Swordfish Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 10 minutes ago, Kalbear said: You'd be cool with never putting a car thief in jail? Really? Or not putting drunk drivers in jail? Or not putting in home invasions? Good luck selling that platform. Never say never. The point is, let's not let the perfect get in the way of the good. It's a significant impact, and i'm ok starting there. Particularly where the alternative is essentially 'Do nothing because it's too hard.' I know you can't publicly acknowledge this, because your loyalty to HRC knows no bounds, and you'll go to any lengths to argue against anything solely on the grounds of defending her and her positions at all costs, but try and think big picture here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxom 1974 Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 So, Corey Booker making his case for either the VP spot in 2020 or positioning to be the frontrunner in the worst case scenario of needing to take back the White House in 2020...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 4 hours ago, aceluby said: Policies matter. This is what I find so disheartening about this election cycle, almost nobody is willing to actually look at policy, proposals, and actual historical precedence of the candidate; and instead resort to bullshit about 'leadership', 'likeability', and 'trust' that can't be quantified; mostly because those people don't want to quantify and objectively look at the decision. Policies undoubtedly matter. However, in order for looking at the proposal of a candidate to be worthwhile, one must assume that the proposal is something that has a serious chance of being implemented in the way that one would naively expect rather than simply something being proposed to get the politician elected. I think many (most?) Americans have been disappointed enough times to internalize the idea that these proposals are almost entirely worthless. The historical positions of the candidates are also unhelpful because both of them have changed a lot over the years and it's hard to say what they'll do. I'd totally vote for the version of Hillary from circa 1975, but the one we have today is closer to the one which voted for war in Iraq, advocated the devastation of Libya and supported NAFTA. It would be different if Sanders was the Democratic nominee because his most important positions have been consistent over several decades, but as it stands, I don't see much of a point in considering the policy proposals and prior positions of the nominees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 40 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said: You'd have to ask the apparently independent journalists who seem to have come to that conclusion and inserted that into the media narrative. I'm certainly not aware of anything that points to it. My point is, the perception seems to be developing into one that the DNC did directly and materially intervene in the primary to ensure an HRC win. The facts seem unlikely to play much of a role in how a large segment of the electorate winds up viewing this whole thing. One expects Fox and its ilk to paint that sort of picture, but when the same picture is being painted by apparently unbiased media and foreign media it seems like perception has overtaken known fact. Well yeah, perception is developing exactly as wikileaks intended so far. Seems to have little relation to to reality though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 9 minutes ago, Swordfish said: I know you can't publicly acknowledge this, because your loyalty to HRC knows no bounds, and you'll go to any lengths to argue against anything solely on the grounds of defending her and her positions at all costs, but try and think big picture here. Seriously? Fuck that shit right in the ear. What is the big picture about making legal car thefts? What is the big picture about legalizing home invasions? Seriously - you know who does home invasions quite a bit? Asshole ex husbands and boyfriends who are trying to intimidate women. Shockingly, I am not going to be acknowledging that making that legal is a good thing, and might have a personal interest in not having ex husbands invade my house legally. So yeah, fuck that. I also don't know about what specific position you're ascribing to me that I'm defending that HRC shares. I'm in favor of a lot of decriminalization or outright legalization of most drugs - particularly party drugs. Opioids are a problem regardless, just like they were in China when 1/4th of the population was addicted to them - that's not a good thing. That isn't HRC's position that I'm defending to my knowledge. I am also in favor of massive overhaul of the criminal system and revisiting every single person that is in jail and seeing if they can be released early. That also isn't HRC's position. So instead of arguing with some mythical persona that you've constructed of me, perhaps you could argue in some kind of good faith about things I've actually stated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 32 minutes ago, Kalbear said: You were the one that wanted her to be for racial justice, and brought up legalization of drugs. I don't know why you brought it up either! I don't even know what you mean by this? Someone else brought up racial justice and I asked them about it. Her racial injustice webpage that you linked me to brought up drug policies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 3 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said: I don't even know what you mean by this? Someone else brought up racial justice and I asked them about it. Her racial injustice webpage that you linked me to brought up drug policies. Right. I'm asking you why the focus on drugs alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 Just now, Kalbear said: Right. I'm asking you why the focus on drugs alone. Because you linked to another article about drug incarceration and I commented about it. I wasn't focused only on drugs alone before that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 I wish Michelle Obama was running I'd give her my support immediately Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 I don't think that's accurate, but okay. So I've asked this a couple times now - what would Clinton have to do to show you she is interested in fixing racial inequality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
all swedes are racist Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 boss ass speech Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 Just now, Kalbear said: I don't think that's accurate, but okay. So I've asked this a couple times now - what would Clinton have to do to show you she is interested in fixing racial inequality? Honestly I was just asking Larrytheimp, I don't think you and I are going to get anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 Just now, DunderMifflin said: I wish Michelle Obama was running I'd give her my support immediately She has literally no political experience. None. Why is everyone so hung up on giving total n00bs the presidency? I love her, but she has never served publicly ever. Do you even know what her positions on things are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 Just now, DunderMifflin said: Honestly I was just asking Larrytheimp, I don't think you and I are going to get anywhere. Perhaps take it to pms then? It's kind of annoying to spend time providing you with input and data and then you simply ignore it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 5 minutes ago, Kalbear said: Perhaps take it to pms then? It's kind of annoying to spend time providing you with input and data and then you simply ignore it. It's equally annoying you telling me that im ignoring things that I havent. I read through everything that you linked. You just seem to be talking at me and implying I'm unreasonable. So yeh, I will ask larry in private if or when I have any further questions for him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
all swedes are racist Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 Stop cutting to Bill Clinton, shit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 6 minutes ago, Kalbear said: She has literally no political experience. None. Why is everyone so hung up on giving total n00bs the presidency? I love her, but she has never served publicly ever. Do you even know what her positions on things are? I wouldn't want her running for President, at least not for a long while, but I'd be happy to see Michelle Obama run for Congress (presumably a senate seat). Maybe go for Durbin's whenever he retires. It was a really good speech. And between some combination of factors, it went off without a hitch. It seemed like there was almost a chant at one point, but it was drowned out very quickly. There actually are very few vocal hecklers at this point. So few that I hope after the roll call tomorrow they're told that if they do anything more they'll have their credentials revoked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 Sadly flotus apparently doesn't want to run for anything and isn't interested. Hope she stays active, maybe as a ngo or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maester Drew Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 4 hours ago, alguien said: I'm sorry, I'm not seeing any logic in your decision-making process, just a betrayal of Sanders's principles. Supporting Hillary would be a betrayal of Sanders' principles. Supporting Trump would be a betrayal of Sanders' principles. Look one of the things many on this forum have explained to me, is that we all must make compromises in life, even in elections. While Johnson certainly isn't anywhere near my favorite politician, I compromised: If not Bernie, than it'll be Johnson. Yet, now me compromising is to be considered a "betrayal of Sanders' principles." Honestly, I feel if I were to shout, "I love Hillary Clinton!" someone would find some fault with it. However, be that as it may, I never indicated that it would be a guarantee that I'd vote for him in November. All I said was I'll most likely do so. Who knows, the first Tuesday of November, I'll either write in Bernie or vote for Johnson. The likelihood for which one will of course fluctuate between now and then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxom 1974 Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 Is Bernie trying to accept the nomination on night one...? It's a fiery speech...but where's it going...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.