All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[aja_christopher]

I'm not attacking you. I just don't believe you about one thing you've said.

This is not something we have to keep talking about. It's just the impression I got and it doesn't affect anything.

So instead discuss Sanders' tax policies instead of continually deflecting to personal attacks as mentioned in the original post.

[Superbat]

If it bothers you so much, I'll take it back.

I'm sorry I didn't believe you. I'm sure you'll vote for Bernie if he's the nominee.

I'll go edit my post.

[JackDaw]

I'm not lying.

I don't believe that you will vote for Bernie against Trump after months of seeing you post.

That is the impression I've got from you.

Why??

I suspect if I was American I’d feel exactly the same as aja-chriistopher...I’d vote for Bernie over Trump all day long, but feel a bit peeved when taxes went up.

Is it so hard to understand his position? He’s explained it well, I think.

[Superbat]

So instead discuss Sanders' tax policies instead of continually deflecting to personal attacks as mentioned in the original post.

Why do I need to discuss them? I don't need to convince you of anything.

You've already said you'll vote against Trump.

[aja_christopher]

Why??

I suspect if I was American I’d feel exactly the same as aja-chriistopher...I’d vote for Bernie over Trump all day long, but feel a bit peeved when taxes went up.

Is it so hard to understand his position? He’s explained it well, I think.

It's not hard at all to understand.

Sanders just tends to sweep it under the rug, as do his supporters, who attack and hold every other Democratic candidate accountable but Sanders himself.

Rest assured -- Trump and the rest of the Republicans won't sweep it under the rug.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Exactly WHAT is he winning? Short answer: not a blessed thing. The primary season is only a couple of weeks old, Super Tuesday isn't here yet, and the election is November. As I've stated before, polls THIS early in the proceedings don't mean a goddamn thing, not for Sanders, Biden or any of the others. A hell of a lot of things could change over the course of the next eight months, which is why I could care less about numbers right now. Crow to me that Sanders is "winning" AFTER he's beaten Trump in the general election if he's the Democratic candidate, and not before. By the way, the same goes for everyone else in the race.

He won the popular vote in Iowa, won NH, has a 14 point lead in Nevada compared to the recent poll aggregates, is up double digits nationally, is up big in the biggest state in California, also Maine, Virginia, Utah, Colorado, and in the southern red state’s that are supposed to be his weakness he’s polling in second (Carolina’s and Texas). Also he wins all the head to head polls.

This also isn’t months out where we can say it’s too early to make projections. Nevada is in 3 days. South Carolina is in a week and Super Tuesday is 3 days after that. This is historically where you want to be surging.

Now things can change. But at this crucial point, there is definitely someone who is winning right now by any metric

[numberthirty]

Already trying to make this personal and proving what's said about Sanders' supporters -- I've never once claimed I wouldn't vote for Sanders over Trump.

To the contrary, I've said I would vote for a rock over Trump.

Conversely, you have many Sanders supporters here saying they wouldn't vote for Bloomberg over Trump.

Which is all beside the point of you dodging what I said about many people not wanting to vote for higher taxes.

Like I said before -- you attack others because you can't refute the facts about Sanders' campaign.

So...

Where are you getting "Many..."?

Because I have been keeping pretty close track(pretty sure I can quote the exact posts...), and I count two.

Get the impression that one of that pair ain't even a Sanders supporter...

[SquirrelMan]

George Zimmerman wants a day in court against two of the leading Democratic presidential contenders, accusing them of defamation.

In a lawsuit filed Tuesday in Florida, the man who killed Trayvon Martin in self-defense in 2012 accused Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Elizabeth Warren of “maliciously defam[ing]” Mr. Zimmerman, using the killing “as a pretext to demagogue and falsely brand Zimmerman as a white supremacist and racist to their millions of Twitter followers.”

Mr. Zimmerman was acquitted of all charges on traditional self-defense grounds, because Martin attacked him and beat his head against the ground, supposedly for profiling the black teen while on a neighborhood-watch shift.

In December, Zimmerman sued the family of Trayvon Martin for $100 million, alleging that they and their lawyer presented an “imposter” witness during his trial.

In recent years Zimmerman has auctioned off the gun used to murder Martin, sold his Confederate flag artwork, and publicly called President Obama a “baboon.”

He being represented in both lawsuits by nutbag attorney Larry Klayman, who is also currently representing loony Laura Loomer and other far-right extremists.

Zimmerman Sues Buttigieg And Warren For $265M

[aja_christopher]

So...

Where are you getting "Many..."?

Because I have been keeping pretty close track(pretty sure I can quote the exact posts...), and I count two.

Get the impression that one of that pair ain't even a Sanders supporter...

I get the impression that many of you will do anything to avoid discussing the cost of Sanders' policies, which doesn't bode well for a general election.

[numberthirty]

I get the impression that many of you will do anything to avoid discussing the cost of Sanders' policies, which doesn't bode well for a general election.

Again...

Where are you getting this set of "Many..." Sanders supporters who have said they won't vote for Bloomberg over Trump?

Like I said, I'm pretty sure I can quote the two times it has been mentioned and I don't really get the impression that one of that pair supports Sanders.

Anything even remotely solid you can point to that actually suggests something like "Many..."?

Posts or something?

[Tendrin]

Good article by Myke Cole here.

https://newrepublic.com/article/1545...scism-trumpism

The Sparta Fetish Is a Cultural Cancer

Last spring, 28 Tory hardliners unleashed another round of havoc on British politics, refusing to vote for Prime Minister Theresa May’s compromise Brexit plan and paving the way for her replacement by Britain’s Trump variant, Boris Johnson. The group of hardcore Euroskeptics dubbed themselves “Spartans” for their singleminded willingness to hold the line, to sacrifice anything in obedience to their convictions. British news outlets ran with the moniker; the Daily Mail praised the group’s efforts to sink its own government as “The last stand of the Spartans.”

Last August, Stewart Rhodes, the founder of the right-wing anti-government and anti-immigration American militia group Oath Keepers, appeared on conspiracy media outlet Infowars to announce the launch of “Spartan training groups” that would prepare armed Americans to defend the country from the “violent left.” The Oath Keepers’ website also invokes Ralph Waldo Emerson’s essay “Self Reliance,” which exhorts readers to “hear the whistle of a Spartan fife”—a nod to references in both Thucydides and Plutarch that the Spartans used the double-reeded, oboe-like aulos to keep in step while marching to battle.

It's older, but relevant.

[PaulBullion]

Good article by Myke Cole here.

https://newrepublic.com/article/1545...scism-trumpism





It's older, but relevant.

Who knew Frank Miller and the South Park creators would do so much damage to society.

[Mister Mets]

On one hand you have concentration camps, transphobic policies, racist policies, attack on abortion rights and everything else Trump is doing. On the other hand, higher taxes.

If someone is not budging on taxes, it does suggest they don't care about the other stuff, so why should voters?

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Why??

I suspect if I was American I’d feel exactly the same as aja-chriistopher...I’d vote for Bernie over Trump all day long, but feel a bit peeved when taxes went up.

Is it so hard to understand his position? He’s explained it well, I think.

Because it’s a fruitless argument. It’s the same argument with anything that costs money. Do you think what you are buying is worth it. For the VAST majority of Americans they save money. This is backed up by multiple independent studies from reputable sources. The people arguing this already know that and are just dragging people in circles so they can find points to continue this bad faith argument. You can only tell someone the answer so many times and watch them pretend to forget it before you stop taking them seriously.

Likewise, economically, multiple studies support Bernie’s system being more cost effective

Now if you want to shift just to wealthy people who will see an increase that won’t be offset. At that point you have to make a decision on whether you think covering everyone is worth the wealthy paying more money. And quite frankly if you think keeping taxes down for the rich should take precedent over the idea that healthcare is something that should be allotted to all citizens, well there is a party that has spent the bulk of the last 30 years taking that stance. But apparently it’s a personal attack if you point that out.

The argument is fruitless when people plead extreme ignorance so they can find reasons to argue.

[aja_christopher]

Again...

Where are you getting this set of "Many..." Sanders supporters who have said they won't vote for Bloomberg over Trump?

Like I said, I'm pretty sure I can quote the two times it has been mentioned and I don't really get the impression that one of that pair supports Sanders.

Anything even remotely solid you can point to that actually suggests something like "Many..."?

Posts or something?

It says a lot that you're so intent on proving Sanders' supporters will vote for Bloomberg...

...but still won't discuss how Sanders will pay for his policies.