Page 639 of 667 FirstFirst ... 139539589629635636637638639640641642643649 ... LastLast
Results 9,571 to 9,585 of 10005
  1. #9571
    Extraordinary Member Tendrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    8,918

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
    Ignoring that those sorts of voters were out there has already played a role in getting the country into that position.

    I'm just saying that trying to sweep them under the rug(even if I can't agree with everything they are saying) isn't the smartest play.
    If your position is 'Bernie or Bust' then you've already declared your unwillingness to be reached. It will forever remain the political equivalent of holding your breath. Militancy does not work in those conditions.

    And we all know what you're 'actually saying' and have been saying for years at this point. Again: if your position is 'I can't be reached', then, well... you've taken yourself out of the discussion all together.
    Last edited by Tendrin; 10-12-2019 at 01:28 AM.

  2. #9572
    Ultimate Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    17,242

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tendrin View Post
    If your position is 'Bernie or Bust' then you've already declared your unwillingness to be reached. It will forever remain the political equivalent of holding your breath. Militancy does not work in those conditions.
    There, I'm going to have to just politely agree to disagree.

    While the second lady looked like "Hard To Get"(not saying her concerns had no merit), the first lady sounded like she was looking for a reason. While I may very well be wrong about that, you certainly won't get her vote deciding that you know what the outcome of trying to reach her will be.

    Just feels like unsound strategy to me.

    That said, I'm not under the impression that Warren is just going to decide she doesn't need to make an appeal there. Personally hope she makes those attempts even if they don't bear fruit.

  3. #9573
    Extraordinary Member Tendrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    8,918

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
    There, I'm going to have to just politely agree to disagree.

    While the second lady looked like "Hard To Get"(not saying her concerns had no merit), the first lady sounded like she was looking for a reason. While I may very well be wrong about that, you certainly won't get her vote deciding that you know what the outcome of trying to reach her will be.

    Just feels like unsound strategy to me.

    That said, I'm not under the impression that Warren is just going to decide she doesn't need to make an appeal there. Personally hope she makes those attempts even if they don't bear fruit.
    Militancy requires a strategy to be effective. 'Bernie or bust!' is not a strategy.

  4. #9574
    Guardian Empress of Earth Tami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    21,841

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosa Luxemburg View Post
    Except Warren isn't part of the left. Bernie is barely left.

    Hillary was a solidly right-wing.

    The criticism of these candidates from the left, is to move people to the left.

    And we need to stop dismissing concerns about these candidates as people expecting perfection.

    Bernie's foreign policy is bad, Warren's is even worse. Both of them are going to kill people and ruin lives on a global scale, just as Obama did. Either directly through drone strikes, or by supplying weapons and aid to countries that will oppress and kill. Neither of them are going to stop the war machine.

    We should always be critical of politicians. Vote when the time comes, but never let up in criticizing them. These people are gunning for the most powerful position in the world, an inherently immoral position.
    Political affiliation has some similarities with Religion. In both cases each person defines for themselves who they are and what it means to be what they are. The problem comes when others takes their own definitions and apply them to others.

    I would say that your assessment as to who is left or right or central is based solely on your own opinion. If you were to ask each candidates how they see themselves, they would most likely differ in your assessment.

    Political affiliation is also a spectrum, or multiple spectrums that run from the 'Right' to the 'Left'. Multiple lines would reflect an individual's self sense of where they are on certain issues, each person's uniqueness would be reflected in where their attitudes lie on each line.

    Yet these lines are not fixed, not always. Some are stuck in place, while others are flexible, sliding back and forth like fingers on a guitar string.

    Actually a Guitar makes for a good analogy, with each person having their own unique songs.

    Bottom line is, it is subjective to assign to a person a label that marks them fixed in place along that spectrum as if they only play one note on one string. .If you listen to their songs, you might find some more pleasing than others. But other people might prefer different songs played by different candidates. Yet, all of these songs, on average, still fall within the side of the spectrum commonly referred to as 'Left'.

    You, or others, may define the music of the Left more narrowly, the candidates and politicians themselves would have their own definition of what the music of the Left is, and other people might also have their own definition of what the music of the Left is.

    If we don't allow everyone to play their own song, if we try to force them to play the same song as each other and to play it over and over again, we lose a lot of creativity to the sameness of uniformity.

    For me, the diverse and creative music of the Left is far more preferable than the repetitive, single-minded strum of the same harsh cords of the Right.
    Last edited by Tami; 10-12-2019 at 06:35 AM.
    Original join date: 11/23/2004
    Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn or imaginatively created.

  5. #9575
    Old school comic book fan WestPhillyPunisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    19,144

    Default

    Ousted Ukraine Ambassador Tells Congress Trump Removed Her Over ‘False Claims’

    U.S. diplomat Marie Yovanovitch told impeachment investigators she was attacked “by people with clearly questionable motives.” And I'm guessing Trump was at the very top of that list. By the way....

    **********

    Rudy Giuliani Reportedly Under Investigation For Links To U.S. Ambassador’s Recall

    Prosecutors are looking into whether Giuliani violated lobbying laws that protect the government from covert foreign influence, The New York Times reported. And I've heard Trump is already distancing himself from Rantin' Rudy. Use 'em, abuse 'em, then dump 'em, that's the Trump M.O.

    **********

    Appeals Court Rules House Democrats Can Subpoena Trump’s Financial Records

    The 2-1 ruling went against the president, who was seeking to block a subpoena for documents, including tax returns, held by his accounting firm. Well now, this figures to be interesting.

    **********

    Acting Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan Is Out After Just 6 Months

    McAleenan struggled to mesh with the Trump administration. And another one bites the dust! Yo, WBE! Crank up that Oompa Loompa whistle!

    **********

    Fox News’ Chris Wallace Calls Out Newt Gingrich For Impeachment Hypocrisy

    The then-House speaker didn’t think it was unconstitutional when he led the impeachment of Bill Clinton, Wallace said. Wallace has also been a critic of Trump at Faux News. how long before he suddenly "departs" like Shep Smith?
    Avatar: Here's to the late, great Steve Dillon. Best. Punisher. Artist. EVER!

  6. #9576
    Spectacular Member Rosa Luxemburg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    154

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tami View Post
    Political affiliation has some similarities with Religion. In both cases each person defines for themselves who they are and what it means to be what they are. The problem comes when others takes their own definitions and apply them to others.

    I would say that your assessment as to who is left or right or central is based solely on your own opinion. If you were to ask each candidates how they see themselves, they would most likely differ in your assessment.

    Political affiliation is also a spectrum, or multiple spectrums that rune from the 'Right' to the 'Left'. Multiple lines would reflect an individual's self sense of where they are on certain issues, each person's uniqueness would be reflected in where their attitudes lie on each line.
    My opinion of what counts as politically left and right is based on how those terms have been used historically, what they mean, what they hope to accomplish how they hope to accomplish it. These terms have meaning, and they can not be whatever someone wants them to be. What counts as left and right aren't a matter of personal opinion.

    A candidate can call themselves left-wing, but if they don't adhere to some from of left-wing politics then they aren't left-wing. Just as someone can call themselves Buddhist, but they aren't if they don't actually believe in any Buddhist principles and their belief system has more in common with Christianity.

    Politics is a spectrum, and two people with wildly different politics are not going to occupy the same place on that spectrum. You can not have both Salvador Allende on the left, and then have Obama just a few places next to him.

    This isn't that complicating, when Obama himself has said he'd be considered a republican in the 1980s.

    Americans just happen to think that centrist politics are left to far-left because of right-wing propaganda.

    There is a diversity of thought within the left, but liberalism isn't among it.
    Last edited by Rosa Luxemburg; 10-12-2019 at 02:48 AM.

  7. #9577
    Spectacular Member Rosa Luxemburg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    154

    Default

    Here's what happened over the years.

    The Democrats became a solidly right-wing party, and the Republicans became a Christian death cult.

  8. #9578
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    144

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosa Luxemburg View Post
    Here's what happened over the years.

    The Democrats became a solidly right-wing party, and the Republicans became a Christian death cult.

    This has been my assessment as well, having observed and noted the shifts over the last 30 to 35 years.

  9. #9579

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tendrin View Post
    Like we said, a number of voters who liked Warren only liked to use her as a way to declare they aren't sexist because they're not gonna vote for Hillary because Reasons, and now amazingly, those /same reasons/, just pained a little different, are now being marched out against Warren in favor of another old white guy or the other old white guy. It's almost like we all saw this 'pivot' coming, both widespread and here on this board, and were not even slightly surprised. It has nothing to do with leftism in most cases.
    Occam's Razor:

    If someone spends days on end on internet forums twisting themselves in knots to defend the positions of some of the worst men on the right, but exclusively saves their criticism for people on the left who are women (specifically attacking Hillary Clinton, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar, Nancy Pelosi, and others at points) in favor of older men on the left...

    This isn't about right/left. A person that does that is most likely motivated by sexism, whether they're smart enough to realize/admit it or not.
    X-Books Forum Mutant Tracker/FAQ- Updated every Tuesday.

  10. #9580

    Default

    On this date in 2014, “Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day” had a profile of Jon Hubbard, a former member of the Arkansas House of Representatives who was elected to office in 2012, and didn’t last too long in office after the Arkansas times started thumbing through a book he wrote called “Letters to the Editor: Confessions of a Frustrated Conservative” where he discussed how the institution of slavery was not “an abomination upon black people” so much as a “blessing in disguise” that gave them the opportunity to have “lives as Americans likely much better than they would have enjoyed living in sub-Saharan Africa”. He also predicted that immigration as an issue in America would lead to “planned wars or extermination” and assured us that while that thought might seem “barbaric and uncivilized”, and some point it would “become as necessary as eating or breathing”. When all these revelations came to light, Jon Hubbard didn’t apologize, of course, he defended them to the hilt, and the Koch Brothers kept funding his campaign and sending out mailers to try to keep him in office. Since being voted out , Hubbard has shifted the blame for his fall from grace on, who else? President Obama. He compares the president to Hitler and he’s started calling the IRS the Gestapo while claiming that Planned Parenthood have been blessed by Obama’s god (lower case G, so it’s clear it’s not the Judeo-Christian one). Yes, Jon Hubbard was very, very racist and is highly unlikely to every hold office again.

    On this date in 2018, “Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day” profiled Catherine Templeton, a candidate for Governor of South Carolina in 2018. And yes, as shown above, she tried winning the Republican primary in that race by airing ads to show her proficiency with firearms, taking aim at a rattlesnake, because that’s a good measuring stick for office these days from the GOP. It might have helped, however, if the animal she chose to use to embody what’s wrong with politics that she was about to slay was not an endangered animal. That, however, is not the reason why we took notice of Templeton, who formerly served as the Director of Labor and the Director of the Department of Health and Environmental Services at two different points during the administration of former Gov. Nikki Haley. No, it would probably be Templeton’s desire to win the bigot vote by doing things shortly after announcing her candidacy like declaring she was “proud of the Confederacy”, and also that she would not allow a Confederate monument to be removed if elected. A little digging from local historians found out that maybe there was even less of a reason for Templeton to be proud of an rebellion fought for the right to keep slaves… her family fought in it, sure… but they also were literally some of the slave owners running a plantation in South Carolina. She claimed, of course, to be unaware of her family’s own sordid past. But Templeton was also an equal opportunity bigot, adding to her racist fandom with transphobic bathroom fear-mongering. Templeton’s less than subtle trucking in hate did not help win her the election, and that she finished third in the primary with only 21% of the vote




    In 2015, 2016, as well as 2017, "Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day" published profiles of Garry Smith, a member of the South Carolina House of Representatives who worked on the presidential campaign of Scott Walker (as short as that lasted) who actually tried filing a bill to create a “2nd Amendment Education Day” to be celebrated annually on December 15th, which would be the day after the anniversary of the Newtown Massacre, by coincidence (sure it is). Where Smith really got attention, though, was to strip money away from South Carolina universities for having reading programs that included LGBTQ literature. In totals that just so happened to be their entire reading budgets. He went on CNN to defend this decision in March 2014, and gave the response you’d expect from another poor “victim" of the supposed gay agenda, ”Their stance is, ‘Even if you don’t want to read it, we’ll shove it down your throat.’ It’s not academic freedom, it’s academic totalitarianism.” As a legislator, Smith has submitted legislation to attempt to nullify the Affordable Care Act or federal firearms laws, tried to criminalize abortion outright (forgetting that Roe v. Wade is a thing), and submitted amendments to the state constitution to try and define marriage as between one man and one woman.

    Garry Smith advanced out of the GOP Primary in 2018 with 75% of the vote against two challengers, and did not face a challenger in November from Democrats. That gave Smith a chance to co-sponsor another GOP fetal heartbeat bill in the hopes that it might help outlaw abortion as early as six weeks (before many women even realize they are pregnant), He also continues to be an extreme homophobe, suggesting that the South Carolina state legislature should vote on amendments to strip funding from any library in the state that would dare to host a Drag Queen Story Hour event. After Smith was called out for his dumb, dumb idea, the amendment was tabled 17-5.
    X-Books Forum Mutant Tracker/FAQ- Updated every Tuesday.

  11. #9581
    Spectacular Member Rosa Luxemburg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    154

    Default

    One thing we can all agree on about this primary, Yang has the worst supporters.

  12. #9582
    Ultimate Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    17,242

    Default

    Yang's supporters?

    Really?

    Don't have details.
    Last edited by numberthirty; 10-12-2019 at 04:43 AM.

  13. #9583
    Ultimate Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    17,242

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by worstblogever View Post
    Occam's Razor:

    If someone spends days on end on internet forums twisting themselves in knots to defend the positions of some of the worst men on the right, but exclusively saves their criticism for people on the left who are women (specifically attacking Hillary Clinton, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar, Nancy Pelosi, and others at points) in favor of older men on the left...

    This isn't about right/left. A person that does that is most likely motivated by sexism, whether they're smart enough to realize/admit it or not.
    While this whole bit usually isn't worth the effort, could you quote couple of posts that supposedly attacked the women in blue?

  14. #9584
    Ultimate Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    17,242

    Default

    Took a quick look back. While I don't really think I've mentioned Gillinbrand or Klobuchar much, this was from the last debate...

    Quote Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
    Klobuchar saying that the time is now was right on.

  15. #9585

    Default

    I don't do requests for people I have on ignore, as a rule of principle. Nor do I quote them.

    I do, however, let them choose to self-identify as someone I'm generically talking about, without ever having named them as an example of a generic "type" I'm discussing.
    X-Books Forum Mutant Tracker/FAQ- Updated every Tuesday.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •