US Politics - Turtles crawl, the constipation sensation that's gripping the nation.

[Larry of the Lawn]

I will only vote for Void Crabs if they have Ted Cobbler on as VP.  

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

25 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Trump just commuted Blogojevich’s sentence, because ‘he was convicted by Comey and that crowd’.

He’s just trying to fight bad hair piece on bad hair piece crime!!!!!

#Unity

#EndHairPieceViolence

[OnionAhaiReborn]

5 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Victory need not be certain, but near certainty of failure should cause one to readjust one’s tactics.  

Like Sanders supporters have to know they’re tilting at windmills, right? There’s no chance his policies are going to pass. How will you feel when we reach that day? Will water downed proposals be good enough for you? Because my experience is that Sanders’ strongest supporters are absolutists.

I think a lot of cynicism about our political system is warranted and the challenges will be enormous, but people can also get carried away in their certainty about what is and isn't possible. A little knowledge of history, even recent history, shows how wrong the conventional wisdom can be. In any case, I reiterate that given a choice between not trying to get the policies you want and trying and failing, it's clearly better to try. Even if the chance is infinitesimal, it's greater than zero. So I don't buy the 'setback' argument.

As for watered down proposals, it would depend on the circumstances. In most cases I would not be too bothered provided a good faith effort was made and the eventual policy won was positive in some way. In the case of climate change I worry that watered down proposals doom humanity to a century of mass suffering and horror so I guess you could say I'd be a bit bothered by that. 

[DMC]

36 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Trump just commuted Blogojevich’s sentence, because ‘he was convicted by Comey and that crowd’.

He also pardoned former Niners owner Eddie Debartolo.  I mean, sure, dude bribed a governor, but the Niners also won 5 rings under his watch.  MAGA baby!

[Larry of the Lawn]

42 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Victory need not be certain, but near certainty of failure should cause one to readjust one’s tactics.  

Like Sanders supporters have to know they’re tilting at windmills, right? There’s no chance his policies are going to pass. How will you feel when we reach that day? Will water downed proposals be good enough for you? Because my experience is that Sanders’ strongest supporters are absolutists.

This doesn't make any sense to me.  Did Obama not getting single payer doom us to never have it?  Did Clinton failing to get single payer doom us from never getting healthcare reform?  No.  In fact, the next time Dems had control they got the ACA.  

Sanders supporters being absolutists, if it's even true, is a total red herring - they aren't the ones drafting legislation.  And if enough of the public demands single payer we could very well have it.  Politicians love getting re-elected.  Do I think it will happen?  Probably not.  But we don't keep trying we will never get it.  

Why would every one suddenly stop trying for shit just because one piece of legislation failed one time?  Take what you can get and keep trying.  

The reason we're even having his discussion is because despite getting the ACA, millions of people still want more out of healthcare and want something done about the insurance industry.  A bill failing isn't going to suddenly convince us all that we deserve to suffer.

[Kalbear]

I think a problem is that if all  that enthusiasm gets Sanders elected, and then he fails to accomplish much, a lot of that enthusiasm may dissipate - just like it did with Obama. And that ended up causing problems for years in both his election and downballot elections, and also encouraged more logjams and more resistance to anything he did. 

I think also that it's a similar worry to what we're seeing with being the 'first' to anything, and failing. If Sanders loses, will the talk be 'no super lefty person can win'? Probably, and that'll absolutely depress progressive candidates for a while. We've already seen that with women candidates this cycle. 

[Fragile Bird]

8 minutes ago, DMC said:

He also pardoned former Niners owner Eddie Debartolo.  I mean, sure, dude bribed a governor, but the Niners also won 5 rings under his watch.  MAGA baby!

OMG! Michael Miliken too! The junk bond king and fraudster!

That movie is going to have to be remade.

All these succesful businessmen, just like Trump! People who embody corruption! The faces of corruption in America, all being pardoned!

He's just softening you up for Stone, Flynn and Manafort.

 

[IheartIheartTesla]

Quote

Mike Bloomberg said in December 2016 young people support Democratic socialism because they think it involves social media: "Socialism, yeah that's that social media stuff."

Hehehe....

[Mlle. Zabzie]

35 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

I will only vote for Void Crabs if they have Ted Cobbler on as VP.  

 

Implied condition.  Obviously.  

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

Misogyny isn't being scared of women

Though you may believe that there is no connection between Misogyny and Gynophobia (why isn't there a term for hatred of men?) this is not at all the case, especially when examined throughout the world and in the round.  Especially when we see hatred and fear so often connected in other aspects of social and cultural behaviors -- we hate and fear vermin, for instance.

From Misogyny and Homicide of Women Jacquelyn Campbell, R.N., M.S.N. Instructor, Community Health Department Wayne State University Detroit, Michigan

https://www.nlm.nih.gov/exhibition/confrontingviolence/materials/OB11560.pdf
 

Quote

 

Fear of women

The roots of the patriarchal societal organization probably can be most logically traced to men’s fear of women in primitive times because of the unexplained mystery of reproduction.14 Thousands of legends from all around the world indicate some crisis occurring when leadership was "wrested from the women, either by force or seduction or both” between 7500 BC and 1250 BC.15(p203) Early recorded history shows the efforts of men to overcome their fear by establishing a religious basis for the subjugation of women and depreciation of the woman’s role.16 Early Greek patriarchal formulations are based on the concepts of subjugation of nature and the linking of male "essential selves with a transcendent principle beyond nature which is pictured as intellectual and male.”17(pI3) Men eagerly accepted this paradigm, and the "first oppressoroppressed relation, the foundation of all other class and property relations,” became entrenched.17(p3)

 

 

[Larry of the Lawn]

You mean misandry?

4 minutes ago, Zorral said:

 (why isn't there a term for hatred of men)

 

 

 

[DanteGabriel]

2 hours ago, Muaddibs_Tapeworm said:

Hillary's campaign kind of reminds me of a weed shop I visited in Maine over the holidays. The staff was super multicultural. Black people, white people, Asians of every hue, pink hair, dreadlocks, every shade or variety of human you could imagine. Very friendly, very inclusive, very welcoming environment. Almost enough to make one forget that the police are still arresting poor people and destroying their lives and families for selling the same plant that this corporate entity is colluding with law enforcement to corner the market on.

I don't know what the hell this has to do with anything, but congratulations on finding a single shop that employs apparently half the non-white people in Maine.

[Larry of the Lawn]

43 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

I think a problem is that if all  that enthusiasm gets Sanders elected, and then he fails to accomplish much, a lot of that enthusiasm may dissipate - just like it did with Obama. And that ended up causing problems for years in both his election and downballot elections, and also encouraged more logjams and more resistance to anything he did. 

I think also that it's a similar worry to what we're seeing with being the 'first' to anything, and failing. If Sanders loses, will the talk be 'no super lefty person can win'? Probably, and that'll absolutely depress progressive candidates for a while. We've already seen that with women candidates this cycle. 

What's the answer to this then?  Just support someone who supports milquetoast versions of what your own goals are so that they aren't 'corrupted' by failure?  

What's the alternative, just not to try?  Support what you believe in only when Dems somehow get the White House and 65 leftist senators and the House?  

 

[Fragile Bird]

FYI. Here's a list of the others who received pardons or clemency. The last three got clemency.

Friedler was the CEO of a software company called Symplicity who hacked into the accounts of competitors on federal contract bids. Pardoned.

Paul Pogue was a Texas contractor who committed fraud by underreporting his income by more than a $1M in 2003 and by large amounts in 2004 and 2005. Pardoned.

David Safavian was the GSA Chief of Staff sentenced to one year in prison in 2009 for obstruction of justice for lying about notorious Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Abramoff, among other things, took him on a "luxury golf vacation to Scotland". When did Trump buy his Scottish golf course? Pardoned.

Angela Stanton is a Trump supporting tv personality who was convicted of racketeering in 2004. Pardoned.

Tynice Nichole Hall is a young black woman who had been sentenced to 35 years on drug charges. I see there was a campaign to get her clemency, but I can't find a story about it. Crystal Munoz is a 40 year old Native American woman sentenced to 20 years on pot charges. I don't think I have an issue with these. I guess they were tossed in as an example of, "oh look, it's not just about thieving white dudes!" Clemency.

Judith Negron, aged 40, was the co-owner of a medical health care company and was convicted of orchestrating a $205M fraud against Medicare. She was ordered by a Florida judge to repay $87 MILLION! I wonder if she has done so. I saw her plea for clemency on the internet and she starts off by saying she's a first-time, non-violent offender. Holy shit! She got a sentence of 35 years in 2011, and here she is, 9 years later, getting released. I remember reading about the fraud when the story broke, the biggest Medicare fraud in history.

 

[DMC]

4 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

What's the alternative, just not to try?  Support what you believe in only when Dems somehow get the White House and 65 leftist senators and the House?  

The point is to craft a message that gives you the best possible shot at 270 EC votes.  Is M4A a part of that message?  Possible I guess, but the empirics suggest otherwise.  You can still make progress towards your policy goals without outright advocating for your intended goal if that goal remains unpopular with the general electorate.  That's what campaigns are all about.  Then you govern on what's achievable.

Related to this, anyone see AOC's comments on M4A the other day:

Quote

“A president can’t wave a magic wand and pass any legislation they want.  The worst-case scenario? We compromise deeply, and we end up getting a public option. Is that a nightmare? I don’t think so.”

So, basically what Warren said back in November and the Sanders campaign/advocates attacked her for equivocating.  Nice.

[Ran]

20 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

FYI. Here's a list of the others who received pardons or clemency. The last three got clemency.

As others have noted, for the most part Trump is basically signalling that all the stuff people say he has done or is currently doing -- fraud, corrupt use of power, extortion, obstruction of justice, lying to federal investigators -- doesn't mean a damn.

[Kalbear]

29 minutes ago, Muaddibs_Tapeworm said:

There really isn't a distinction between hate and fear for the purposes of our conversation. He's just over-correcting my post to be pedantic.

I'm not. I'm correcting you because the reactions of fear vs. hate in the election manifest themselves differently. And in 2016 (and since) we're seeing a lot of hate. We're seeing more active attacks, more direct attacks, more actual violence, more people declaring themselves MRA and marching against women specifically. And it isn't because they are afraid; it's because they despise. 

Contrast this with people who voted for, say, Sanders in 2016 because they were afraid that a woman couldn't win. 

That's why it's a difference.

36 minutes ago, Muaddibs_Tapeworm said:

It might have been Massachusetts by that point, we were all over New England. But my point was that there's this brand of "woke capitalism" that does a good job of looking inclusive, even while it still practices all the same evil shit that the robber barons did when they were taking over the country. It's the sort of fake progressivism that people like Clinton and Bloomberg like to trot during their campaigns, just to keep giving corporations, the military, the private prison industry, the people who pay for their campaigns, free reign over the most vulnerable people in the country once they're in power.

I especially like this argument because overwhelmingly those vulnerable people voted for Clinton over Sanders. So not only does this end up being wrong, it ends up being especially paternalistic towards those voters. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, larrytheimp said:

 Take what you can get and keep trying.  

Funny, this is the mantra of the moderate/centrists/pragmatists.

I think this comes down to the Overton window. The above what to nudge to the left at a pace that outraces nudges to the right, and history has shown this is highly effective. Asking for a huge shift on empty promises can be dangerous, and as Kal said, can have disastrous results. If Bernie wins and is a failure, which he very well could be, and plus the economy tanks, which it very may well, the country will not try socialism again for a long time and that’s not what I want.

Bernie has a good message, but he’s a flawed messenger.

[Kalbear]

25 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

What's the answer to this then?  Just support someone who supports milquetoast versions of what your own goals are so that they aren't 'corrupted' by failure?  

What's the alternative, just not to try?  Support what you believe in only when Dems somehow get the White House and 65 leftist senators and the House?  

It's setting expectations reasonably and knowing how to get there. If your plan requires a majority in the house, senate and POTUS, don't support the filibuster. Or ensure that you actually have all the dems for your plans (or can get them). Or make sure that you can put massive pressure on the other senators and house to get what you want. 

Or focus on things that don't require laws in order to get passed.  This is, IMO, one of Sanders' biggest strengths - he has a coherent foreign policy and can easily achieve it without any real signoff, and it will show almost immediate dividends. 

I admit, it's hard to do because you want to get people energized and wanting to get big things done. I think that the big thing Obama didn't do early enough was go after the things that required no bipartisan support when he had the chance. He should have nominated, like, all the judges he possibly could as soon as humanly possible. He should have done more of the things he ended up doing later, like DACA. To be fair he didn't know either, but that lack of accomplishment due to partisan fighting hurt him, and having a plan for it is going to be needed. 

 

[Zorral]

33 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

What's the answer to this then?  Just support someone who supports milquetoast versions of what your own goals are so that they aren't 'corrupted' by failure?  

What's the alternative, just not to try?  Support what you believe in only when Dems somehow get the White House and 65 leftist senators and the House?  

 

Exactly!  I just don't get this thinking that we can't do the smart thing, the right thing, even the thing that people are asking for, because down the like the people who don't like this thing(s) will be mad and not vote for us.  They're not going to vote you anyway, any time.  You can't stop something, you can't change something, but doing the same gdd thing(s) they are already doing, or even just shutting up about the same evil stupid destructive gdd thing(s) they are already doing and have always done.