:36 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2018 02:16 GreenHorizons wrote:So you guys know, Bernie was the compromise, even he knew better than to think he could tell his supporters what to do. He didn't "lose control" over a "mob". More of his supporters went on to support Hillary than Hillary's did Obama and far more of her supporters went on to vote for McCain. Before Bernie Obama was the "too far left" and "too focused on race" so much so that people basically completely forgot Hillary was so against conceding to Obama that she brought up the RFK assassination as a reason she should stay in the race. The whole construction zlefin's put forward is one of imagination. Ultimately 25 percent of these Clinton primary voters cast a ballot for McCain in the general
election. sites.duke.edu but bernie didn't take black lives matter seriously enough, right? clinton crushed bernie amongst black voters.
I never know what you're setting up so I'm hesitant to engage, but it wouldn't be right to grill everyone and not put myself on the hot seat.
Yes and no. Bernie certainly had plenty of problems and definitely lacked the rhetorical polish on the issues that Hillary had, but the division (despite the prevailing perceptions here) between Hillary and Bernie was more generational than Racial.
The candidate that most appeals to young adults of all races and ethnicities, even as the
primary campaigns wind down, is Bernie Sanders. Majorities of young African
Americans (60%), Asian Americans (69%), Latino/as (68%), and Whites (59%) chose
Bernie Sanders over both Clinton and Trump as the candidate who best understands the
problems of people like them.
Among African American young adults who indicated they voted in the primaries, a
majority, 54%, said they voted for Bernie Sanders.
www.apnorc.org
|
On July 25 2018 03:28 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2018 02:36 IgnE wrote:On July 25 2018 02:16 GreenHorizons wrote:So you guys know, Bernie was the compromise, even he knew better than to think he could tell his supporters what to do. He didn't "lose control" over a "mob". More of his supporters went on to support Hillary than Hillary's did Obama and far more of her supporters went on to vote for McCain. Before Bernie Obama was the "too far left" and "too focused on race" so much so that people basically completely forgot Hillary was so against conceding to Obama that she brought up the RFK assassination as a reason she should stay in the race. The whole construction zlefin's put forward is one of imagination. Ultimately 25 percent of these Clinton primary voters cast a ballot for McCain in the general
election. sites.duke.edu but bernie didn't take black lives matter seriously enough, right? clinton crushed bernie amongst black voters. I never know what you're setting up so I'm hesitant to engage, but it wouldn't be right to grill everyone and not put myself on the hot seat. Yes and no. Bernie certainly had plenty of problems and definitely lacked the rhetorical polish on the issues that Hillary had, but the division (despite the prevailing perceptions here) between Hillary and Bernie was more generational than Racial. Show nested quote +The candidate that most appeals to young adults of all races and ethnicities, even as the
primary campaigns wind down, is Bernie Sanders. Majorities of young African
Americans (60%), Asian Americans (69%), Latino/as (68%), and Whites (59%) chose
Bernie Sanders over both Clinton and Trump as the candidate who best understands the
problems of people like them.
Among African American young adults who indicated they voted in the primaries, a
majority, 54%, said they voted for Bernie Sanders. www.apnorc.org
Highlights the importance of a political party being nimble. Democrats had planned on Clinton 2016 since 2008. Spent so much time preparing that we ignored the fact that we were preparing for the wrong thing. The anti-elite, anti-establishment movement on both the right and left had been clearly mounting for a long time.
At the core, what I see as a fundamental mechanism for Clinton's loss is the internet. Cultural exchange and the progress of idea formation is enormously accelerated using the global nature of the internet. Ideas are being iterated and changed at an extremely rapid pace. 20 years ago, things would not have transformed in 8 years NEARLY as quickly as they do nowadays. The internet is just really good at creating a "market of ideas" scenario where we rapidly destroy and build new worldviews, ethics, etc.
Note: I am not saying the internet is to "blame" so much as the fact that it has quickly replaced many other methods of idea transmittance changed a lot of dynamics. Democrats are at fault for not adapting properly.
|
I still find it interesting that certain people can go "no we will not join the normal democrats, they will have to join us on the far left if they don't want another trump" then go on to call anyone who isn't far left "the enemy" then get appalled when someone isn't willing to side with them because of those things. What makes it more interesting is many of the far left say they are minorities and/or poor and/or have health conditions that would leave them completely fucked by the right. But they still want to fight and convince the center left majority to join their minority movement, or else have the right win, which will hurt the far left people much more than the center left onea.
|
On July 25 2018 04:00 hunts wrote:
I still find it interesting that certain people can go "no we will not join the normal democrats, they will have to join us on the far left if they don't want another trump" then go on to call anyone who isn't far left "the enemy" then get appalled when someone isn't willing to side with them because of those things. What makes it more interesting is many of the far left say they are minorities and/or poor and/or have health conditions that would leave them completely fucked by the right. But they still want to fight and convince the center left majority to join their minority movement, or else have the right win, which will hurt the far left people much more than the center left onea.
Imagine thinking "normal democrats" is what the country wants or needs in 2018.
It does seem that we've found some common ground on the understanding that the "normal" democrats are more politically aligned with the right than they are with "the far left" which I'm guessing starts at Ocasio or maybe Sherrod Brown?
|
On July 25 2018 04:00 hunts wrote:
I still find it interesting that certain people can go "no we will not join the normal democrats, they will have to join us on the far left if they don't want another trump" then go on to call anyone who isn't far left "the enemy" then get appalled when someone isn't willing to side with them because of those things. What makes it more interesting is many of the far left say they are minorities and/or poor and/or have health conditions that would leave them completely fucked by the right. But they still want to fight and convince the center left majority to join their minority movement, or else have the right win, which will hurt the far left people much more than the center left onea.
How is this any different than Hillary's supporters? Normal Democrats lol. Have you ever looked at the shenanigans the DCCC pulls? They'd rather lose to the right than win with a progressive. I guess you do too. Completely attempting to undermine us at every turn. I'm not getting into the whole Hillary would have been better again.
I think you just need some Chuck D. 
+ Show Spoiler +
|
So, because farmers, etc. are getting boned as a result of these idiotic tariffs, the USDA is now tossing a few billions of aid to help them. This looks an awful lot like government welfare, but fiscal conservatives seem to be quiet about it (with some exceptions).
The U.S. Agriculture Department announced Tuesday a $12 billion package of emergency aid for farmers caught in the midst of President Trump’s escalating trade war the latest sign that growing tensions between the United States and other countries will not end soon.
Trump ordered Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue to prepare a range of options several months ago, amid complaints from farmers that their products faced retaliatory tariffs from China and other countries. The new package of government assistance funds announced Tuesday and will go into effect in September.
The aid package will target soybean farmers, dairy farmers, and pork producers, among others. White House officials hope it will temporarily quiet some of the unease from farm groups, but the new plan could revive debates about taxpayer-funded bailouts and the degree to which Trump’s trade strategy is leading to unforeseen costs.
Source
Maybe this is how we get to socialism, Trump blows things up and then bails em out.
|
On July 25 2018 04:19 screamingpalm wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2018 04:00 hunts wrote:
I still find it interesting that certain people can go "no we will not join the normal democrats, they will have to join us on the far left if they don't want another trump" then go on to call anyone who isn't far left "the enemy" then get appalled when someone isn't willing to side with them because of those things. What makes it more interesting is many of the far left say they are minorities and/or poor and/or have health conditions that would leave them completely fucked by the right. But they still want to fight and convince the center left majority to join their minority movement, or else have the right win, which will hurt the far left people much more than the center left onea. How is this any different than Hillary's supporters? Normal Democrats lol. Have you ever looked at the shenanigans the DCCC pulls? They'd rather lose to the right than win with a progressive. I guess you do too. Completely attempting to undermine us at every turn. I'm not getting into the whole Hillary would have been better again. I think you just need some Chuck D. + Show Spoiler +
It isn’t any different than the DCCC and what Hunts in complaining about. The DCCC which has existed for well over 100 years and isn’t going away any time soon, is all about trying to find what they feel is the best candidate to win. And they are wrong as often as they are right. Progressives will LOVE the DCCC once they are in the house and senate, because the DCCC will have their back at that point.
But to Hunt’s point, a lot of the discussion around the progressive/liberal divide both sides telling the other to get with the program. It feels like the progressives have openly embraced the strong arm tactics they rail against when the DCCC uses them. Which is fine, this is politics, not a play date with pre-schoolers. But I wouldn’t expect “get with the program” to be a compelling argument in this thread.
|
On July 25 2018 02:48 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2018 02:36 IgnE wrote:On July 25 2018 02:16 GreenHorizons wrote:So you guys know, Bernie was the compromise, even he knew better than to think he could tell his supporters what to do. He didn't "lose control" over a "mob". More of his supporters went on to support Hillary than Hillary's did Obama and far more of her supporters went on to vote for McCain. Before Bernie Obama was the "too far left" and "too focused on race" so much so that people basically completely forgot Hillary was so against conceding to Obama that she brought up the RFK assassination as a reason she should stay in the race. The whole construction zlefin's put forward is one of imagination. Ultimately 25 percent of these Clinton primary voters cast a ballot for McCain in the general
election. sites.duke.edu but bernie didn't take black lives matter seriously enough, right? clinton crushed bernie amongst black voters. Don't forget that Toni Morrison dubbed Bill Clinton the first black president. Bernie can't hope to compete with that.
Wasn't Bill Clinton really, really bad for black people? Like, REALLY bad?
|
On July 25 2018 04:47 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2018 02:48 xDaunt wrote:On July 25 2018 02:36 IgnE wrote:On July 25 2018 02:16 GreenHorizons wrote:So you guys know, Bernie was the compromise, even he knew better than to think he could tell his supporters what to do. He didn't "lose control" over a "mob". More of his supporters went on to support Hillary than Hillary's did Obama and far more of her supporters went on to vote for McCain. Before Bernie Obama was the "too far left" and "too focused on race" so much so that people basically completely forgot Hillary was so against conceding to Obama that she brought up the RFK assassination as a reason she should stay in the race. The whole construction zlefin's put forward is one of imagination. Ultimately 25 percent of these Clinton primary voters cast a ballot for McCain in the general
election. sites.duke.edu but bernie didn't take black lives matter seriously enough, right? clinton crushed bernie amongst black voters. Don't forget that Toni Morrison dubbed Bill Clinton the first black president. Bernie can't hope to compete with that. Wasn't Bill Clinton really, really bad for black people? Like, REALLY bad?
It took a lot of time the general public to realize that the three strikes law was terrible. And 20 years of a republican congress to make sure nothing was ever done to correct the problem.
But yeah, the 1990s have aged poorly. Everything we did during that era set the stage for the BS we are dealing with now. See the laws governing the internet passed 1995.
|
On July 25 2018 04:35 ticklishmusic wrote:So, because farmers, etc. are getting boned as a result of these idiotic tariffs, the USDA is now tossing a few billions of aid to help them. This looks an awful lot like government welfare, but fiscal conservatives seem to be quiet about it (with some exceptions). Show nested quote +The U.S. Agriculture Department announced Tuesday a $12 billion package of emergency aid for farmers caught in the midst of President Trump’s escalating trade war the latest sign that growing tensions between the United States and other countries will not end soon.
Trump ordered Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue to prepare a range of options several months ago, amid complaints from farmers that their products faced retaliatory tariffs from China and other countries. The new package of government assistance funds announced Tuesday and will go into effect in September.
The aid package will target soybean farmers, dairy farmers, and pork producers, among others. White House officials hope it will temporarily quiet some of the unease from farm groups, but the new plan could revive debates about taxpayer-funded bailouts and the degree to which Trump’s trade strategy is leading to unforeseen costs. SourceMaybe this is how we get to socialism, Trump blows things up and then bails em out.
doesn't really lead to socialism at all; it's far too typical. the farm lobby is very good at extracting federal money and convincing people to not consider it "welfare".
|
On July 25 2018 04:47 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2018 02:48 xDaunt wrote:On July 25 2018 02:36 IgnE wrote:On July 25 2018 02:16 GreenHorizons wrote:So you guys know, Bernie was the compromise, even he knew better than to think he could tell his supporters what to do. He didn't "lose control" over a "mob". More of his supporters went on to support Hillary than Hillary's did Obama and far more of her supporters went on to vote for McCain. Before Bernie Obama was the "too far left" and "too focused on race" so much so that people basically completely forgot Hillary was so against conceding to Obama that she brought up the RFK assassination as a reason she should stay in the race. The whole construction zlefin's put forward is one of imagination. Ultimately 25 percent of these Clinton primary voters cast a ballot for McCain in the general
election. sites.duke.edu but bernie didn't take black lives matter seriously enough, right? clinton crushed bernie amongst black voters. Don't forget that Toni Morrison dubbed Bill Clinton the first black president. Bernie can't hope to compete with that. Wasn't Bill Clinton really, really bad for black people? Like, REALLY bad?
some of the proposals and stuff enacted have not worked out well (particularly in terms of criminal justice); but they had a lot of support from the black community at the time for doing them.
I don't have clear aggregate data for how the various parts affected black people overall.
|
On July 25 2018 04:47 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2018 02:48 xDaunt wrote:On July 25 2018 02:36 IgnE wrote:On July 25 2018 02:16 GreenHorizons wrote:So you guys know, Bernie was the compromise, even he knew better than to think he could tell his supporters what to do. He didn't "lose control" over a "mob". More of his supporters went on to support Hillary than Hillary's did Obama and far more of her supporters went on to vote for McCain. Before Bernie Obama was the "too far left" and "too focused on race" so much so that people basically completely forgot Hillary was so against conceding to Obama that she brought up the RFK assassination as a reason she should stay in the race. The whole construction zlefin's put forward is one of imagination. Ultimately 25 percent of these Clinton primary voters cast a ballot for McCain in the general
election. sites.duke.edu but bernie didn't take black lives matter seriously enough, right? clinton crushed bernie amongst black voters. Don't forget that Toni Morrison dubbed Bill Clinton the first black president. Bernie can't hope to compete with that. Wasn't Bill Clinton really, really bad for black people? Like, REALLY bad?
Any attempt at being "tough on crime" and other such things tend to end up being a disassssster for black communities.
The basic thinking is "find ways to cleanse communities of rotten apples --> everyone else is better off --> black communities improve by having the rotten apples removed"
But it turns out as "make police relations with their communities 100x worse --> destroy communities by jailing people who don't need to be in jail --> destroy families by having everyone's dad go to prison --> kids grow up to be even worse than their parents --> more crime -->"
And all along the way, the same things that normally happen to blacks, being jailed for longer, more often, for less serious offenses. So these tough on crime things not only make the situation worse under NORMAL circumstances, but they were applied to a group that disproportionately suffers from these kinds of things.
|
Can't post a link because I'm on phone but apparently Maine passed an initiative to expand medicaid, and their governor refuses to sign it or acknowledge it and has been on record saying he would sooner go to jail than pass medicaid. Is that a thing he can do, or will the courts force him to accept the initiative passing? Also after reading into it, it looks like that governor won his seat twice with a minorit of the votes, because of far left voters splitting the democratic vote with 3rd party far left candidates.
|
Maine’s governor is insane and needs to be impeach, FYI. He straight up doesn’t do his job, like today where he refuses to sign or veto a bill to assure it cannot become law.
And the courts can’t do anything, the creating laws is beyond the reach of the judicial branch. And they have no power to remove him from office. The government is broken, their legislature needs to remove the governor or deal with a broken, dysfunctional government.
|
On July 25 2018 05:42 hunts wrote:
Can't post a link because I'm on phone but apparently Maine passed an initiative to expand medicaid, and their governor refuses to sign it or acknowledge it and has been on record saying he would sooner go to jail than pass medicaid. Is that a thing he can do, or will the courts force him to accept the initiative passing? Also after reading into it, it looks like that governor won his seat twice with a minorit of the votes, because of far left voters splitting the democratic vote with 3rd party far left candidates.
Expanding Medicaid at the state level isn't a good idea considering states rely on revenue for spending/programs. This is something that needs to happen at the federal level as it isn't constrained in the same way. It's always our fault anyway though.
Re: Clinton's welfare and prison reform bills. He still defends those policies today. No remorse, no apologies. Add to that his economic policies and you have a recipe for disaster.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
