All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!(Part II)

[Mister Mets]

For you, I'll discuss. I just get tired of people whose arguments essentially boil down to "You voted wrong, you made everyone suffer with your selfishness", even after I explained the reasoning for my actions.

Honestly, my reasoning was that, at the time, my interest in Hillary, Trump, and Stein was like looking at some "fruit in yogurt" cup at a local coffee shop where mold was actually growing inside, and I went and grabbed a biscuit sandwich from a fast food joint instead, which was Johnson. Trump was obviously the obnoxious man-child, so there was no way I was going to support a sideshow attraction. I had trust issues with Hillary, and the fact that I had voted Bernie in the primaries might have hindered my opinion to Hillary if you wanna look at it, but my logic at the time was that I was looking at the overall health of the two main candidates and the possibility they might keel over within four years. Trump's obviously the antithesis of health, as he only eats steak and McDonalds, sleeps four hours a day (which is too much for him), and golf isn't a physical activity if you drive to the ball after each shot. Hillary had recently dealt with the stroke, and given that my brother himself was a stroke victim, that gave me some mental trepidation. Obviously, this may sound silly to you, but that's how I reacted.

And Stein... in addition to being a total basketcase, what pissed me off the most was she was an anti-vaxxer. As an autistic person, the NOTION that somebody would refuse to vaccinate their own children out of fears they'll get this disorder as if it'll be the end of their lives makes me angry and I choose to do absolutely nothing with an individual who accepts this quackery. It's the 21st century, which was supposed to be an Age of Wisdom, not the Age of Foolishness.

Johnson seemed the most fundamental to my overall beliefs, and YES, I knew he had no chance, but I was voting in a presidential election in a state that I knew was automatically going to go one way by default because that's how Indiana works, so I threw my support to Johnson. I just assumed that more people would actually have voted in states that did matter for Hillary instead of letting voter malaise set in. And, honestly, I'm only angry at the non-voters who just assumed that it was in the bag for Clinton to win that they took it for granted.

Look, I'm sorry if I got angry, but the bottom line is that I rationalized my decision at the time based on merits, and didn't just go to the voting booth all "I'm voting for this person because this political party".

As for what'll interest me in a candidate in the future, my beliefs are that you need to regulate the commercial side of American industries, as the recent tariff war with China and the deregulation of environmental mandates (clean coal, my ass) have shown what happens if you decide to go "Capitalism Cures All", but only because companies will not make decisions based on best interests for everyone as a collective and simply for their own bottom line. For social issues, I believe in firmer gun control, but not a total takeover, as I want to make sure competent Americans who understand how to use and take care of their firearms instead of getting them to show off imaginary dick sizes or, say, ringing in the New Year are able to keep their guns because they have shown responsibility. I believe in encouraging a low-cost insurance plan that puts more effort in preventative care, such as free check-ups and programs for weight control, smoking, substance abuse, and what have you, as well as a total overhaul of the mental health industry, considering that we only followed through the easy part of JFK's mandate from 1962 about shutting down the archaic asylums and bringing care to the 20th century. On social issues, I believe in a more pragmatic approach rather than a Biblical approach, because if you dissect the Bible, there's a lot of inaccuracies and stuff where people were assholes. And those were just the good guys.

The only thing I'm definitively conservative is drug usage. For some reason, the idea of marijuana becoming legal bugs the hell out of me, and I still don't feasibly understand the benefits of smoking pot.

There are no reports that Hillary Clinton had a stroke.

[Mister Mets]

You conveniently overlook your Republican president's love affair with Norway and the like -- but you conveniently overlook a lot of things about your party these days.

Not sure what this had to do with my post. If someone’s contribution to a discussion is a list of countries including Botswana, it’s fair to point the deficiencies.

[aja_christopher]

Not sure what this had to do with my post. If someone’s contribution to a discussion is a list of countries including Botswana, it’s fair to point the deficiencies.

And completely unfair -- as well as blatantly unobjective -- to ignore other listed nations with a comparatively better overall standard of living than America.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/27/us-n...y-of-life.html

But you do you.

[4saken1]

I would vote for the person because I have enough intelligence to figure out that nothing will happen if the Dems can't take back Congress. Not just the one thing that I want, but nothing good anyone either Progressives or Mainstream Democrats want.
In fact life will actually get much, much worse for just about all of us.

Truth be told, Dems won't be doing much of anything until 2020, even if they do win back both Houses of Congress this year. I'm hoping on the state level they will be able to undo some gerrymandering after the 2020 census, but for the most part the only thing they'll be able to do until 2020 is keep Republicans from enacting more terrible legislation. If they win the Senate back, it's possible they might temper Trump's next pick for the Supreme Court, but I'm hoping they pull a Mitch McConnell and tell him to suck a bag of dicks instead!

[Jack Dracula]

I wouldn’t say they pushed me that far. But this thread has always had a stain of entitlement when it comes to votes. Very dogmatic about the Democratic Party and a focus less on policy substance and more on the score card. Which is funny because there was a lot of chest thumping over being a big tent party, except when people realized that a big tent party might mean son irreconcilable differences.

Either way it’s kind of futile. It dissolved into whining strawnans about purity tests. It’s like no, you support certain candidates that are antithesis of left wing progressive values. It’s not about being 90% of the way there and wanting 100% it’s about this 30% that lbs absolutely against the core of what they believe. When the main things are your primary focus, the periphery and not having an R next to your name isn’t that compelling. Especially if you vote on substance and not for a fucking team.

Just about all of the people here lean far to the left and would vote for a progressive candidate who had solid plans to accomplish all of the things you and Jdogindy and catbellysqueezer want.
IOW we all support the same issues to some degree. No one is saying that progressive legislation isn't importanmt or worth voting for. That isn't the issue or argument.
The point I and others are trying to make is that, in November strategy is more important than pushing progressive causes forward. The correct move in the next few months is to push the entire Democratic party forward and gain as much ground as possible. After that happens, and we have enough power to actually get something done, we can all vote our various consciences. In fact, I'll be pushing for universal healthcare, regulating Wall Street, campaign finance reform etc, right with you. The reality is that none of those battles can ever be won without a majority of D's in Congress. Not gonna happen without that first.

[Dalak]

For you, I'll discuss. I just get tired of people whose arguments essentially boil down to "You voted wrong, you made everyone suffer with your selfishness", even after I explained the reasoning for my actions.

Honestly, my reasoning was that, at the time, my interest in Hillary, Trump, and Stein was like looking at some "fruit in yogurt" cup at a local coffee shop where mold was actually growing inside, and I went and grabbed a biscuit sandwich from a fast food joint instead, which was Johnson. Trump was obviously the obnoxious man-child, so there was no way I was going to support a sideshow attraction. I had trust issues with Hillary, and the fact that I had voted Bernie in the primaries might have hindered my opinion to Hillary if you wanna look at it, but my logic at the time was that I was looking at the overall health of the two main candidates and the possibility they might keel over within four years. Trump's obviously the antithesis of health, as he only eats steak and McDonalds, sleeps four hours a day (which is too much for him), and golf isn't a physical activity if you drive to the ball after each shot. Hillary had recently dealt with the stroke, and given that my brother himself was a stroke victim, that gave me some mental trepidation. Obviously, this may sound silly to you, but that's how I reacted.

And Stein... in addition to being a total basketcase, what pissed me off the most was she was an anti-vaxxer. As an autistic person, the NOTION that somebody would refuse to vaccinate their own children out of fears they'll get this disorder as if it'll be the end of their lives makes me angry and I choose to do absolutely nothing with an individual who accepts this quackery. It's the 21st century, which was supposed to be an Age of Wisdom, not the Age of Foolishness.

Johnson seemed the most fundamental to my overall beliefs, and YES, I knew he had no chance, but I was voting in a presidential election in a state that I knew was automatically going to go one way by default because that's how Indiana works, so I threw my support to Johnson. I just assumed that more people would actually have voted in states that did matter for Hillary instead of letting voter malaise set in. And, honestly, I'm only angry at the non-voters who just assumed that it was in the bag for Clinton to win that they took it for granted.

Look, I'm sorry if I got angry, but the bottom line is that I rationalized my decision at the time based on merits, and didn't just go to the voting booth all "I'm voting for this person because this political party".

I'm angry at all non-voters: The ones that assumed she'd win, the ones that weren't excited enough to vote, the ones staying home in protest rather than holding their nose to vote, and the ones who think their votes wouldn't have mattered too. I understand their reasoning even if I don't agree with it, like I do yours here. I almost voted for Nader since I knew Texas would go Dubyah but couldn't do it at the last minute just in case the margins were slim enough to matter. That experience is why I think you'd feel differently if things were closer in your case, but I don't know how much of a voter suppression effort took place in Indiana so *shrug*.

As for the stroke:

There are no reports that Hillary Clinton had a stroke.

If this is the case your vote was directly impacted by fake news.

If anything, I want the Democratic Party in 2020 to understand you need somebody the majority will accept and now allow splintering to happen once more. Easier said than done, but conversely, I look at the Republican Party, who decided to just pick the most outrageous candidate so they could get the dregs of civilization to crawl out from their holes like Yahoos from Gulliver's Travels to vote for him.

As for what'll interest me in a candidate in the future, my beliefs are that you need to regulate the commercial side of American industries, as the recent tariff war with China and the deregulation of environmental mandates (clean coal, my ass) have shown what happens if you decide to go "Capitalism Cures All", but only because companies will not make decisions based on best interests for everyone as a collective and simply for their own bottom line. For social issues, I believe in firmer gun control, but not a total takeover, as I want to make sure competent Americans who understand how to use and take care of their firearms instead of getting them to show off imaginary dick sizes or, say, ringing in the New Year are able to keep their guns because they have shown responsibility. I believe in encouraging a low-cost insurance plan that puts more effort in preventative care, such as free check-ups and programs for weight control, smoking, substance abuse, and what have you, as well as a total overhaul of the mental health industry, considering that we only followed through the easy part of JFK's mandate from 1962 about shutting down the archaic asylums and bringing care to the 20th century. On social issues, I believe in a more pragmatic approach rather than a Biblical approach, because if you dissect the Bible, there's a lot of inaccuracies and stuff where people were assholes. And those were just the good guys.

I pretty much agree with all of this.

The only thing I'm definitively conservative is drug usage. For some reason, the idea of marijuana becoming legal bugs the hell out of me, and I still don't feasibly understand the benefits of smoking pot.

This however I've never understood: What benefits are there to alcohol/tobacco? There's as much of a medicinal application to marijuana as there is alcohol, and opium is used (rightly or wrongly) in many pain relievers. Considering all the plants, bugs and other animals on this planet there's probably a substance that would work better to relieve pain than all of the above, but until we do we'll have to work with what works for each person and their particular body chemistries. Ex: Ibuprofen works far better on me than Acetaminophen for pain, and Aleve/Naproxin works better for a short while and then loses effectiveness.

[Jack Dracula]

Truth be told, Dems won't be doing much of anything until 2020, even if they do win back both Houses of Congress this year. I'm hoping on the state level they will be able to undo some gerrymandering after the 2020 census.

That would be great!

but for the most part the only thing they'll be able to do until 2020 is keep Republicans from enacting more terrible legislation.

Fabulous!

If they win the Senate back, it's possible they might temper Trump's next pick for the Supreme Court, but I'm hoping they pull a Mitch McConnell and tell him to suck a bag of dicks instead!

Bonus!

[Gray Lensman]

For you, I'll discuss. I just get tired of people whose arguments essentially boil down to "You voted wrong, you made everyone suffer with your selfishness", even after I explained the reasoning for my actions.

Honestly, my reasoning was that, at the time, my interest in Hillary, Trump, and Stein was like looking at some "fruit in yogurt" cup at a local coffee shop where mold was actually growing inside, and I went and grabbed a biscuit sandwich from a fast food joint instead, which was Johnson. Trump was obviously the obnoxious man-child, so there was no way I was going to support a sideshow attraction. I had trust issues with Hillary, and the fact that I had voted Bernie in the primaries might have hindered my opinion to Hillary if you wanna look at it, but my logic at the time was that I was looking at the overall health of the two main candidates and the possibility they might keel over within four years. Trump's obviously the antithesis of health, as he only eats steak and McDonalds, sleeps four hours a day (which is too much for him), and golf isn't a physical activity if you drive to the ball after each shot. Hillary had recently dealt with the stroke, and given that my brother himself was a stroke victim, that gave me some mental trepidation. Obviously, this may sound silly to you, but that's how I reacted.

And Stein... in addition to being a total basketcase, what pissed me off the most was she was an anti-vaxxer. As an autistic person, the NOTION that somebody would refuse to vaccinate their own children out of fears they'll get this disorder as if it'll be the end of their lives makes me angry and I choose to do absolutely nothing with an individual who accepts this quackery. It's the 21st century, which was supposed to be an Age of Wisdom, not the Age of Foolishness.

Johnson seemed the most fundamental to my overall beliefs, and YES, I knew he had no chance, but I was voting in a presidential election in a state that I knew was automatically going to go one way by default because that's how Indiana works, so I threw my support to Johnson. I just assumed that more people would actually have voted in states that did matter for Hillary instead of letting voter malaise set in. And, honestly, I'm only angry at the non-voters who just assumed that it was in the bag for Clinton to win that they took it for granted.

Look, I'm sorry if I got angry, but the bottom line is that I rationalized my decision at the time based on merits, and didn't just go to the voting booth all "I'm voting for this person because this political party".

As for what'll interest me in a candidate in the future, my beliefs are that you need to regulate the commercial side of American industries, as the recent tariff war with China and the deregulation of environmental mandates (clean coal, my ass) have shown what happens if you decide to go "Capitalism Cures All", but only because companies will not make decisions based on best interests for everyone as a collective and simply for their own bottom line. For social issues, I believe in firmer gun control, but not a total takeover, as I want to make sure competent Americans who understand how to use and take care of their firearms instead of getting them to show off imaginary dick sizes or, say, ringing in the New Year are able to keep their guns because they have shown responsibility. I believe in encouraging a low-cost insurance plan that puts more effort in preventative care, such as free check-ups and programs for weight control, smoking, substance abuse, and what have you, as well as a total overhaul of the mental health industry, considering that we only followed through the easy part of JFK's mandate from 1962 about shutting down the archaic asylums and bringing care to the 20th century. On social issues, I believe in a more pragmatic approach rather than a Biblical approach, because if you dissect the Bible, there's a lot of inaccuracies and stuff where people were assholes. And those were just the good guys.

The only thing I'm definitively conservative is drug usage. For some reason, the idea of marijuana becoming legal bugs the hell out of me, and I still don't feasibly understand the benefits of smoking pot.

Regarding pot, there are two components to it. THC, which gets you high, and CBD, which is the part that helps with chronic pain like fibromyalgia. Medical grade weed is low in THC and high in CBD. And is becoming available in the form of pills, inhalers, and vaping. Inhaling is a good option since so.e. ironic pain conditions can be a part of chemotherapy and swallowing pills isn't always easy.

[Mecegirl]

There are no reports that Hillary Clinton had a stroke.

I thought so. I didn't remember her having a stroke at all. She got sick(think it was pneumonia or something) and Trump acted like she was bedridden. But beyond that she seemed fairly healthy for a woman her age.

[catbellysqueezer]

I've come up with some campaign slogans for all you "better than the Republican" voters that don't care how far to the right Democratic candidates move:

"Vote Jim Sweeney 2026, at least he isn't openly racist"

"Vote John Stevens 2038, lead in children's toys' paint is better than uranium"

"Vote Sue Hicks 205X, slavery is better than genocide"

"Vote Eric Anderson 207X, he'll commission better artwork for the walls of the nuclear fallout shelters"

"Grunt-huff-screech no smash head with big stone"

[Dalak]

I've come up with some campaign slogans for all you "better than the Republican" voters that don't care how far to the right Democratic candidates move:

As always:

Because that’s not the argument people are making.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

As always:

---> . <--- point

( ' ___ ' )

[Dalak]

---> . <--- point

( ' ___ ' )

[zinderel]

I've come up with some campaign slogans for all you "better than the Republican" voters that don't care how far to the right Democratic candidates move:

"Vote Jim Sweeney 2026, at least he isn't openly racist"

"Vote John Stevens 2038, lead in children's toys' paint is better than uranium"

"Vote Sue Hicks 205X, slavery is better than genocide"

"Vote Eric Anderson 207X, he'll commission better artwork for the walls of the nuclear fallout shelters"

"Grunt-huff-screech no smash head with big stone"

These would be clever if this is what people were saying. It isn't, though, and not even close. AND YOU KNOW IT. But, hey. Go ahead and deliberately misrepresent people and discussions, and ignore any point that contradicts your martyrdom. That's a GREAT way to get people on your side!

[catbellysqueezer]

That's a GREAT way to get people on your side!

Better than calling people idiots repeatedly and telling them they're responsible for the actions of a sociopath they didn't vote for.