Jump to content

Archived

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

Martell Spy

U.S. Politics: Hey! Teachers! Leave Them Kids Alone

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, lokisnow said:

Yup. This is why I want a constitutional amendment to remove the imposter from the court and immediately invalidate all decisions to which he was a part.

Edit - fuck it, doesn't matter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rippounet said:

 Being civil is one thing, but if one wants to be credible politically one must still have some respect for the truth and call a spade a spade. You can't separate the families of immigrants and still pretend you're just a bit xenophobic, even if one were to ignore everything that's been said and done before that.

This is the crux of it. The calls by the other side for 'civility' are actually calls for the Democrats to co-operate in playing down how appalling the Republicans' actions have been, to shift that Overton window so that this racism, corruption and authoritarianism is seen as within the bounds of tolerable political conduct.

1 hour ago, chiKanery et al. said:

2016.

The election where Trump defeated the candidate who played by the rules and was civil?

Sorry, you've made a mistake. That's the evidence against your position. The claims that Clinton 'followed' Trump into the mud are just another false equivalence: the blinkers are on.

1 hour ago, chiKanery et al. said:

Do you have any polls showing otherwise?

Yes. 2016.

1 hour ago, chiKanery et al. said:

An no, Hillary was not the definition of civil. That basket of deplorables comment will haunt her for the rest of her life.

That comment was not even remotely as uncivil as any random comment selected from literally anything Trump said. It may have been unwise, it may have even been insulting to some voters, but it was a very, very civil insult. Not crude at all. No call for violence. No coarse language. No cruelty.

If you think this disproves my point, you're clutching at straws.

1 hour ago, chiKanery et al. said:

Of course there is, but it’s following him down the path he wants to lead you. Don’t do it. It’s a loser for Democrats, because Republicans don’t care if their guy does it while Democrats do. There’s a reason why liberals loved Michele Obama’s “go high” comment. Go the opposite way at your own peril.

I think the situation is pretty perilous as it is.

I also think that the thing that really matters, particularly to Obama/Trump switchers, is not civility. There's zero evidence for that. But there is evidence that they care about authenticity. That's why they responded to both Obama's civility and Trump's crassness: because they believed that Obama was genuinely an affable, polite guy and that Trump was genuinely a dick.

So if Waters is genuinely angry, let her be angry. Don't ask her to fake civility to try to impress people. That won't work. You only think it will because that's built in to how you perceive politics: it's a ground-level assumption of the rules of the game. But the rules have been suspended.

10 minutes ago, Zorral said:

White old guys like Crowley just sit around and blowhard -- and maybe sexually harass.

Hey, maybe don't imply Crowley is a sexual harasser just because you are glad his opponent won?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, chiKanery et al. said:

The constituents watching the campaign. Specifically those on the fence and those who didn't vote. You need the Democratic nominee to be able to contrast themselves with Trump's boorish behavior. 

If Maxine Waters was the Dem candidate, that'd be an issue. She's almost certainly not going to be.

17 hours ago, chiKanery et al. said:

I seriously doubt that resistance voters would abandon the party in 2020 over not getting their ideal candidate. And they can still get a candidate who will put up a forceful resistance without jumping into the sewer with Trump. 

See above.

17 hours ago, chiKanery et al. said:

You have to keep in mind, Americans have no attention spans and generally speaking, aren't deep thinkers. Ours is a shallow culture with people trapped in their screens. There's a decent chance the detention centers will have been largely forgotten by the time November, 2020 rolls around.

But the uncivility won't be? Come on.

17 hours ago, chiKanery et al. said:

 

So? I'm talking about going after the right. F them. I'm talking about going after the middle while holding your base. If you throw up an angry candidate whose main campaigning technique is to lash out at Trump, you're going to lose. You need someone who can appeal to a wide audience, otherwise we'll probably get a repeat of 2016, where the Dem wins the popular vote and Trump ekes out an EC win. 

Okay, let's analyze your theory here. You believe that the number of voters who are undecided between Trump and random Democrat candidate who live in key states are going to primarily base their vote on whether Maxine Waters recommended being rude to the Trump staff. 

17 hours ago, chiKanery et al. said:

Furthermore, I'm talking about the big picture in a post-Trump world. If we cannot fix the toxic nature of our culture, we're doomed. Doomed to gridlock. Doomed to not solving problems. Doomed to not taking care of the business of the people. Doomed as a nation. Things are bleak right now IMO, and I don't want to feed into what's causing that.

The culture is largely determined by the system in this case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, La Albearceleste said:

This is the crux of it. The calls by the other side for 'civility' are actually calls for the Democrats to co-operate in playing down how appalling the Republicans' actions have been, to shift that Overton window so that this racism, corruption and authoritarianism is seen as within the bounds of tolerable political conduct.

The election where Trump defeated the candidate who played by the rules and was civil?

Sorry, you've made a mistake. That's the evidence against your position. The claims that Clinton 'followed' Trump into the mud are just another false equivalence: the blinkers are on.

Yes. 2016.

That comment was not even remotely as uncivil as any random comment selected from literally anything Trump said. It may have been unwise, it may have even been insulting to some voters, but it was a very, very civil insult. Not crude at all. No call for violence. No coarse language. No cruelty.

If you think this disproves my point, you're clutching at straws.

I think the situation is pretty perilous as it is.

I also think that the thing that really matters, particularly to Obama/Trump switchers, is not civility. There's zero evidence for that. But there is evidence that they care about authenticity. That's why they responded to both Obama's civility and Trump's crassness: because they believed that Obama was genuinely an affable, polite guy and that Trump was genuinely a dick.

So if Waters is genuinely angry, let her be angry. Don't ask her to fake civility to try to impress people. That won't work. You only think it will because that's built in to how you perceive politics: it's a ground-level assumption of the rules of the game. But the rules have been suspended.

Hey, maybe don't imply Crowley is a sexual harasser just because you are glad his opponent won?

I didn't say that he himself did/does, but I can see why you might think so.

However, he is a member of the affinities who do abuse and harass in the state and city of NY and in D.C., and political affiliation, as we've seen, locally and nationally, has nothing to do with it. This is playing out big time in the current political arena, as we have a sexual predator and racist in chief enabling all these horrible actions across the nation -- not to mention, shall we say, incivility in public and private discourse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jace, The Sugarcube said:

I'd call this a fantasy, but it's beyond even the most drug addled mind's ability to conjure.

Win 37 state legislatures, identify an utterly reliable partisan leader in each state, send the 37 to a motel in Hawaii and tell them to wait.

on the first day the new legislatures are seated, iforst business taken up by each legislature is immediately pass a bill calling for a constitutional convention, and name one delegate (see above).

a few hours later, once all 37 states have passed this legislation, and a quorum of 37 is reached, the constitutional convention begins, live stream it to the world. Immediately read aloud, then vote to ratify respectively the four dozen or so amendments we desperately need, have them all take effect immediately. 

maybe pass a final amendment that any of the amendments from this convention can only be repealed or amended by unanimous consent of all 52 states (since two of the amendments will be state hood for the states Tubman (DC aka new Columbia) and Puerto Rico)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, lokisnow said:

Win 37 state legislatures, identify an utterly reliable partisan leader in each state, send the 37 to a motel in Hawaii and tell them to wait.

on the first day the new legislatures are seated, immediately pass a bill calling for a constitutional convention, and name one delegate (see above).

a few hours later, once all 37 states have passed this legislation, and a quorum of 37 is reached, the constitutional convention begins, live stream it to the world. Immediately read aloud, then vote to ratify respectively the four dozen or so amendments we desperately need, have them all take effect immediately. 

maybe pass a final amendment that any of the amendments from this convention can only be repealed or amended by unanimous consent of all 52 states (since two of the amendments will be state hood for the states Tubman (DC aka new Columbia) and Puerto Rico)

Yeah, is there a timeline on this plan? 'Cause I'm pretty sure Dem's control like 8 state legislatures. And unions are about to get kicked in the fiscal balls, so there goes basically every Dem springboard in red states.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jace, The Sugarcube said:

Yeah, is there a timeline on this plan? 'Cause I'm pretty sure Dem's control like 8 state legislatures. And unions are about to get kicked in the fiscal balls, so there goes basically every Dem springboard in red states.

No timeline but it bypasses the fucking worthless delaying democrat senators and House to directly enact amendments as quickly as possible. Step one, win 37 legislatures, step two amend the constitution. Much more simple than corralling the power mad, stupid wealthy and change averse white men controlling the democrat federal party.

 

when people say nothing can be done, they simply don’t have a plan to actually fucking do it. Don’t like the imposter on the court? Fine don’t say nothing can be done, because we can remove the imposter and invalidate the decisions he was part to, it’s just going to be hard but not impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, lokisnow said:

No timeline but it bypasses the fucking worthless delaying democrat senators and House to directly enact amendments as quickly as possible. Step one, win 37 legislatures, step two amend the constitution. Much more simple than corralling the power mad, stupid wealthy and change averse white men controlling the democrat federal party.

Look, I feel ya. I really do. But this has less chance of happening than me falling in love again.

Some things are just dead inside, y'know? Like me or our democracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So about this restaurant thingy...

http://www.cracked.com/article_25706_that-sarah-sanders-restaurant-story-80-years-old-news.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Los Ticos Mexal said:

Kennedy retiring effective July 31st. Hits keep coming.

HA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Tywin, tell me more about how it's possible to win please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I've ever been more dejected. I hate that I'm living through the collapse of America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Los Ticos Mexal said:

I don't think I've ever been more dejected. I hate that I'm living through the collapse of America.

Had to happen sometime. We had a good run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, La Albearceleste said:

This is the crux of it. The calls by the other side for 'civility' are actually calls for the Democrats to co-operate in playing down how appalling the Republicans' actions have been, to shift that Overton window so that this racism, corruption and authoritarianism is seen as within the bounds of tolerable political conduct.

I don’t see it this way. You can still call a spade a spade and call out Trump for his racist remarks, his inhumane treatment of asylum seekers at the border, authoritarian tendencies, etc. while also comporting yourself in a calm and composed manner. I’m simply arguing that the candidate and leadership should not fall into the trap that’s being laid for them.

Quote

The election where Trump defeated the candidate who played by the rules and was civil?

Sorry, you've made a mistake. That's the evidence against your position. The claims that Clinton 'followed' Trump into the mud are just another false equivalence: the blinkers are on.

In many instances she was civil, but she could also be rude, condescending, arrogant etc. You need someone more like Obama than Clinton.

Quote

That comment was not even remotely as uncivil as any random comment selected from literally anything Trump said. It may have been unwise, it may have even been insulting to some voters, but it was a very, very civil insult. Not crude at all. No call for violence. No coarse language. No cruelty.

If you think this disproves my point, you're clutching at straws.

While your correct to say that it’s nowhere near as bad as what Trump was saying, it was still a bad thing to say. And that’s just one example. Look, when Trump started getting rough, Hillary returned serve. She should have just ignored him.

Quote

I think the situation is pretty perilous as it is.

I also think that the thing that really matters, particularly to Obama/Trump switchers, is not civility. There's zero evidence for that. But there is evidence that they care about authenticity. That's why they responded to both Obama's civility and Trump's crassness: because they believed that Obama was genuinely an affable, polite guy and that Trump was genuinely a dick.

So if Waters is genuinely angry, let her be angry. Don't ask her to fake civility to try to impress people. That won't work. You only think it will because that's built in to how you perceive politics: it's a ground-level assumption of the rules of the game. But the rules have been suspended.

You’re correct in saying Obama-Trump voters don’t care about civility and that authenticity matters, but that’s not the point I was getting at. You need to go after people who don’t like Trump, but also didn’t vote in 2016 or in general. If you go with a hard left firebrand, you’re probably going to lose in 2020, and it’s important for so many more reasons than just Trump that Democrats have a good cycle. Furthermore, you need someone that can start to undo the toxicity that Trump as sown. A firebrand cannot do that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Los Ticos Mexal said:

Kennedy retiring effective July 31st. Hits keep coming.

F***, that leaves enough time for Republicans to confirm his replacement before the midterms.
Not that the Democrats had much hope of retaking the Senate, but still, I was really hoping Kennedy would let voters play a role.

This... is really bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ted Cruz to the Supreme Court. Calling it now. Wont be confirmed until after the election in November. Ted will say he isnt interested and is focused on the citizens of Texas, but after the election, he will be confirmed by Christmas. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

F***, that leaves enough time for Republicans to confirm his replacement before the midterms.
Not that the Democrats had much hope of retaking the Senate, but still, I was really hoping Kennedy would let voters play a role.

This... is really bad.

You can say FUCK here. Are you afraid of being... uncivil? We're all uncivil now.

Welcome to UNcivilization!

-Insert maniacal laugh hiding real pain here-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting thought experiment might be why the court's only remaining 'swing' vote picked now to resign.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Jace is right, with Kennedy retiring, that is the end of democracy in America.

For those keeping score at home, once Kennedy’s replacement is confirmed, in the fifty-one since LBJ realigned American politics with the passage of the CRA and VRA and other great society programs and violated the white sanctity Of the Supreme Court with his final appointment, in those fifty one elapsed years we will have had fourteen justices appointed by republicans and four justices appointed by democrats, including of course one stolen seat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×