US Politics: Vaguely above average Tuesday

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

9 hours ago, Rippounet said:

I genuinely struggle to follow your thoughts here.
1) It seems you're saying humanity is incapable of solving a global social dilemma. I'll have a more optimistic view of my species if you don't mind.
2) Even if I'm wrong, it's still worth trying ; right now we're not even trying. In other words, we could at least try to limit the number of holes instead of punching new ones.
3) A new entity might be necessary but it doesn't follow that it requires global sovereignty so long as most States (or at least, major economic powers) agree on possible penalties for violations. Such organizations already exist (though the US does have a tendency to keep out of them).
4) The idea that any kind of force or threat of force would be necessary to move toward greater global collaboration on an economic issue completely baffles me. I can understand you'd criticize the idea, or even that you'd find it unrealistic, but this insistznce on force is utterly bizarre to me.
To my eyes that's like saying you can only have a potluck if the host is ready to shoot whoever doesn't bring anything... It's a coherent reasoning, but it feels like it's coming from a complete psychopath.

Ripponuet,

Without the ability to enforce compliance with such a global tax a significant portion of those who the tax would target would use States refusing to participate in such a tax regime to avoid having to pay the tax.

Humans are human.  You have yet, outside a religious context, to demonstrate a society were threat of force was unnecessary to get everyone to pay taxes.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

7 hours ago, Triskele said:

Oh yes, and now he's afraid that journalists will try to purposefully infect him (Vanity Fair, limited clicks):

 

 

Sorry about the lines. 

 

 

I love that quoted section--what a strange example (nachos). I mean, not chips and dip? Salsa? I just love that even when it's reasonable to expect someone to be eating poorly due to fear of double dipping, the example Trump allegedly uses is nachos. I suppose I don't imagine many "billionaires" going out and eating nachos off a plate with others. He sure doesn't act like a billionaire.

The other good part is how the source said, "He calls them 'double dippers." Is Trump now taking credit for that phrase?

[Centrist Simon Steele]

2 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

Biden really on point here, can't imagine how this could work against him in the general:

I have zero confidence he wouldn't do something like this again.  M4a is too expensive, but starting baseless wars?  No problem!

 

 

He also said even if the House and Senate got together and put M4A on his desk, it'd be a veto. The people who say he is progressive and super close to Sanders in policy aren't paying attention. He's going to the negotiating table far removed from Sanders, and he won't even be able to get his shitty plans fully passed.

Better affordable care act? Turn out to be the same. Maybe a slight medicaid expansion in some states.

Student loan debt crisis? He wants to make the current public service loan forgiveness "better." Which means, we might to get keep what we currently have.

Oh! I get it what he means now that "nothing will fundamentally change."

[IheartIheartTesla]

I voted. It only took 10 minutes, but it was an old fashioned ballot (as always) where you filled in an oval, had all the candidates listed with Bloomberg at the top of the ticket (not their fault, but annoying), and the ballot reader was not functional since they didnt have the passcode, so we dumped our ballots in the auxilliary bin of the reader. So now we are taking on faith our votes will be scanned at a future time.

Well, at least Russians wont be able to hack such a low-tech operation.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

4 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

I voted. It only took 10 minutes, but it was an old fashioned ballot (as always) where you filled in an oval, had all the candidates listed with Bloomberg at the top of the ticket (not their fault, but annoying), and the ballot reader was not functional since they didnt have the passcode, so we dumped our ballots in the auxilliary bin of the reader. So now we are taking on faith our votes will be scanned at a future time.

Well, at least Russians wont be able to hack such a low-tech operation.

We had trouble with our ballot reader early on 2/29 in SC.  All ballots in our precincts were scanned and counted.

[IheartIheartTesla]

I'm not particularly worried my vote wont be counted, its just a low grade annoyance that I wasnt able to see it in action (and I believe the normal practice is to also print out a receipt, which didnt happen either)

From the polls, it looks like Biden may carry Michigan. There are some differences from 2016 where the polls were exactly at the same place. As I've said before, this may point to his chances in the general compared to HRC (losing the primary should have been a clue to her that she needed to do a bit more there).

[Stego]

I love how people are discussing Biden's cabinet as if he has a chance to beat Trump. I may as well plan my Kingsguard.

The 2020 election was all but finalized on Super Tuesday. 

[Rippounet]

21 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Without the ability to enforce compliance with such a global tax a significant portion of those who the tax would target would use States refusing to participate in such a tax regime to avoid having to pay the tax.

Oh FFS Scot this is why I keep bringing up FATCA. What FATCA showed is that if a major economic power (like the US, but also the EU, and possibly China) decides that it really wants to go after its citizens' wealth it can actually do so. Throw in some measure of international cooperation and even half-assed measures would achieve something. It doesn't matter that much if a minority will always find a way around them as long as we start recognizing that it is in everyone's interest for States to cooperate on those issues. On some level many of Piketty's proposals are only meant to raise awareness, and like it or not he's already had some success, even in the US.

This discussion is a bit like me saying we should have laws against crime and you endlessly repeating that criminals won't obey laws anyway so we have to be prepared to shoot them in the face. You're just not interested in discussing the problem.

[DMC]

1 hour ago, OnionAhaiReborn said:

It's kind of stunning that Democrats have now managed, since the Iraq War, to nominate three Presidential candidates who voted for the war, out of four nominees total (I'm getting ahead of myself, I guess, but Biden is the overwhelming favorite). The fact that supporting that war is not viewed as completely disqualifying shows how little Americans care about foreign lives.

Heh.  I think that speaks more to where the American public was at at the time and the fact the Democrats keep nominating older nominees - which means most of the Democratic talent in 2003, yeah, supported the war.  

I remember exactly where I was when the Iraq War started.  The basement of a dive bar where my friends were playing a set, I was 17 at the time.  Someone came down and announced the first attacks happened, and we all freaked out like..well, the average freakout on these threads at least every day or two, I suppose.  My friend Matt led the band, and they played War/No More Trouble, flawlessly reciting Selassie's old UN speech.  Then we all got really fucked up and pretty sure most us got laid.  Great night.  Year and a half later, I'd be surprised if 10% of those people ended up voting in the 2004 election.

Anyway, I was pretty pissed off for a long time about all the Dems that acquiesced to that bullshit vote right before the 2002 midterms.  (And to clarify it wasn't just because this is a "when I was seventeen" diatribe, my parents were also strongly against the war at the time.)  And as has already been mentioned, Obama's opposition to that is just as significant as his 2004 convention speech in terms of him getting his foot in the door. 

But, it's 2020.  Let's get over it.  If a baby was born the day the Iraq War started, she'd almost be as old as I was on that day.  That..well, first of all makes me feel old, but second emphasizes this probably should be something we should all move on from at this point.  Biden started opposing the war pretty quickly, and then came out with that weird 3 state solution that was pretty fucking stupid.  You wanna criticize him?  Talk about that.  Although I do love how the left is throwing the kitchen sink at Biden because they're so emo Sanders isn't gonna get the nomination.  It's like when a drunk sports fan breaks his TV when his team loses.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

13 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Oh FFS Scot this is why I keep bringing up FATCA. What FATCA showed is that if a major economic power (like the US, but also the EU, and possibly China) decides that it really wants to go after its citizens' wealth it can actually do so. Throw in some measure of international cooperation and even half-assed measures would achieve something. It doesn't matter that much if a minority will always find a way around them as long as we start recognizing that it is in everyone's interest for States to cooperate on those issues. On some level many of Piketty's proposals are only meant to raise awareness, and like it or not he's already had some success, even in the US.

This discussion is a bit like me saying we should have laws against crime and you endlessly repeating that criminals won't obey laws anyway so we have to be prepared to shoot them in the face. You're just not interested in discussing the problem.

The people this targets are not Joe Blow Schmoe.  These are folks who have managed to assemble massive amounts of wealth.  If there is a loophole to maintain that wealth do you really think most of them will not take it?

[Ormond]

11 hours ago, Fez said:

With so many other public events being cancelled or postponed due to COVID-19, it feels like Biden and Sanders have got to stop doing rallies soon, right? (and Trump too, if he had a brain)

Seems like such an unnecessary risk, including for them personally. Seeing journalists tweeting the photos of Biden's rally tonight feels real disconcerting, considering everything else going on.

It was pointed out on one of the cable news networks last night that although Trump claims he will be holding more rallies, for the first time in quite a while he actually has none scheduled, and he did not show up in Michigan or one of the other states holding primaries today to lord it over Democrats like he was doing before. 

[Liffguard]

10 minutes ago, DMC said:

But, it's 2020.  Let's get over it. 

Let's not. It wasn't a minor scuffle. Hundreds of thousands of people were killed. The entire region is still suffering the effects. The dead can't just get over it. The relatives of the dead can't just get over it. The nations affected can't just get over it.

The US authorities (and to a lesser extent the UK) can't be permitted to just shrug and say "my bad." Especially when some of those authorities are still running for office. It's difficult to "get over it" when someone who helped the war happen is trying to become the commander in chief.

If the US actually does want to "get over it," a good start would be punishing the people who made the war happen, or at the very least ensuring they never hold any power again.

[Ran]

59 minutes ago, Stego said:

I love how people are discussing Biden's cabinet as if he has a chance to beat Trump!

Don't give up hope! 

Quote

In head to head matchups with President Trump among registered voters, Biden gets support from more than half of registered voters against the incumbent president, while Sanders does not. Biden leads Trump 52 - 41 percent, and Sanders leads Trump 49 - 42 percent.

Looking at favorabilities among registered voters, Biden is by far the most favorably viewed. Biden is viewed favorably by 45 percent and unfavorably by 40 percent, while Sanders gets a negative 40 - 46 percent favorability rating. Trump is the least popular of the three candidates with a negative 39 - 58 percent favorability rating.

Biden and Sanders also do better than Trump when it comes to candidate traits. While 62 percent say Sanders is honest and 51 percent say Biden is honest, only 33 percent say Trump is honest. Biden has good leadership skills say 52 percent of voters, while 45 percent say Sanders has good leadership skills and 42 percent say Trump has good leadership skills. On empathy, 64 percent say Sanders cares about average Americans, while 59 percent say Biden cares about average Americans, and 43 percent say Trump cares about average Americans.

Both Biden and Sanders beat Trump on the question of who would do a better job handling a crisis. Biden beats Trump 56 - 40 percent on this question, while Sanders tops Trump 50 - 44 percent.

 

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, Liffguard said:

Let's not. It wasn't a minor scuffle. Hundreds of thousands of people were killed. The entire region is still suffering the effects. The dead can't just get over it. The relatives of the dead can't just get over it. The nations affected can't just get over it.

Right, and this is all Joe Biden's fault for making a politically calculated vote when he was a prominent politician.  Plus, more importantly, knew there was nothing the opposition could do to stop it.  Get over yourself.  We had a decade to whine about this, and boy did I whine about it.  But it's a different time.

[DMC]

I mean, if we want to talk about old votes that cost thousands of American lives and suffering - many more than the Iraq War did - how about we talk about Sanders' votes against the Brady Bill and consistent opposition to gun control for about the first 15 years of his congressional career?  Pretty sure "the dead can't just get over" that either.

[Rorshach]

44 minutes ago, DMC said:

  My friend Matt led the band, and they played War/No More Trouble, flawlessly reciting Selassie's old UN speech. 

You're talking about Haile Selassie's speech to the League of Nations?

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Rorshach said:

You're talking about Haile Selassie's speech to the League of Nations?

No, although that is an important speech as well.  Bob Marley's War/No More Trouble is essentially reciting a section of Selassie's address to the UN in 1963.  A pretty rhetorically awesome section of the speech, which I'm sure is why Marley turned it into a song by adding, like, one chord and a chorus.

[Liffguard]

12 minutes ago, DMC said:

Right, and this is all Joe Biden's fault for making a politically calculated vote when he was a prominent politician.  Plus, more importantly, knew there was nothing the opposition could do to stop it.  Get over yourself.  We had a decade to whine about this, and boy did I whine about it.  But it's a different time.

No, it's not "all" Joe Biden's fault, but he wasn't some random bloke on the street. He was a senator. And he didn't just fail to stop the war, he was an active supporter. This isn't whining, I whine when I have to work late and miss my bus. This is requesting some recognition that a supporter of one of the greatest crimes of the century is seeking greater power, and that said support is a very real point of concern.

 

Quote

I mean, if we want to talk about old votes that cost thousands of American lives and suffering - many more than the Iraq War did - how about we talk about Sanders' votes against the Brady Bill and consistent opposition to gun control for about the first 15 years of his congressional career?

Sure thing, we should talk about that too. Gun violence is definitely a major weak point of Sanders. I wouldn't necessarily blame anyone who considered it a dealbreaker. And I wouldn't roll my eyes at anyone who thought it was a major concern and tell them to "get over it."

I object to how you characterise bringing up Biden's support for the Iraq war as "throwing the kitchen sink," as if that support was a silly little thing of no consequence.

[Larry of the Lawn]

25 minutes ago, DMC said:

Right, and this is all Joe Biden's fault for making a politically calculated vote when he was a prominent politician.  Plus, more importantly, knew there was nothing the opposition could do to stop it.  Get over yourself.  We had a decade to whine about this, and boy did I whine about it.  But it's a different time.

Biden was talking about going into Iraq during the Clinton administration.  It's not like he just went along with it he supported the decision li g after the fact, which he has been lying about constantly.  

[DMC]

Just now, Liffguard said:

And he didn't just fail to stop the war, he was an active supporter.

...Until he wasn't, which was pretty quick.  Again, this isn't like referring to McCain or Jeb Bush and their steadfast support of the Iraq War.  There are important distinctions there, and Biden was one of the first prominent Democrats to voice opposition to the war.  Does he get credit for that?  I understand if you don't think so, but it's a clear indicator he was not all on board Dubya's neocon world-building and rather was simply a reflection of the rally round the flag effect - which most Democrats in Congress were at the time.  Very few dissenters then.  Yes, Sanders was one, great.

3 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Biden was talking about going into Iraq during the Clinton administration. 

Um, you're gonna have to be more specific that that.  Everyone was talking about going into Iraq during the Clinton administration.  We bombed them, twice, during the Clinton administration.