Jump to content

u.s. politics: a cruel and unusual government


all swedes are racist

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Clinton almost running on UBI but choosing not to because the numbers didn't work well is the most Hillary Clinton thing I've ever heard of. 

One of the guys I used to argue with at an old board was to the right of Kaiser and moved to Alaska.  I teased him about the Permanent Fund being incredibly socialist, which he then vehemently denied.  It was a lot of fun.  Anyway, yeah, a carbon tax is always going to poll horribly at first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Kalbear said:

Clinton almost running on UBI but choosing not to because the numbers didn't work well is the most Hillary Clinton thing I've ever heard of. 

It really really is. Look at populist pie-in-the-sky idea. Figure out you can't make the numbers work. Abandon the idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Shryke said:

It really really is. Look at populist pie-in-the-sky idea. Figure out you can't make the numbers work. Abandon the idea.

When Paul Ryan does something like that, he's "a numbers guy." When Hillary Clinton does it, she's a corporate shill and a betrayer of all things liberal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

When Paul Ryan does something like that, he's "a numbers guy." When Hillary Clinton does it, she's a corporate shill and a betrayer of all things liberal. 

But let's be honest here. She is a corporate shill. I wouldn't go so far as to call her a betrayer of all things liberal, but she is a corporate shill.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/07/us/politics/the-vote-for-bankruptcy-reform-that-haunts-hillary-clinton.html?mcubz=1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

When Paul Ryan does something like that, he's "a numbers guy." When Hillary Clinton does it, she's a corporate shill and a betrayer of all things liberal. 

yes i am quite sure the same people are saying both of those things

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Fuck that. Paul Ryan is a spineless wonk who idolizes a shitty, flawed philosophy. For all of Clinton's faults, she should be compared favorably to Paul Ryan by any objective measure.

Paul Ryan, Deep Thinking Policy Wonk:

For all her faults, Hillary was a workhorse on policy that was respected on both sides of the aisle in the Senate.  Paul Ryan's policy "knowhow" emanates from starting off as Jack Kemp's smarmy little bitch speechwriter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Paul Ryan's "wonk" status is an invention of the DC courtier media. In reality, he's a randian nutjob and idiot.

Clinton's a pretty smart policy person and hard worker with some faults of the Democratic party movement she comes from and the politics of the previous style of the party that it is slowly shedding.

But she's definitely one for the practical solution over the soaring rhetoric. Like this quote from the book on the UBI issue is absolutely classic Hillary Clinton:

Quote

We decided it was exciting but not realistic, and left it on the shelf. That was the responsible decision. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

SCOTUS really living up to its role as the foil of unchecked federal power I see. Well, let's just hope ISIS doesn't think of some radical new strategy for infiltrating our country, like a connecting flight from Saudi Arabia. But that's crazy talk. I mean ISIS is only a shadow organization with military training, a vast network of spies and hackers, and hundreds of millions of dollars at its disposal. Why assume they can pull off the same thing as a Cuban guy with a raft. Thank you God-Emperor Trump for keeping us poor, frightened little fools safe.

LGK,

Do you have a link?  The only thing I'm seeing it that the SCOTUS granted Texas a stay on Electoral map changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Lew Theobald said:

Sarcasm aside, protecting the borders, in order to keep us safe, is actually his job.  He may not be the best person for the job, but it's the job he has.  

I think SCOTUS understands the importance of actually letting the President do his job when he comes to border security.  If he does it poorly, there's an election in 3 years.  

Meanwhile, if he tries to interfere with freedom of speech, freedom of the press, or other guarantees and protections of the democratic process or rights of U.S. citizens, that would be when I would want SCOTUS to step in.

When he is barring US citizens reentry to the US and seizing cell phones from citizens as a condition of reentry he is far overstepping the power granted to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...