US Politics: Hindsight on 2020

[Kalbear]

5 minutes ago, Altherion said:

It wasn't enough when he was being nominated to judicial position by Reagan -- a Republican Senate rejected him.

That was the 80s. Much more cooperation between groups then, and huge lack of polarization in the country compared to now. 

[Kalbear]

9 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Is Keith Ellison a 9/11 truther?

Not really. He compared 9/11 to the Reichstag Fire as far as the results were, but he's never said that it was an inside job or anything like that, though he does say that Bush 'let' them happen. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

20 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Is Keith Ellison a 9/11 truther?

No. That said, I think you guys are going to learn that Keith is too far left to ever have a chance of running the party. I loved working along side him, I love that he's my Congressman, but he is not the right fit to lead the party. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

28 minutes ago, Wrl6199 said:

Who are you guys talking about?

Sen. Jeff Sessions. There were a lot of claims that he was a racist, so the Republican controlled Senate shot down his nomination to a U.S. District Court in Alabama. 

[Kalbear]

Just now, Tywin et al. said:

Sen. Jeff Sessions. There were a lot of claims that he was a racist, so the Republican controlled Senate shot down his nomination to a U.S. District Court in Alabama. 

To be really clear, the 'claims' that he was a racist were because he was super, super racist. 

[SkynJay]

2 hours ago, Altherion said:

One of the interesting aspects of the Trump campaign's relationship with the media is that they seem to be giving... unconventional outlets quite a bit of attention. For example, here's a Steve Bannon interview in something called The Hollywood Reporter. It's propaganda, of course, but quite entertaining:

 

That last paragraph is interesting.  Is the Trump administration really going to take advantageof interest  rates and push infrastructure?  Can he get his party on board with this very Democrat plan?  And if so will anyone realize they stonewalled Obama not as a matter of policy but purely for political points?

Will the words 'national debt' be mentioned by the GOP in the next four years?

[Kalbear]

Just now, SkynJay said:

That last paragraph is interesting.  Is the Trump administration really going to take advantageof interest  rates and push infrastructure?  Can he get his party on board with this very Democrat plan?  And if so will anyone realize they stonewalled Obama not as a matter of policy but purely for political points?

Will the words 'national debt' be mentioned by the GOP in the next four years?

The congress has said no new debt. Trump has said otherwise. Another plan calls for modest infrastructure gains using privatization and tax breaks, but that wouldn't particularly boost the economy nor would it take advantage of the interest rates. 

[Theda Baratheon]

32 minutes ago, mormont said:

For the record, as a Scot, I'd rather go for a drink or live next to any of the many minority ethnic Scots I've met in my life than the Snark here. Most have contributed more to my country than he has or will. People are people, and I'm sure there must be idiots in every community, but I don't define my country by its prevailing skin colour.

 

Aye, aye. 

I'm doing a Celtic Studies MA for piss take, I'm a total romantic for the past and am fiercely proud of the history of the British Isles, especially Cornwall and Wales (where my family are from) but you can be non-white and Welsh and proud to be so. I just don't equate whiteness with being tied to culture here. It shouldn't be. Snark is nuts. I don't want the study of early british history to just be for white people, I want any british person/or non british person whatever race/ethnicity as long as they're interested, to be part of it and add to the discussion. Doubt Snark is doing much to preserve cultures, writing shitey maudlin poetry doesn't count. 

[Kalbear]

1 minute ago, mormont said:

Speaking of post-truth and all that, Trump has declared his $25m settlement in the Trump U case to be a great victory.

Not making it up: those exact words. I also like how the President-elect is calling a state official a 'lightweight' on Twitter. Very Presidential.

 

To be fair, this was two years ago.

[mormont]

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

To be fair, this was two years ago.

Yeah, realised that subsequently and deleted. Heh. 

[Mudguard]

3 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

To be really clear, the 'claims' that he was a racist were because he was super, super racist. 

Yeah, seems like there's some credible evidence that he's racist.  Doesn't seem like he's ever really shown remorse for it either, so my guess is that he's still a racist.  That said, I think he has a good chance of getting confirmed if all that is required is a majority, unless there are mass protests to his nomination.

[Wrl6199]

2 minutes ago, Mudguard said:

Yeah, seems like there's some credible evidence that he's racist.  Doesn't seem like he's ever really shown remorse for it either, so my guess is that he's still a racist.  That said, I think he has a good chance of getting confirmed if all that is required is a majority, unless there are mass protests to his nomination.

Yeah.

[Zorral]

Really? An Attorney General with the name of Jefferson Beauregard "Jeff" Sessions III -- from ALABAMA?

The THIRD means his great-whatever number of greats-grandfather was a slaveholder and secessionist.

Jefferson MEANS the POTUS who made the U.S. domestic slave trade safe -- Virginia's domestic slave products -- from the much less expensive direct from Africa imports. And perhaps, also a gesture of honor to Jefferson Davis, the slaveowner who never asked for parole or pardon for betraying the U.S. both as a secessionist and the secessionist leader who declared war on the United States.

Beauregard? Louisianan Pierre Gustave Toutant-Beauregard was a Southern military officer, politician, and the first prominent general of the Confederate States Army during the American Civil War.

How do we say, Black Vote Suppression, boys and girls? How do we say incarcerate black people to feed the neo slavery of the private prison industry?

How much more directly could the orange regime aim a message of terror and oppression at the nation's African American communities?

[Kalbear]

Sessions might not get approved just because of how against pot smoking he is - now that 20% of the US population lives in states where pot is legal and Sessions is absurdly adamantly against it, you could see a lot of very rigid opposition to him that, say, Bannon wouldn't necessarily receive.

That said, the NAACP has come out and said in very, very loud terms that no, they will not accept Sessions. 

[felice]

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

Again, it's not that simple. Poverty is absolutely a factor, but it isn't the sole factor, and there have been numerous studies indicating that poverty by itself (or even extreme poverty) does not fully explain the differences.

Not the only factor, certainly (obviously not all poor people are criminals!) but it's huge enough that it seems hardly worth addressing other factors until poverty is dealt with. Relative poverty is more important than absolute poverty.

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

And it further definitely doesn't explain the differences in actual arrests and jail time, which are absurdly biased against minorities irrespective of economic status. This, IMO, is one of the things that infuriated the AA community about Sanders - that even if you fix poverty, you aren't fixing 2 million people in jail and more in various stages of holding.

Oh, racism and corruption in the legal system is absolutely a big problem as well, and the US's ridiculously high incarceration rate, the war on drugs, etc. The problem can't be solved quickly, though; while there are plenty of blacks (and others) unreasonably incarcerated, even if poverty (or other factors) are the root cause, dangerous criminals are still dangerous criminals. And even eliminating poverty overnight wouldn't eliminate the effects of having lived in poverty; it would probably take generations to fully heal.

[Mudguard]

If being an unapologetic racist isn't enough to derail Session's nomination, I'm pretty sure his position on pot is irrelevant.  It'll be interesting to see how much public outrage can be generated and maintained over his nomination.  It'll be also interesting to see if Session's takes the same tact as before and either ignores or denies that he's said anything racist.  Public apologies have worked for some politicians, but it probably takes quite a bit of time and actions that back up the apology before people really will buy the apology.