US Politics XVIII: the illegitimate partisan sham thread

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
i may have a future as the honorable governor of the State of Lincoln Park

American democracy is broken.

We have a president who lost the popular vote, a Senate where the “majority” represents about 15 million fewer people than the “minority,” and a Supreme Court where two justices were nominated by that president and confirmed by that unrepresentative Senate.

An unsigned note, entitled “Pack the Union: A Proposal to Admit New States for the Purpose of Amending the Constitution to Ensure Equal Representation” and published in the Harvard Law Review, offers an entirely constitutional way out of this dilemma: Add new states — a lot of new states — then use this bloc of states to rewrite the Constitution so that the United States has an election system “where every vote counts equally.”

To create a system where every vote counts equally, the Constitution must be amended. To do this, Congress should pass legislation reducing the size of Washington, D.C., to an area encompassing only a few core federal buildings and then admit the rest of the District’s 127 neighborhoods as states. These states — which could be added with a simple congressional majority — would add enough votes in Congress to ratify four amendments: (1) a transfer of the Senate’s power to a body that represents citizens equally; (2) an expansion of the House so that all citizens are represented in equal-sized districts; (3) a replacement of the Electoral College with a popular vote; and (4) a modification of the Constitution’s amendment process that would ensure future amendments are ratified by states representing most Americans.

Under the Constitution, new states may be admitted by an ordinary act of Congress with a simple majority vote. The Constitution does, however, prevent new states from being carved out of an existing state unless the legislature of that state consents. Chopping up the District of Columbia gets around this problem because Washington, DC, is not a state.

https://www.vox.com/2020/1/14/21063...n-democracy-pack-the-union-harvard-law-review
 
Four Republicans have agreed to vote with Democrats in support of the measure, according to Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who wrote the legislation that seeks to prevent President Trump from further escalating hostilities with Iran.

tenor.gif
 
It’s a good strategy, knowing fine well that she’s dead in the water if she crosses Bernie, but dead in the water if she doesn’t get him out of the way.

At the end of the day he’s way more popular than her, and though his health concerns make him a serious question mark... if we take a progressive candidate, he’s more likely to win than her. She’s desperate right now.
 
Well, no worries on being disqualified — playing the identity politics card to try to loosen up votes from a base that’s not interested in the identity politics card will do nothing but have her polling numbers slip amongst the middle of the political spectrum — and she’s not gaining many votes from the middle left, who are already divided amongst other candidates.
 
Agreed that she’s desperate, or at least knows it’s showtime and time to break the truce. The “smear” may be baseless, but it’s highly believable based upon the past. And it seems unsurprising that many voters will once again choose not to believe women.
 
Last edited:
Agreed that she’s desperate, or at least knows it’s showtime and time to break the truce. The “smear” may be baseless, but it’s highly believable based upon the past. And it seems unsurprising that many voters will once again choose not to believe women.



What makes you think this has anything to do with believing women? The notion of “believing women” stems from sexual assault from me too, not a he-said-she-said on a political conversation that did or didn’t happen to take place.

I fully imagine the statement was said, and I also fully imagine it’s taken way out of context. Because nobody believes that Bernie Sanders has any skin in that game. Why is it highly believable based upon the past? What past? Bernie Sanders passionately talking over Hilary Clinton with his male voice?
 
I think the Warren people are de-escalating anyway so this will all be much ado about nothing.

The more interesting dynamic at the debate, IMO, will be between Bernie and Biden. Bernie has to rip into him at this point, there is no reason to hold anything back.
 
What makes you think this has anything to do with believing women? The notion of “believing women” stems from sexual assault from me too, not a he-said-she-said on a political conversation that did or didn’t happen to take place.

I fully imagine the statement was said, and I also fully imagine it’s taken way out of context. Because nobody believes that Bernie Sanders has any skin in that game. Why is it highly believable based upon the past? What past? Bernie Sanders passionately talking over Hilary Clinton with his male voice?




I’m sure it will be the very first question tonight.

Im sure it’s a fairly formative, common experience for most women to have a man tell you you’ve misinterpreted something.

It’s not in Sanders’ interest to have Warren running, they’re in the same lane. Why wouldn’t he have lobbied her back in December 2018 not to run?
 
I’m sure it will be the very first question tonight.

Im sure it’s a fairly formative, common experience for most women to have a man tell you you’ve misinterpreted something.

It’s not in Sanders’ interest to have Warren running, they’re in the same lane. Why wouldn’t he have lobbied her back in December 2018 not to run?



Of course they occupy the same territory.

You can’t mix politics with freaking social injustices this way. I’m sure it’s very common for a politician to make shit up that’s politically beneficial *having nothing to do with gender*.
 
fair enough. she was really the only one arguing that side of the question and doing very well in my opinion and i suppose it seemed like ganging up on her at a convenient time.
 
They are letting Warren off the hook. They didn't press her at all on her making all of this shit up. Sanders only even ran in 2016 because Warren turned him down when he asked her!

Also, there is a massive difference between accusing Sanders of being misogynist and a campaign discussing differences between candidates in correspondence (which has also been disproven as not from the campaign anyway). Not even close to a reasonable comparison.
 
joe biden is "looking forward to an economic debate" with an incumbent president in a good economy who is also donald trump.
 
But Phillip was on a roll. Des Moines, she noted, is an “insurance town.” What will happen to the poor insurance company employees if “Medicare for All” replaces the private insurance industry?

To which Sanders replied: Well, the health insurance industry is ripping off the country. They’re gonna have to live with it. But they will be eligible for money from a “transition fund” offering up to five years of income, health care and job training for people who work for health insurance companies.

It was a reasonable response to a ridiculous question. No matter what the next president does about the American health care system, health insurers and health care providers are going to make less money. The health care crisis in America is a product of health insurance companies and health care providers ripping everybody off. You can’t fix that without sticking it to them.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/cnn-botched-democratic-debate-051240185.html

Amazing article overall, but I loved that point especially.
 
https://www.yahoo.com/news/cnn-botched-democratic-debate-051240185.html

Amazing article overall, but I loved that point especially.



I’m from Des Moines. The people there aren’t dumb, but if talking points starting coming out that people will lose their job if Bernie is President you’re going to get Trump. No matter what facts or truth can be used as counter points. I fear the same across the Midwest, East, and Southwest. Middle to upper middle class white folk aren’t going to want their taxes increased. They may decide that Trumps disaster politics sucks for women and minorities but since they’re not directly affected they can handle their income staying the same.

Des Moines has a very liberal (White) youth that’ll turn out for the caucus but don’t expect them to show for the general. Who will show up are all the rural small towns.
 
It never happened, Warren is a liar

Warren said Sanders disagreed with her view that a woman could win the presidential election. Sanders contends that he merely outlined what he said would be Trump's efforts to defeat another female candidate, and in the debate, he said, "Of course a woman can win."

Ok it happened just not the way she remembers it
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom