2016 US Presidential Election Thread - VII - Page 30 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-07-2016, 05:33 PM   #436
ONE
love, blood, life
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Leicester, UK
Posts: 12,378
Local Time: 02:58 AM
I will say though... the Iraq War is a special case where I do think that flip flopping is important to be criticized heavily. That's because it's an assessment of judgement, not just character.
__________________

__________________
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 04-07-2016, 05:36 PM   #437
ONE
love, blood, life
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Leicester, UK
Posts: 12,378
Local Time: 02:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mack_Again View Post
this argument is so futile because we can't get into Hillary's head.

Well that's my point. She's definitely not "heroic" for changing. That's drinking the Clinton kool aid. But it's not an adequate judgement of her ability to do what she says she'll do. I'm sure she will, no doubt about that.
__________________

__________________
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 04-07-2016, 05:39 PM   #438
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Mack_Again's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: definitely Osaka
Posts: 6,626
Local Time: 02:58 AM
I feel like Hillary's "compromise and what we think of compromise is pretty different.
__________________
Mack_Again is offline  
Old 04-07-2016, 06:00 PM   #439
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: illegitimi non carborundum
Posts: 17,410
Local Time: 02:58 AM
Well, this thread certainly isn't doing either side any favors
__________________
DaveC is offline  
Old 04-07-2016, 06:01 PM   #440
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,694
Local Time: 01:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
I'm glad the left finally woke up and realizes who the enemy is.

Tribute bands are the enemy of art, and compromise is the tribute band of politics.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 04-07-2016, 06:04 PM   #441
Refugee
 
Hollow Island's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,133
Local Time: 03:58 AM
So let’s forget the smoking guns for the moment. The problem with Clinton World is structural. It’s the way in which these profoundly enmeshed relationships—lubricated by the exchange of money, favors, status, and media attention—shape what gets proposed as policy in the first place.

For instance, under the Clintons’ guidance, drug companies work with the foundation to knock down their prices in Africa (conveniently avoiding the real solution: changing the system of patenting that allows them to charge such grotesque prices to the poor in the first place). The Dow Chemical Company finances water projects in India (just don’t mention their connection to the ongoing human health disaster in Bhopal, for which the company still refuses to take responsibility). And it was at the Clinton Global Initiative that airline mogul Richard Branson made his flashy pledge to spend billions solving climate change (almost a decade later, we’re still waiting, while Virgin Airlines keeps expanding).
In Clinton World it’s always win-win-win: The governments look effective, the corporations look righteous, and the celebrities look serious. Oh, and another win too: The Clintons grow ever more powerful.



At the center of it all is the canonical belief that change comes not by confronting the wealthy and powerful but by partnering with them. Viewed from within the logic of what Thomas Frank recently termed “the land of money,” all of Hillary Clinton’s most controversial actions make sense. Why not take money from fossil-fuel lobbyists? Why not get paid hundreds of thousands for speeches to Goldman Sachs? It’s not a conflict of interest; it’s a mutually beneficial partnership—part of a never-ending merry-go-round of corporate-political give and take.



The Problem With Hillary Clinton Isn’t Just Her Corporate Cash. It’s Her Corporate Worldview. | The Nation
__________________
Hollow Island is offline  
Old 04-07-2016, 06:06 PM   #442
Refugee
 
Hollow Island's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,133
Local Time: 03:58 AM
The problem with people who worship the idea of compromise is that they fail to realize that there are some things that cannot be compromised on.
__________________
Hollow Island is offline  
Old 04-07-2016, 06:20 PM   #443
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,694
Local Time: 01:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollow Island View Post
The problem with people who worship the idea of compromise is that they fail to realize that there are some things that cannot be compromised on.

Understanding the necessity of compromise at times is not worshipping. The problem with the all or nothing crowd is they may die waiting for change.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 04-07-2016, 06:23 PM   #444
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,886
Local Time: 02:58 AM
My biggest hang-up with the far left (which exists now, I guess that's progress from where it felt like we were not that long ago?) is exactly what BM is showing here. There has to be some level of pragmatism. You can't just say "never drone strike." You can't just say "tax the rich." Both on a political and practical level, you need to get real at some point. And it's why Sanders is such an odd concept for me. He's the only one who gets one of the major issues, but his solutions aren't good.

But that doesn't get Clinton off the hook. Part of what this election cycle has revealed is that the Bill Clinton nostalgia is a little over-the-top and inaccurate.
__________________
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 04-07-2016, 06:53 PM   #445
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,271
Local Time: 01:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
yeah, see, this is exactly what's wrong with our politics. ossification and an unreasonable demand for purity used to be only for those on the right.

as a homosexual (i love saying that), i totally understood that Obama couldn't take a pro-SSM position because, shock, it would have, at the time, meant that he would be in danger of losing votes that he needed to win the election. i knew, instinctively, that he was pro-SSM, and would one day be pro-SSM, and that if i were patient, and voted for the right people, and continued to make the argument, and if he continued to make incremental change (like DADT), that eventually the time would come. i'm not a child, so i didn't demand to be catered to or that my own individual concerns were so important that they were more important than other concerns, nor do i think that my vote is something rare and precious that must be courted and won, like some maiden's virginity. politics is a zero sum game, and it's a long game, and it's more important to assemble a coalition and run a national party that works together for achievable common goals than to be so sure of our rightness and so intolerant of other viewpoints and ways of life and the fact that, gosh, change *is* hard for some people, that we sacrifice the good for our own self-absorbed ideas of perfection.
Thank. You.

It doesn't make sense. We're all supposedly so cynical about politicians, but then we complain when they don't live up to the promises and campaign slogans they spout. Well, yeah, of course they won't follow through with every last thing they say they'll do and say they believe. They're politicians. We're not supposed to trust them from the start, remember?

And I do NOT want the left emulating the right on the "no compromise ever" attitude. We cannot bitch about the right refusing to compromise with Obama and the Democrats when we're willing to turn around and do the exact same thing. We just can't.

That's not to say we shouldn't stand our ground on issues/bills that are especially important when they come up. Absolutely we should. But there still needs to be room for compromise at some point, too. And if doing that means that change happens a little more slowly than one would like or expect, then so be it. At least that way, the results will likely be better for everyone in the long run.

Speaking for myself, as long as I know a politician is at least TRYING to do what they can, as long as I can agree with them on a good portion of their political views and get the sense that they are at least interested in doing their part to help with issues I care about (doesn't matter whether they were there from day one or came in late, fact is, they're there and that's what matters), that's the most important thing to me. I don't expect sweeping change overnight (certainly won't complain if it happens, but some things take more time than others), and I don't expect to find a candidate who I will never ever disagree with or who's never ever done things I wouldn't support. I still very much like Obama and am glad I voted for him both times. Have I agreed with everything he's done? No. But he's also done or supported enough good things that make me feel like voting for him was worth it.

And if I disagree with him or any other politician strongly enough on something, or have an issue that I think is worth bringing attention to, I write letters. I support organizations. I'll go to a rally or a protest if need be. Sometimes it might work, sometimes it might not, but at least I'm doing something.
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 04-07-2016, 07:03 PM   #446
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,498
Local Time: 02:58 AM
I admire many of Sanders' long-held positions. The video of him demolishing Sen. Duke Cumningnham for using the term "homos in the military" way back in 1995 is genuinely inspiring and exemplary.

It's also easier to take such positions when you only have to answer to 650,000ish Vermonters. It's a very white, very real state in the middle of common sense mind-your-own-business New England, and the first state to pass Civil Union legislation in 2003 (thanks to Howard Dean, who had to wear a bullet proof vest when he signed the bill). Bernie's position on handguns also reflects his constituents. Vermonters like to hunt. Naturally, he is more supportive of gun rights.

All of which is to say that Bernie is a politician. One with a little more leeway than others. But even still, he represents the interests of his constituents. Like he's supposed to.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-07-2016, 07:10 PM   #447
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,295
Local Time: 02:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
as a homosexual (i love saying that), i totally understood that Obama couldn't take a pro-SSM position because, shock, it would have, at the time, meant that he would be in danger of losing votes that he needed to win the election. i knew, instinctively, that he was pro-SSM, and would one day be pro-SSM, and that if i were patient, and voted for the right people, and continued to make the argument, and if he continued to make incremental change (like DADT), that eventually the time would come. i'm not a child, so i didn't demand to be catered to or that my own individual concerns were so important that they were more important than other concerns, nor do i think that my vote is something rare and precious that must be courted and won, like some maiden's virginity. politics is a zero sum game, and it's a long game, and it's more important to assemble a coalition and run a national party that works together for achievable common goals than to be so sure of our rightness and so intolerant of other viewpoints and ways of life and the fact that, gosh, change *is* hard for some people, that we sacrifice the good for our own self-absorbed ideas of perfection.
You know it's interesting because Canadians like to pat themselves on the back for how much more advanced we are on the gay marriage issue, but years ago I went to see one of the lawyers who basically legislated all of them main cases prior to gay marriage being legalized. Fascinating woman who told us of the 20 YEAR process it was in my province (Ontario) and basically it began with chipping away at smaller things, like human rights issues that could be argued before tribunals, etc. So that when gay marriage was legalized it was actually just the last step of many, many incremental changes which came before (like rights re: visitations in hospitals, workplace discrimination rules, etc). But because most people have no idea that this went on it was as if Canada was suddenly enlightened and our courts out of the blue declared "one man + one woman" unconstitutional. Those courts basically had no choice at that point.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 04-07-2016, 07:21 PM   #448
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,271
Local Time: 01:58 AM
Yeah, Irvine, I'd be willing to bet that many Democratic politicians here in Iowa would have a similar stance on the gun issue for the same reason. LOTS of gun owners here. Lots.

It would be interesting, though, to see if and how his stance on the gun issue changed if he were to become president. I imagine we probably would see at least bit of a shift in some respects, especially if more gun control groups and organizations do press him to show more support for their stance.

I'm fine with either Sanders or Clinton. For the most part, I think I tend to be more politically in line with Sanders, but I'm fine with Hilary, too. I don't get the intense hatred some have for her (well, I know one reason some people hate her, but that's also not the only reason people hate her), and I don't feel she's THAT much worse than any other politician out there. Certainly there's legit things in her record or past to criticize or scrutinize or investigate, but hell, the chances of finding a politician whose past you DON'T have to do that for is pretty slim, so... Not saying that makes any shady stuff politicians do right, of course, just...welcome to the world of politics, unfortunately.

I'll need to check out that video you mention of Sanders going after Cunningham. That sounds pretty awesome.
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 04-07-2016, 08:16 PM   #449
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,262
Local Time: 02:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Prop 8 happened before he took office.
Obama won California at the top of the same ballot. Had he come out in favor of gay marriage, it could have convinced enough people, particularly black voters, to say "no" to Prop 8. So yes, his stance at the time is completely relevant.
__________________
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 04-07-2016, 08:38 PM   #450
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,730
Local Time: 11:58 PM
Fuck North Carolina. Fuck Mississippi. Like anyone wants to go to Mississippi anyway.

(People do want to go to NC. I hear the beaches and Outer Banks are lovely. I have an uncle who lives in NC. He's probably in favor of the ruling or law or whatever, alas.)
__________________

__________________
corianderstem is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com