US Politics - It's a new dawn. It's a new day. It's a new life for US

[Varysblackfyre321]

55 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

I get these a often when I'm watching a political or news video. I let them play through and I'll even click on the link because I love the thought of PragerU paying money to advertise on the majority Report or the like. Same for Epoch Times. Not that I'm actually going to buy their nonsense.  

Eh I can’t take humor in it. Because in any case their benefitting from the initial exposure at the very least.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

11 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Eh I can’t take humor in it. Because in any case their benefitting from the initial exposure at the very least.

How's that?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

33 minutes ago, Week said:

Never mind, enough of the "centrist" hackery.

I would have let the original comment ride. The frustrating thing about this prolonged debate is both sides have rather similar end goals. Sure there are differences regarding tactics and when and how to take action, but it's a great representation of the narcissism of small differences, especially when you consider the other competing faction wants to destroy basically everything both groups want and care about.

[Martell Spy]

FEC filing: 'MAGA Patriot Party' incorporates in Texas

https://news4sanantonio.com/news/nation-world/fec-filing-maga-patriot-party-incorporates-in-texas?fbclid=IwAR3_0KqCr-qsEWxS9dHfMRHRDVn7lAK1t5YAIVRPG3yUq1qeAFkt8YP9Gjs

Quote

 

SAN ANTONIO, Texas (KVII) – There's a new conservative political party in the Lone Star State.

The Federal Election Commission on Monday posted a notice of organization on behalf of the "MAGA Patriot Party" in San Antonio, Texas. According to documents, the committee fundraises exclusively for the "Donald J. Trump for President" political action committee.

An organization calling itself the Patriot Party made headlines earlier this month for their courting of an endorsement from now-former President Trump.

Trump also reportedly floated the idea of forming his own party with the same moniker, according to the Wall Street Journal.

 

 

[Week]

18 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I would have let the original comment ride. The frustrating thing about this prolonged debate is both sides have rather similar end goals. Sure there are differences regarding tactics and when and how to take action, but it's a great representation of the narcissism of small differences, especially when you consider the other competing faction wants to destroy basically everything both groups want and care about.

Yes, and again with the circular firing squad on the left. Which then leads some thinking, as occurs to some "Leftists", that maybe the far Right is a closer ally than centrists. To be clear, I wouldn't expect that of anyone here.

 

 

[Fez]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

That's because you deigned to not capitalize my name!!!  Fez has broken this down before - it will be hell getting any legislation through without an organizing resolution, albeit technically doable.  McConnell is obviously bluffing here, and the Dems have the better bluff/leverage anyway, but how long does the turtle hold out?  That's a question for the gods.  Until such time, the committee composition stays as it was in the prior session (with the GOP being the chairs and having a one member advantage).

ETA:  Oh, and as for new members - they literally do not have any committee assignments yet.  They have to wait.  I guess it gives Warnock and Ossoff more time to make sure the streets of Gotham are safe.

On top of this, there were some tea leaves today that we might be getting close. It seems like Sinema's and Manchin's statements again insisting that they will never vote to eliminate the filibuster may be enough for McConnell to drop that particular point.

There may still be technical adjustments to the 2001 agreement that McConnell is insisting on too, but I've no idea. That agreement already gave the minority leader a surprisingly large amount of power in terms of bringing bills to the floor, but he might want more. Or, more likely perhaps, have more restrictions on both his and Schumer's ability to block amendments (since McConnell doesn't care about passing bills, but he'd love to force Democratic votes on wedge issue amendments and add poison pills that the House will never accept).

[kairparavel]

Uh, what? Didn't see this earlier in the thread. 

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 hour ago, Martell Spy said:

FEC filing: 'MAGA Patriot Party' incorporates in Texas

https://news4sanantonio.com/news/nation-world/fec-filing-maga-patriot-party-incorporates-in-texas?fbclid=IwAR3_0KqCr-qsEWxS9dHfMRHRDVn7lAK1t5YAIVRPG3yUq1qeAFkt8YP9Gjs

 

Great minds think alike.  I posted that a page back.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

13 minutes ago, kairparavel said:

Uh, what? Didn't see this earlier in the thread. 

 

Backdoor way to tweet. Baby needs his binky. 

[DMC]

20 minutes ago, kairparavel said:

Uh, what? Didn't see this earlier in the thread. 

The Palm Beach County Office of the Former President will be aided by such luminaries as Hyman Roth, Tony Montana, and Corrado Soprano Jr.

[GrimTuesday]

1 hour ago, Martell Spy said:

FEC filing: 'MAGA Patriot Party' incorporates in Texas

https://news4sanantonio.com/news/nation-world/fec-filing-maga-patriot-party-incorporates-in-texas?fbclid=IwAR3_0KqCr-qsEWxS9dHfMRHRDVn7lAK1t5YAIVRPG3yUq1qeAFkt8YP9Gjs

 

It means nothing, anyone can start a PAC, which is what this is. Being a party is a very specific thing that confers certain privileges that are not extended to PACs such as having different contribution limits and other rules. For example, in Washington state where a PAC has a contribution limit of between 1-5k per election (Primary and general count as one election each), while a party's contribution limits are determined by the number of people in the jurisdiction that the election is taking place (For example, the Democratic party can make donations up to a dollar per registered voter to a state executive candidate $4,861,997). The FEC allows parties to give double what a standard PAC can give, (5k per election vs 2800 per election) while they have 50 other state parties that can also give 5k per election.

I work in campaign finance so for once I can kind of claim to be an authoritative voice on this.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

10 minutes ago, DMC said:

The Palm Beach County Office of the Former President will be aided by such luminaries as Hyman Roth, Tony Montana, and Corrado Soprano Jr.

Dexter clearly has an office to clean out. 

[Mindwalker]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

Backdoor way to tweet. Baby needs his binky. 

Oh Gods, no... The quiet was so nice.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

13 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

Oh Gods, no... The quiet was so nice.

Clearly you have heard the storm from the Texas GOP.

https://www.newsweek.com/qanon-texas-gop-storm-slogan-1564127
 

[GrimTuesday]

Oh baby. (insert horny Vince McMahon gif here)

 

[Martell Spy]

McConnell agrees to allow Senate power-sharing to move forward
A fight over the filibuster had kept the Senate stalled.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/25/mitch-mcconnell-agrees-senate-filibuster-462466

Quote

 

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell backed down from his demand that any Senate power-sharing agreement include protections for the legislative filibuster, after Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema reaffirmed their opposition Monday to scrapping the procedural tool.

“Today, two Democratic Senators publicly confirmed they will not vote to end the legislative filibuster,” McConnell said in a statement. “They agree with President Biden’s and my view that no Senate majority should destroy the right of future minorities of both parties to help shape legislation.”

While Democrats hold the Senate majority, the chamber’s 50-50 split means that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and McConnell need to establish a power-sharing agreement, also known as an organizing resolution.

Schumer had refused to make a commitment that would tie Democrats' hands and many in the caucus were growing angry with McConnell's resistance.

“We’re glad Senator McConnell threw in the towel and gave up on his ridiculous demand," said Justin Goodman, a spokesperson for Schumer. "We look forward to organizing the Senate under Democratic control and start getting big, bold things done for the American people.”

 

 

[SFDanny]

9 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

Here's West himself on what he means re: neoliberalism and Obama.

He's mentioned the US's aggressive militaristic foreign policy and the Wall Street bailout many times when this comes up.  

I've never heard him call Obama and Reagan or Bush ideological twins.  When he refers to any of them as neo-liberals it's pretty clear he's talking foreign policy and corporations over people.  I'm just not seeing this "false analysis of equivalence" that you're saying is bad strategy.  Neither West, Simon Steele, or anyone else seems to be claiming the Biden is equivalent to Trump, or Reagan to Obama.

You might think that's a lousy definition, or just an insult, but he laid what he means by it.  If it's discourteous and bad strategy to call politicians by names they wouldn't use to describe themselves I guess I'll just keep being discourteous.  I think it's fair to call GWB a warmonger and Biden a corporatist.  I doubt they'd use those words themselves.

edit: that quote is from this interview

and yeah, West seems to have some actual personal animosity when it comes to Obama.  You want to call that bad strategy, ok.  I don't think calling centrists "neo-liberals" is preventing leftist policy goals from happening, but who knows.

First, I want to thank you for the linked interview. It's one I had not read before and I was glad to read it. Next, let me say that I've never meant to claim West called Obama an "ideological twin" only that his political view towards what he calls neo-liberals leads to treating them as such. The best example of this is West's decision to endorse Jill Stein after Sanders lost his quixotic bid to persuade superdelegates to intervene on his behalf and give him the nomination over Clinton in a clear repudiation of what Democratic voters had said.

There are a lot of criticism that can be justly made of Hillary Clinton and of her 2016 campaign. What cannot be credibly said is there was no difference between her and Trump. Trump is a fascist. Clinton is not. Deciding to support Stein's campaign was, in my opinion a prime example of what not understanding  just what that difference would mean for the world and for the people of this country. The last four years and the attempted coup of January 6th should have taught us all that lesson.

Nonetheless, this discussion was never meant to be an attack on West. He is a well respected and dedicated fighter against racism and for real equality. With a well earned history to be honored. I probably should have picked another example to show what I think was a tremendous mistake in political judgement. West wasn't by any means the only one on the Left to make this error.

As to the "personal animosity" towards Obama, I too have read such discussions, but that was again not the point of my criticism. We are all responsible for the decisions we make and the world view we advocate. In this regard, I think West, along with many others was wrong.

[SFDanny]

8 hours ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

Fair enough. I did write a lot. I didn't think you were coming at me, but sometimes I get swept up in the moment. 

I also want to say, I do get what you mean. We see this mislabeling of things all the time as a method of gatekeeping. For example, the more revolutionary lefties typically say anyone who isn't for destroying the system isn't a true socialist. If you say you're a social democrat, to them that means you're a capitalist. Social democrats are socialists who live in capitalist societies and looked at the violent revolutions in Russia and China (for example) and made an explicit move to try and become socialists through democratic means. I do see this element of gate keeping, and it is annoying. But I feel like it's a small (and loud) minority. Some of them may use the term "neoliberal" as gatekeeping. A lot of us don't. We use it as a specific descriptor to make distinct the difference between liberals and leftists.  

Let me say, as to my definition of socialism, it is decidedly rather old school. The "social ownership of the social means of production" is how I remember Marx and Engels putting it. There is a lot more to it than just that, of course, but it is an important start. Which is only to say I don't think capitalist nations with social democratic safety nets qualifies as Socialism. Not that I would in anyway say that socialists should not fight like hell to make the lives of working people better under capitalism. I just don't agree with Sanders that it qualifies as Socialism because it is all about who owns and controls the economic structure of a state. It's about who has the power. Here I'm not trying to make any distinction between social democrats and socialists. I have no problem with people who have different strategies about how one gets to Socialism. In fact, I would not argue there is only one way to get there by any means. 

I agree with you completely that socialists should be committed to the democratic process and a peaceful path to socialism. That's not to say people don't have the right to defend themselves or to overthrow tyrannical governments that refuse to allow a democratic process to function. But socialists should know who dies in such violence, and it is always we the ordinary working people who suffer the most.

To your last sentence, I would only ask what is the problem with using the words you chose? "Liberals and leftists" seems to me perfectly fine, and it avoids the confusion and problems that the term "neo-liberal" causes.

I will try to go back and respond to your earlier post, but I wanted to at least get to this tonight. Thanks for the post.

[Morpheus]

The Q crowd has come back strong with the theory that the inauguration and all of Biden’s oval office pics are fake, staged on movie sets. Even seen some talk of Rob Reiner’s involvement, he’s no Kubrick but I guess he just has to make an old man look like the president, not fake the moon landing.

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

QBees are worse than Flat Earthers.  They refuse to even believe what they actually see.  It’s like some bizarre version of group solipsism.