US Politics XII: shutting down Interference until @U2 agrees to pay for a firewall - Page 49 - 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 02-25-2019, 05:51 PM   #961
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Popmartijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 32,843
Local Time: 01:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
I would suppose the point of so much being in one bill with the name “new deal” is because it’s supposed to emulate FDR’s New Deal, which was obviously (as you probably already know) a massive economic program centered around numerous things from unemployment to financial reform.

“Green” new deal, I would suppose, is another “new deal” meant to broadly address numerous problems, with an emphasis on doing it in a green fashion (if applicable).
But the original New Deal of 85 years ago never was just one bill with everything. It consisted of several acts. In total it was a massive economic program, but it was made up of smaller packages.
So why throw everything together now in one bill, one that isn't even specific enough to detail exactly how certain policies are achieved? It almost certainly contains something for everyone not to be content with. In total it gives almost everyone an excuse to vote against it. Especially in today's hyper-partisan political environment, where there's almost no political capital to spend, I don't think it's wise to just dump such a bill on the floor of Congress. It might work as a manifest (though every job created should be a union job, really?), but as an actual bill that can become law, the creators should have known that chances to get it passed are zero. And that it'll be used as a stick to hit the Democrats with, both those that vote for and against it.

You said that you want bold ideas, real change instead of just small incremental steps. But even then the proposals should be realistic. A big proposed change that does not get passed is less progress than several smaller ones that do become law.
__________________

Popmartijn is offline  
Old 02-25-2019, 10:52 PM   #962
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,460
Local Time: 08:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Popmartijn View Post
But the original New Deal of 85 years ago never was just one bill with everything. It consisted of several acts. In total it was a massive economic program, but it was made up of smaller packages.

So why throw everything together now in one bill, one that isn't even specific enough to detail exactly how certain policies are achieved? It almost certainly contains something for everyone not to be content with. In total it gives almost everyone an excuse to vote against it. Especially in today's hyper-partisan political environment, where there's almost no political capital to spend, I don't think it's wise to just dump such a bill on the floor of Congress. It might work as a manifest (though every job created should be a union job, really?), but as an actual bill that can become law, the creators should have known that chances to get it passed are zero. And that it'll be used as a stick to hit the Democrats with, both those that vote for and against it.



You said that you want bold ideas, real change instead of just small incremental steps. But even then the proposals should be realistic. A big proposed change that does not get passed is less progress than several smaller ones that do become law.


Well you’re talking about a newly elected President after the worst economic crisis in the history of the country, with all the firepower and green lights he needed... comparing that to a newly elected 29 year old congresswoman.

I think one was more likely to be successful at passing all of their legislation to set up a new system than the other.

Also I think you brushed over the part where I said I’m not even endorsing it. I just wasn’t having it reading it’s a purely self centered egotistical bill so she could say she tried and there’s no other logical explanation. You. Know. That’s. Not. True.
__________________

LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 02-26-2019, 09:19 AM   #963
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BEAL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: San Diego
Posts: 6,516
Local Time: 12:39 PM
Who does this sound like???

https://twitter.com/kaivanshroff/sta...328057856?s=21
BEAL is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 09:27 AM   #964
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,205
Local Time: 07:39 AM
It should be law for any presidental candidate to release his or her tax returns and anyone who doesn't is instantly suspicious and not someone who I will vote in any normal circumstance.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 09:29 AM   #965
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 7,233
Local Time: 12:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BEAL View Post
I didn't watch, but not sure if anything came up about his wife's shady dealings. That will be another hit on him. Luckily for him, his fans will explain the tax returns and anything else away. That also sounds familiar...
womanfish is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 09:33 AM   #966
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,205
Local Time: 07:39 AM
I'm not a Bernie fan, but not everyone who is a fan is a sycophantic wackadoodle - so in the interest of not turning the Democratic nomination process into a complete shit show, perhaps we don't refer to ok every Bernie supporter as such.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 09:34 AM   #967
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,460
Local Time: 08:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
It should be law for any presidental candidate to release his or her tax returns and anyone who doesn't is instantly suspicious and not someone who I will vote in any normal circumstance.


Agreed. To add to that, it’s become also symbolic at this point. What have you to hide?
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 02-26-2019, 10:37 AM   #968
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 7,233
Local Time: 12:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
I'm not a Bernie fan, but not everyone who is a fan is a sycophantic wackadoodle - so in the interest of not turning the Democratic nomination process into a complete shit show, perhaps we don't refer to ok every Bernie supporter as such.
That's why I said Bernie "fans".
To me, the solid, immovable base of Trump and Bernie supporters are FANS. They are following a personality, not a candidate and their issues. I have been very clear that I like Bernie. The money he's raising puts him in a definite lead position, and if he's the nominee, then I'm all in. He may very well be my choice if he has the best message to me during the primaries and debates. Who knows.
I am quite aware that not every Bernie supporter is a wackjob. I don't even think most of the solid base are wackjobs, i do think that they overlook a lot of issues of Sanders' that would be troublesome if it were another candidate. Doesn't make them a wackjob, just a bit hypocritical in my opinion.
womanfish is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 10:40 AM   #969
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Popmartijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 32,843
Local Time: 01:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by womanfish View Post
I didn't watch, but not sure if anything came up about his wife's shady dealings. That will be another hit on him. Luckily for him, his fans will explain the tax returns and anything else away. That also sounds familiar...
Still, he might have some issues then securing enough votes in the presidential elections, should he become the candidate.
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-w...ff-2020-ballot
Though the bill mentioned might be primarily aimed at feuding with Trump, it will then also apply to Bernie.
Popmartijn is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 10:46 AM   #970
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 7,233
Local Time: 12:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Popmartijn View Post
Still, he might have some issues then securing enough votes in the presidential elections, should he become the candidate.
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-w...ff-2020-ballot
Though the bill mentioned might be primarily aimed at feuding with Trump, it will then also apply to Bernie.
seriously surprised that California hasn't passed something like this. NJ is one thing, but a Dem can't win without the electoral votes from CA.
womanfish is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 11:30 AM   #971
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,205
Local Time: 07:39 AM
NVM

I'm just here so I don't get fined
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 11:34 AM   #972
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: nazi punks fuck off
Posts: 21,974
Local Time: 07:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Popmartijn View Post
Still, he might have some issues then securing enough votes in the presidential elections, should he become the candidate.
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-w...ff-2020-ballot
Though the bill mentioned might be primarily aimed at feuding with Trump, it will then also apply to Bernie.
holy hell that's a historically bad idea. aside from being almost certainly unconstitutional, it's a terrible precedent to set.

what's stopping a republican-controlled state congress in a swing state like florida or ohio from refusing to allow a democratic presidential candidate on the ballot unless they pledge to, say, never introduce any gun control or public healthcare measure, or work to overturn roe v wade?
DaveC is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 01:04 PM   #973
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 7,233
Local Time: 12:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
holy hell that's a historically bad idea. aside from being almost certainly unconstitutional, it's a terrible precedent to set.

what's stopping a republican-controlled state congress in a swing state like florida or ohio from refusing to allow a democratic presidential candidate on the ballot unless they pledge to, say, never introduce any gun control or public healthcare measure, or work to overturn roe v wade?
Very good point. Leaving this sort of things to the states would be a pandora's box. Would be nice to have the Legislative branch pass a law or provision or whatever it would be called, that any member of any party running for president would need to release a certain number of tax returns, financial records etc, in order to be sure there is no conflict of interest or possibility of blackmail by outside forces.
But that would be a crazy longshot that republicans would ever do something like tha.
womanfish is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 01:05 PM   #974
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 7,233
Local Time: 12:39 PM
double post
womanfish is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 03:08 PM   #975
War Child
 
Jerry Dunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 939
Local Time: 08:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by womanfish View Post
That's why I said Bernie "fans".
To me, the solid, immovable base of Trump and Bernie supporters are FANS. They are following a personality, not a candidate and their issues. I have been very clear that I like Bernie. The money he's raising puts him in a definite lead position, and if he's the nominee, then I'm all in. He may very well be my choice if he has the best message to me during the primaries and debates. Who knows.
I am quite aware that not every Bernie supporter is a wackjob. I don't even think most of the solid base are wackjobs, i do think that they overlook a lot of issues of Sanders' that would be troublesome if it were another candidate. Doesn't make them a wackjob, just a bit hypocritical in my opinion.
Sanders definitely has "fans," and depending on how it's expressed it can range from amusing to irritating to actively harmful, but that is part for the course for really any politician who has fans.

I would argue someone who loves Hillary Clinton is more about fandom. Because she stood for very little; most of her positions changed at various times throughout her career. There are no defining policies or positions that people want to carry on for her legacy; it's just an archetype.

Whereas the "fandom" of Sanders is rooted, for many, in the fact that he is the ONLY national politician to take many of the stands he has in our lifetimes, and many of them are backed up in decades of consistently fighting for them. His stances on the economy, healthcare, and the environment are all examples of this. I do not think there is a great yearning from young people to love a 70-something cranky white man from New England. It really comes down to the fact that he is offering something people have wanted and have consistently been told is not possible by people who lack the creativity or the interest in thinking of ways to change the world.
Jerry Dunk is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 03:13 PM   #976
War Child
 
Jerry Dunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 939
Local Time: 08:39 AM
Also, this thread is very amusing to me. The corporate Dem machine is out en force much earlier this time around:

Jerry Dunk is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 05:21 PM   #977
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
trojanchick99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Los Feliz, CA (between Hollywood and Downtown LA)
Posts: 8,352
Local Time: 05:39 AM
US Politics XII: shutting down Interference until @U2 agrees to pay for a firewall

Wow. This seems illegal. I mean I’m no lawyer but a Congressman sending an intimidating message to a person testifying before Congress seems bad.

trojanchick99 is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 06:04 PM   #978
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
trojanchick99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Los Feliz, CA (between Hollywood and Downtown LA)
Posts: 8,352
Local Time: 05:39 AM
Twitter has banned Jacob Wohl!

He's "famous" for that pitiful attempt at smearing Robert Mueller with a fake harrassment claim. He's also "known" for posting tweets claiming liberals at various hipster coffee houses in LA are secret Trump supporters. I for one will miss dunking on him repeatedly.
trojanchick99 is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 06:07 PM   #979
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: nazi punks fuck off
Posts: 21,974
Local Time: 07:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by trojanchick99 View Post
Wow. This seems illegal. I mean I’m no lawyer but a Congressman sending an intimidating message to a person testifying before Congress seems bad.

it would be 100% illegal to attempt to blackmail a witness in a face to face situation the day before they're supposed to testify in court. i don't see how this is any different.

of course it's all moot, because absolutely nothing will happen to him.
DaveC is offline  
Old 02-26-2019, 06:19 PM   #980
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 08:39 AM
Is Matt Gaetz the same asshole from Florida who wanted to kick out the Parkland fathers from public congressional hearings on gun control (they stood up and yelled when he claimed that the biggest issue in gun control is the lack of a wall on the southern border)?
__________________

anitram 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 07:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×