U.S. politics. thread

[Varysblackfyre321]

14 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

There were several reasons for this - but chief among them was his harem (?) of seriously overweight girlfriends.  These gals all took the magic weight loss drug of the day (Fan-Fan? the name escapes me anymore)

Ah, he had girlfriends you found unattractive because of their weight. How deplorable. 

14 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

Or rather, they would have been taking this drug, except they gave their pills to said slime ball, who then turned around and resold them as 'hard' drugs.

Why even bring up the women's weight up? Oh these women are fat! How could any man get it on with fat chicks is the vibe you're putting out here.

 

14 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

He occasionally resorted to abusive measures to keep these women handing over the meds.  I seem to remember hearing he got beaten up pretty severely a time or to as a result of these activities.   

To be clear are you trying show you're not a sexist in response to me saying the girl you talked about wouldn't be regarded as pathetic if she was man having sex with multiple women for cash? 

Because it's not working. The girl you mentioned at worst you've said she exchanged sexual favors for monetary gain. The guy you're describing was domestic abuser. These two people aren't anywhere close.  You've just shown you think a woman selling sex is as pathetic  as a man who beats his female partners to get some drugs to sell.

[Varysblackfyre321]

53 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

I just have this feeling that climate/environment isn't a winning platform. I mean for me, it's kind of the biggest thing I'm going to look at. But people just don't seem too concerned to actually vote for it. Feinstein really put me in a low mood on this.

Yeah it's sadly a slow death for humanity but not exactly something that will resonate with people suffering from immediate problems today. But it still should be pushed heavily for.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

3 hours ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

I have hidden depths.

Is there a joke here I'm missing? If so, come find me down in Mexico where I'll be wandering around.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Donald J. Trump: Master of making a bad situation worse:

 

 

 

[Jace, Extat]

59 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Donald J. Trump: Master of making a bad situation worse:

 

 

 

Why do you say that? This statement is everything Republicans would never demand as an apology.

[lokisnow]

More on flipping Texas, Texas is the DCCs top 2020 target for seat flips, they’re going after at least six, so that will result in some exciting resource investment that could have positive spillover effects accrue to a presidential and senate candidate. 

https://cookpolitical.com/analysis/house/house-overview/2020-house-overview-can-democrats-keep-their-majority

On the other hand, the terrifying effectiveness of the surgical precision with which republicans ran their Texas turnout machine, resulting in an unbelievable monstrous midterm vote total for ted cruz, makes me think most of these flips will not happen, republicans will have too superb and well calibrated of a turnout machine in Texas in 2020 to overcome them.

[Jace, Extat]

10 minutes ago, lokisnow said:

More on flipping Texas, Texas is the DCCs top 2020 target for seat flips, they’re going after at least six, so that will result in some exciting resource investment that could have positive spillover effects accrue to a presidential and senate candidate. 

https://cookpolitical.com/analysis/house/house-overview/2020-house-overview-can-democrats-keep-their-majority

On the other hand, the terrifying effectiveness of the surgical precision with which republicans ran their Texas turnout machine, resulting in an unbelievable monstrous midterm vote total for ted cruz, makes me think most of these flips will not happen, republicans will have too superb and well calibrated of a turnout machine in Texas in 2020 to overcome them.

So what you're saying is it's gonna be a massive waste?

Shocker!

[Martell Spy]

House Democrats prepare case to request Trump tax returns
Democrats are crafting a request to send to the IRS and say they will "take all necessary steps" to obtain the president's returns.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-democrats-prepare-effort-request-trump-tax-returns-n978246

Quote

 

There are several key pieces of information Cohen, Trump’s former personal “fixer” and attorney, provided in his testimony that strengthen the case for Congress to obtain the returns, according to the aides, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

Among other things, Cohen testified that Trump, as head of the sprawling Trump Organization before his election in 2016, had at times deflated the value of his properties to lower his tax bill and called the government “stupid” for giving him a $10 million tax refund in 2008. Under questioning from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Cohen also said Trump had provided inflated assets to an insurance company.

In a break with modern tradition, Trump has steadfastly refused to disclose his returns, suggesting they are under audit. Every U.S. president dating back to Richard Nixon has voluntarily disclosed his tax returns to the public.

The U.S. tax code authorizes the Ways and Means Committee to obtain any U.S. taxpayers’ returns. Yet committee lawyers are expected to craft a request as precise as possible, aides said, in order to short circuit an all-but-certain legal challenge by the president that could draw the process out.

 

 

[Martell Spy]

The week democracy struck back
The Cohen hearing and Netanyahu indictment news shows that liberal democracy still has some fight in it.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/3/1/18244776/trump-news-michael-cohen-benjamin-netanyahu

Quote

Second, the hearing helped set the stage for even more inquiries. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), for example, asked sharp questions that provided the committee with obvious avenues to follow up: She asked Cohen whether Trump had ever deliberately inflated his assets — he said yes — and then whether the committee would “need to review his financial statements and tax returns” to verify that, to which Cohen also said yes. In a few probing questions, the newly elected representative moved toward exposing whatever Trump is keeping hidden in his taxes as well as potentially revealing insurance fraud by the president.

 

[Jace, Extat]

1 hour ago, Triskele said:

I do have some fear about the temptation to go after Texas, but I also see the logic behind why people think that one of these days it really will be in play.  Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, and Austin are growing and growing in a bluer way.  And look at what lokisnow just said.  If it's true that the Texas GOP cobbled together a huge turnout for Cruz that shows that a Dem came pretty close to beating a Republican even when the Republican had a massive turnout.  That is intriguing.  There could be an inflection point where there's enough dissatisfaction on the GOP side and enough hunger on the Dem side to make it very close.  

Not a penny should be sent into Texas without an exhaustive analysis of how many dollars Democrats have to spend vs Republican to achieve comparable returns in that place. Not you in this instance, but a common theme is that turning Texas into a battle site forces Republicans to defend it. This is true, but such basic analysis refuses the realities. Republicans are institutionally ingrained in Texas. This is their prize jewel of the Electoral College. Like California for Democrats. 

It was mentioned upthread how quickly they mobilized a staggering midterm turnout in basically a month or two once it looked like Texas might be threatened. And they did it with ease. Because their dollar goes *further in Texas. People don't need to be courted or wooed to vote R in Texas, they just need to think their vote is needed. This isn't some proof "That we almost had 'em" it's proof that their defensive advantageous are so overwhelming that a last second effort is more than enough to comfortably kill a Democratic uprising in its cradle during a wave year.

ETA:*I wrote farther like some kind of fucking pleb. Sincere apologies.

[ThinkerX]

5 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

To be clear are you trying show you're not a sexist in response to me saying the girl you talked about wouldn't be regarded as pathetic if she was man having sex with multiple women for cash? 

Because it's not working. The girl you mentioned at worst you've said she exchanged sexual favors for monetary gain. The guy you're describing was domestic abuser. These two people aren't anywhere close.  You've just shown you think a woman selling sex is as pathetic  as a man who beats his female partners to get some drugs to sell.

 

Wrong.  Sex trade and abuse go hand in hand.  Not open for dispute, based on the aftermath. 

 

And a piss-poor thing to bring up as a political issue in any way, shape or form, because the result is always a endless he said/she said rabbit hole.  I warned boarders here about this during the Kavanagh fiasco, repeatedly said flat out the democratic strategy was going to flop big time. 

 

 

[Jace, Extat]

32 minutes ago, Triskele said:

You're a Philistine.  And you're a massively better person than our President.  

Philistine!!! Delightful! Good on you, friend.

[James Arryn]

2 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

 

Wrong.  Sex trade and abuse go hand in hand.  Not open for dispute, based on the aftermath. 

 

And a piss-poor thing to bring up as a political issue in any way, shape or form, because the result is always a endless he said/she said rabbit hole.  I warned boarders here about this during the Kavanagh fiasco, repeatedly said flat out the democratic strategy was going to flop big time. 

 

 

You mean you warned us that the GOP wouldn’t prevent the GOP from getting it’s way? Because I warned boarders in here who were convinced pushing him through would cost the GOP (because no one believed that they couldn’t if they wanted) that Americans are so ‘winning’ obsessed that when Kavanaugh was eventually confirmed, GOPers would play it as a ‘win’...when all it was was an instance of not losing to themselves. And many Americans would but it wholesale. 

Wow, you mean the side with enough votes to confirm from the get-go managed to confirm? Incredibelievablerful! 

 

How you ou go from that to ‘sexual assault accusations are political loser ’ when it actually did give some GOPers pause en route to their already-in-hand win is interesting. Certainly GOPers and supporters don’t seem to care too much what their guys do in this regard, but from the studies I’ve seen that's mostly them saying that they haven’t seen any proof, even so far as to say they have never heard the ‘grab them by the pussy’ tape and remain ‘open minded’ until they do, but that they have no intention of seeking out such ‘fake news’.

 Iow, the specifics of the issue are immaterial, they are going to back their guy come hell or high water, and they will engage in wilful ignorance if that’s what it takes.

[Varysblackfyre321]

4 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

Wrong.  Sex trade and abuse go hand in hand.  Not open for dispute, based on the aftermath. 

What exactly is wrong with what I said? I asked you if you brought up your disgust towards a a male domestic abuser  in clear hopes to show your're not a sexist? If you did it really had the opposite effect man. A woman who sells sex is not as pathetic as a man who abuses his female partners to get drugs. And nothing you've said shows he was involved or even beaten for anything to do with prostitution. The only similarity he's been given to the girl you brought up is that they've both had sex with multiple people. If that mere act was enough for you to condemn someone as pathetic you wouldn't need to bring up the domestic abuse, or the drug stealing and hard drug dealing   You needlessly went into the domestic abuser's female partners looks before you even mentioned the fact they were abused, showing disgust towards them for their weight.

[ThinkerX]

26 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

What exactly is wrong with what I said? I asked you if you brought up your disgust towards a a male domestic abuser  in clear hopes to show your're not a sexist? If you did it really had the opposite effect man. A woman who sells sex is not as pathetic as a man who abuses his female partners to get drugs. And nothing you've said shows he was involved or even beaten for anything to do with prostitution. The only similarity he's been given to the girl you brought up is that they've both had sex with multiple people. If that mere act was enough for you to condemn someone as pathetic you wouldn't need to bring up the domestic abuse, or the drug stealing and hard drug dealing   You needlessly went into the domestic abuser's female partners looks before you even mentioned the fact they were abused, showing disgust towards them for their weight.

you appear to have some misconceptions.  First, the weight issues of slime-balls girls was of no interest to me.  That was brought up solely because of the diet drugs they were taking.  Second, recreational sex is fine.  Even recreational sex with multiple partners.  My issue is with professional sex - sex workers - because that almost invariably involves severe self esteem issues and drug dependency.  It also greatly increases the chances of an abusive relationship.

 

That said, we are getting off topic here.  The initial topic was Harris's record as a prosecutor.  Some posters here took offence at her over that, which is idiocy - in fact, that record, properly presented, could be a big plus in purple or even red states.

 

[Varysblackfyre321]

55 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

you appear to have some misconceptions.  First, the weight issues of slime-balls girls was of no interest to me.  That was brought up solely because of the diet drugs they were taking.  Second, recreational sex is fine.  Even recreational sex with multiple partners.  My issue is with professional sex - sex workers - because that almost invariably involves severe self esteem issues and drug dependency.  It also greatly increases the chances of an abusive relationship.

And it seems now you’re trying to disguise your sexism with “just caring about abuse”. The guy you brought up-had nothing with prostitution. At all. He wasn’t a sex-worker, he wasn’t a pimp. You clearly only did it to prove that you weren’t sexist in response to me pointing out a man having sex with 5 women a day for cash wouldn’t be regarded as pathetic of a woman who did the same thing just with guys. You failed by showing you see a woman who sells sex as as pathetic as man who abuses women. 

[Isalie]

Can you please make your own thread? And if you do, maybe respond to the abuse part rather than go on in some self righteous fury about how thinkerx doesnt like promiscuous and/or fat women. 

[Red Tiger]

With this security clearance thing going on it's only natural that I see Kutcher's face a lot. However, the only thing I can think of when I see him is "when is somebody gonna rip off his face and show us he's fully cybernetic under there?".

He looks so....off. Like the coldest motherfucker on Earth mixed with the uncanny valley.

[Jace, Extat]

6 minutes ago, Red Tiger said:

With this security clearance thing going on it's only natural that I see Kutcher's face a lot. However, the only thing I can think of when I see him is "when is somebody gonna rip off his face and show us he's fully cybernetic under there?".

He looks so....off. Like the coldest motherfucker on Earth mixed with the uncanny valley.

There's nothing 'cold' about Kushner in the traditional sense. Stalin was cold. Jared Kushner is room temperature because he's a plastic fuck doll.

[Varysblackfyre321]

20 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

There's nothing 'cold' about Kushner in the traditional sense. Stalin was cold. Jared Kushner is room temperature because he's a plastic fuck doll.

Hmm, curious what you think is “cold” in regards to Stalin. From the documentaries I’ve seen of him, I got he was too rash, and hotheaded(for example openly shouting down Lenin’s wife,  killing off military leaders, etc) to be really considered to what I’d consider “cold”. I too don’t get cold, from Kushner. Hell I’d say Trump is honestly far more akin to Stallin than Kushner. And I’d say a lot of things about Trump but not cold.