All Purpose News and Politics Thread Part IV: The Center Cannot Hold

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

The last 8 years have been breeding whole new generations that are actually supportive of gun control, and the part of 'my argument' that you always leave out to create a strawman is that looooong before you get the magic 2/3rds to abolish the 2nd you'll be able to get actual legitimate legislation passed that will be effective. inB4 SCOTUS: vote for folks that won't put in drunken sexual criminals and it wouldn't be an issue.

So again - Preach about how ineffective & meaningless Thing You Don't Like is while endorsing something just as ineffective & meaningless, just don't expect anyone to ignore the hypocrisy.



If I claimed everyone I disagreed with at all a secret trump supporter, there'd be no one on this forum that would be immune. Instead, I focus on the things a person says and does when unforced as that is far more revealing of a person's character. I just point these things out, like how you refuse to back up claims you make about posters with evidence because you can't spend the time you spend posting things to look up proof.

And Dalak you still completely fail to address that your strategy has failed for 30 years and nothing in the last 8 has made it anymore successful.

Also maybe you should not spend all your time looking for motivations of other posters because you just tried to call someone fervently against the 2nd Amendment, who is taking the same stance of the Democratic House Majority Leader and the degacto head of the progressive wing as a Trump supporter.

[Dalak]

And Dalak you still completely fail to address that your strategy has failed for 30 years and nothing in the last 8 has made it anymore successful.

Also maybe you should not spend all your time looking for motivations of other posters because you just tried to call someone fervently against the 2nd Amendment, who is taking the same stance of the Democratic House Majority Leader and the degacto head of the progressive wing as a Trump supporter.

How many years did Civil Rights languish before progress was made? Gay marriage? Bringing up the last 30 years like things happen overnight is BS and you know it. The NRA has also been exposed as funneling Russian money into our elections and is definitely on the decline, so go on about how nothing in the last 8 years has made any difference or impact on how things will be going forward. Oh, you agree with Pelosi but disagree again with Elizabeth Warren your professed favorite.

As for how I spend my time, I contemplate the whys and reasons behind practically anything that catches my fancy. Why they made this hilariously bad movie, why did this obscure phrase become a mainstay of discourse, and many other things including why someone who says they are progressive and supports X, Y, and/or Z talks like they actually don't half the time - Like Warren.


E: Back to the point of Impeachment: Getting republican senators on the record as shielding Trump from his crimes could backfire on them just as easily as failing to impeach could backfire on Dems. There are arguments for and against, which is why I support looking for more evidence and squeezing the investigations in on Trump before starting the process.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

How many years did Civil Rights languish before progress was made? Gay marriage? Bringing up the last 30 years like things happen overnight is BS and you know it. The NRA has also been exposed as funneling Russian money into our elections and is definitely on the decline, so go on about how nothing in the last 8 years has made any difference or impact on how things will be going forward. Oh, you agree with Pelosi but disagree again with Elizabeth Warren your professed favorite.

As for how I spend my time, I contemplate the whys and reasons behind practically anything that catches my fancy. Why they made this hilariously bad movie, why did this obscure phrase become a mainstay of discourse, and many other things including why someone who says they are progressive and supports X, Y, and/or Z talks like they actually don't half the time - Like Warren.


E: Back to the point of Impeachment: Getting republican senators on the record as shielding Trump from his crimes could backfire on them just as easily as failing to impeach could backfire on Dems. There are arguments for and against, which is why I support looking for more evidence and squeezing the investigations in on Trump before starting the process.

Civil Rights and Gay Marriage both ultimately occurred with the Supreme Court making a ruling after a mass change in public opinion. That isn’t happening with gun rights. You aren’t even advocating for something similar. You went off about the last 8 years making a change when you’ve still failed on policy and have no concrete proof that it’s leading to tangible results. It’s been the same old cycle of shooting, then outrage, then pushback, then nothing. You’re just saying things at this point to act like you have a case.

Yeah Dalak, I disagree with my preferred candidate on this one. Weren’t you the one who argued against purity tests or are just being hypocritical here to make a point?

For your final point, so your solution is to get Republicans who have been backing Trump this whole time on thevrecirc to back him more from impeachment? They are terrified their base will turn on them for not backing Trump. They are more likely to be punished by their voters for turning on him. This has been a consistent trend for quite awhile. Impeachment is a politically risky process and unless you have a real prospect of it going anywhere, right now you don’t, it’s too big of a risk to at best maybe sway public opinion on a few Senators for who knows how long.

[PaulBullion]

It's a suggestion that's so unrealistic that we're all dumber for having read it.

There are tens of millions of currently and formerly convicted people in America. So here's a "good" idea, lets waste time and resources reviewing and sorting pardons for EVERY offense committed to see if they meet whatever metric is deemed appropriate for restoration of voting rights.

That is insane.

At the end of the day, we're all just one bad decision away from some jail time.

Why shouldn't a woman who got 5 years for trying to get her kid into a better school be allowed to vote to put people in power who will make the laws more just?

[Gray Lensman]

For your final point, so your solution is to get Republicans who have been backing Trump this whole time on thevrecirc to back him more from impeachment? They are terrified their base will turn on them for not backing Trump. They are more likely to be punished by their voters for turning on him. This has been a consistent trend for quite awhile. Impeachment is a politically risky process and unless you have a real prospect of it going anywhere, right now you don’t, it’s too big of a risk to at best maybe sway public opinion on a few Senators for who knows how long.

To me, the bigger issue here is the lesson of impeaching Clinton. Try to do so and fail, and you make them stronger. And the last thing I personally want to see is Trump with a stronger hand. Investigating, highlighting how much more corrupt Trump's appointees are than the people they have replaced, and how his past (in a financial sense) would have shown that this was the only result possible for electing him in the first place had we been able to see it back then, and maybe going for impeachment after that's out - I'm all for. But not right now until there is more effort to sway public opinion. Lest it backfire and the country not only puts Trump in for 4 more years, but backlashes against the house and gives it right back to him.

[Gray Lensman]

It's a suggestion that's so unrealistic that we're all dumber for having read it.

There are tens of millions of currently and formerly convicted people in America. So here's a "good" idea, lets waste time and resources reviewing and sorting pardons for EVERY offense committed to see if they meet whatever metric is deemed appropriate for restoration of voting rights.

That is insane.

I award him no points, and may God have mercy on his soul.

[PaulBullion]

Nate Silver has a rather balanced piece on Bernard Sanders' poll numbers:

Bernie Sanders Can Win, But He Isn’t Polling Like A Favorite

To be clear, I think Sanders can win the Democratic nomination. He’s probably the 3rd- or 4th- most likely nominee, in my estimation — slightly behind Joe Biden and Kamala Harris and roughly tied with Pete Buttigieg, but ahead of everyone else. All of these candidates (and others such as Elizabeth Warren and Beto O’Rourke) have their own assets and liabilities, so I wouldn’t go to the mat if you put them in a different order.

But sometimes, I get the sense from Sanders backers — or from other election analysts who look at the polls a little differently than I do, or from traditional reporters — that they think Sanders’s strength in the polls is being ignored. Empirically, however, Sanders’s position in the polls is not all that strong; it’s consistent with sometimes winning the nomination but usually not.

[Dalak]

Yeah Dalak, I disagree with my preferred candidate on this one. Weren’t you the one who argued against purity tests or are just being hypocritical here to make a point?

It's not an argument for purity tests to point out someone's talking from both sides of their face. In fact I'd definitively say that pointing out someone's double standards isn't promoting a purity test.

For your final point, so your solution is to get Republicans who have been backing Trump this whole time on thevrecirc to back him more from impeachment? They are terrified their base will turn on them for not backing Trump. They are more likely to be punished by their voters for turning on him. This has been a consistent trend for quite awhile. Impeachment is a politically risky process and unless you have a real prospect of it going anywhere, right now you don’t, it’s too big of a risk to at best maybe sway public opinion on a few Senators for who knows how long.

Which is why going gung-ho for impeachment isn't what I'm advocating, one of those bits of nuance about arguments against you which you typically ignore. There's also the Independents and all those folks who stayed home in the last couple of elections to convince to get out that you're ignoring now, rather than the die hards that will support him if he is on camera eating babies. If there's enough political pressure by public opinion brought about by more investigating you will see some defections, though I'm not naive enough to assume it'll be enough to convict without seeing such a groundswell first.

Another person's take:

To me, the bigger issue here is the lesson of impeaching Clinton. Try to do so and fail, and you make them stronger. And the last thing I personally want to see is Trump with a stronger hand. Investigating, highlighting how much more corrupt Trump's appointees are than the people they have replaced, and how his past (in a financial sense) would have shown that this was the only result possible for electing him in the first place had we been able to see it back then, and maybe going for impeachment after that's out - I'm all for. But not right now until there is more effort to sway public opinion. Lest it backfire and the country not only puts Trump in for 4 more years, but backlashes against the house and gives it right back to him.

That's what I'm saying too, with a little more emphasis on the consequences.

[ZombieHavoc]

Knight of the Lake is 100% correct in this discussion.

It's way more important to hopefully win in 2020 and since everyone already believes the same thing they would believe on the other end of an impeachment attempt...I don't see how it benefits anyone.

Everyone just needs to vote in 2020 and not hold their vote hostage because you don't like so and so for whatever dumb reason.

I'm sure if Bernie doesn't get the nom, he'll vote for Kamala or Beto or Pete or whoever, just like he did Hillary. Let's all take a page from Bernie's book and not **** up this time.

[PaulBullion]

Knight of the Lake is 100% correct in this discussion.

It's way more important to hopefully win in 2020 and since everyone already believes the same thing they would believe on the other end of an impeachment attempt...I don't see how it benefits anyone.

Everyone just needs to vote in 2020 and not hold their vote hostage because you don't like so and so for whatever dumb reason.

I'm sure if Bernie doesn't get the nom, he'll vote for Kamala or Beto or Pete or whoever, just like he did Hillary. Let's all take a page from Bernie's book and not **** up this time.

I think I liked you better when you had lost all hope.

[Dalak]

Knight of the Lake is 100% correct in this discussion.

It's way more important to hopefully win in 2020 and since everyone already believes the same thing they would believe on the other end of an impeachment attempt...I don't see how it benefits anyone.

Everyone just needs to vote in 2020 and not hold their vote hostage because you don't like so and so for whatever dumb reason.

I'm sure if Bernie doesn't get the nom, he'll vote for Kamala or Beto or Pete or whoever, just like he did Hillary. Let's all take a page from Bernie's book and not **** up this time.

I strongly disagree with most of what is said here and think at least some of it isn't meant seriously. I suspect the vast majority is jokey, but that's just me.

[Gray Lensman]

Which is why going gung-ho for impeachment isn't what I'm advocating, one of those bits of nuance about arguments against you which you typically ignore. There's also the Independents and all those folks who stayed home in the last couple of elections to convince to get out that you're ignoring now, rather than the die hards that will support him if he is on camera eating babies. If there's enough political pressure by public opinion brought about by more investigating you will see some defections, though I'm not naive enough to assume it'll be enough to convict without seeing such a groundswell first.

I hate to say this, but I am convinced that Trump could be caught on tape having sex with an underage non-white boy, while on the phone saying "Yes Vlad, the plan to destroy America is going according to your schedule. I await your next set of orders, and thanks for helping with all those abortions. Hail Satan." and he would only slip a point or two in the polls.

[PaulBullion]

I hate to say this, but I am convinced that Trump could be caught on tape having sex with an underage non-white boy, while on the phone saying "Yes Vlad, the plan to destroy America is going according to your schedule. I await your next set of orders, and thanks for helping with all those abortions. Hail Satan." and he would only slip a point or two in the polls.

But maybe in voter turnout. 60,000 people less able to hold their noses in the rust belt and he's history.

[wjowski]

having paid their debt to society can't change the fact they broke the law. Those who broke the law should not be able to elect the ones who make the laws. What if a a convicted felon wants to vote for a lawmaker who will enact a law that gives more leniency to convicted felons?

I think they should be allowed to vote again, if they are pardoned. So they need to petition for a pardon from state or federal government.

Pardons can restore the felons' voting rights.

This is the antithesis of justice.

You are creating a modernn-day caste of untouchables.

[InformationGeek]

John Cornyn's campaign Twitter account is snapping at Patton Oswalt. Patton seems to be having fun with it though.

Hollywood Hegar supporter and video guest star, Patton Oswalt, has tweeted some offensive comments over the years, reply A or B to let us know which one is more offensive to you: https://t.co/gXgPvstK6V