Page 1025 of 1172 FirstFirst ... 255259259751015102110221023102410251026102710281029103510751125 ... LastLast
Results 15,361 to 15,375 of 17573
  1. #15361
    Mighty Member TheDarman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steel Inquisitor View Post
    Sanders being compared to FDR is unfair. FDR knew how to get things done, he was the Secretary of the Navy during WWII befogs setting foot in congress. He knew how to build coalitions and break arms to get people to do what he wanted. I agree with your sentiment, however.
    Yeah, I understand this sentiment as well. Sanders has earned himself a reputation as an outsider. I think that has generally worked out well for him in elections, but it certainly doesn’t help when you want to govern. If you cast anyone who disagrees with you as wrong and promise to be an existential threat to the only entity that has been consistently fighting alongside minority folks and for minority folks (or they are even a devout members themselves) it doesn’t build strong coalitions. It sets up a battle. And the last thing a Democratic President needs is intraparty fighting.
    With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility

    Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

  2. #15362
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    4,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steel Inquisitor View Post
    Sanders being compared to FDR is unfair. FDR knew how to get things done, he was the Secretary of the Navy during WWII befogs setting foot in congress. He knew how to build coalitions and break arms to get people to do what he wanted. I agree with your sentiment, however.
    Ehhhh thats but of disingenuous. FDR got things done specifically because he was President, was extremely popular, constantly engaged with the people like no President before him and his popularity basically checkmated Congress and they had to grit their teeth and deal with him on things they werenít crazy about. FDR would not have had they impact as a loan Congressman.

    In fact, he was actually not a great Congressman. He was disliked on impact, his brother described him as being a ďdreadfulĒ representative and when his brother was elected he was told by the House Speaker not to waste their time like his brother.

  3. #15363
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    4,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDarman View Post
    Sure, but Obama and Sanders are probably going to be recognized for a long time as the leaders that ultimately reshaped our discussions about public policy away from what the standard of American politics has been coming out of the Reagan era. Obamaís ACA changed the fundamental debate about health care and turned Sanders proposal into something that could be mainstream. Obama also brought social issues to the fore that will make it more difficult for politicians like Sanders to ignore when trying to make these programs that they desperately want and we, frankly, need. That is, of course, if we can make out of the nightmare we have with Trump right now.

    I also think that we donít give Biden enough credit for actually listening to what activists have to say. No one wants to be told what they should do by a politician. They want to be listened to. Biden has shown more of a propensity to do that. Sanders, meanwhile, has been missing critical anniversary events and continues to insist that economic reforms are what is best coupled with some policies about criminal justice and voting reform. They need more than that. And Sanders has been want to acknowledge that for a while. I think we underestimate how popular Biden has become because of his willingness to listen and advocate for those policies.



    Times change. But it is what you get with ďclass over raceĒ politicians like FDR, JFK, or LBJ. The only reason Johnson ended up doing anything was because of enormous pressure to actually deal with these problems. Democrats had too long been subservient to Dixiecrats as a result of compromises FDR made and compromises LBJ was willing to make. This isnít to say Japanese Internment Camps will come back or anything else. But those are the sacrifices often made by politicians that Sanders has an affinity towards. And that scares me.



    Except the data demonstrates that, much like the result of COVID-19 (though I doubt that in January 2021, the economic effects of a policy of social distancing (implemented now to prevent more long-term health and economic damage) will be as bad as over 30 percent), we were on our way to a depression after the 2008 financial crisis. Obama and his team didnít let it bottom out and most economists would credit Congress, but particularly Obama, for stopping the Great Recession from becoming another Depression. Of course, the recovery from the worst recession since the Great Depression happened slower than any since the Great Depression as well and it was perceived as a weakness for Obama heading into the 2012 election. He won, but I do think it says a lot about how short-term memory works and how quickly we want things to revert to normal that some punished Obama for that. However, I suspect that a health crisis created recession is a little different than one created by the economy itself. And, even then, I think it is up for debate if Sanders would handle the crisis better than Biden, whose administration will likely be full of Obama veterans.
    I wouldnít necessarily categorize it that way because I think Sanders did show significant strides in listening to minorities and their interests since 2016 and made many changes to his campaign staff in that direction. His flaw is that messaging wise heís one note and noticeably struggles pivoting off his major talking points that he is comfortable with, even when heís strong in his platforming on it. Also the other way is argue that Bidenís popularity there probably has quite a bit to do with who heís associated with than what heís done.

    Again I donít think this a a class over rave choice. I donít think you can win as a Democrat without both. Blacks and Hispanics will abandon you without race. Working class whites will abandon you without class. If either does you lose. That was very different pre Civil Rights where you could afford to sacrifice one because the pendulum swung too far. Also quite frankly I think itís very difficult to look at the mostly positive efforts by Sanders when it comes to minority rights to think we are anywhere close to the thought he compromises in the manner FDR did (and I think compromise is being kind there). I mean you yourself said Obama had to pull back because of blowback he got. I really donít even really see much of a scenario where he is going to be off from Obama there purely in policy that impacts minorities (maybe he will show the usual aloofness in optics there).

    As far as the recession the reality is timid recession is likely going to be worse and it has a pandemic attached. We were already heading to one anyways, now we have a shutdown country. I think no matter what the winner of the election is getting a bad hand. Obama yes got us through the last one but Bush also had his own stimulus before Obama and there were only so many ways out of the ditch. Itís more of an issue of not getting in the ditch and the fact is weíve stripped way too many regulations and are beholden to too many corporate interests to avoid it any more.

    Like I said, Biden has the nom now so I donít see much of a point in debating who is more viable. I just donít think itís a fair characterization to set it up as a binary choice of sacrifice economics for social issues based on the specific merits of his history. Had he been right every time? No. He was right earlier than a lot of peers on a lot of racial issue.

  4. #15364
    Ultimate Member Mister Mets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    12,136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KNIGHT OF THE LAKE View Post
    Ehhhh thats but of disingenuous. FDR got things done specifically because he was President, was extremely popular, constantly engaged with the people like no President before him and his popularity basically checkmated Congress and they had to grit their teeth and deal with him on things they werenít crazy about. FDR would not have had they impact as a loan Congressman.

    In fact, he was actually not a great Congressman. He was disliked on impact, his brother described him as being a ďdreadfulĒ representative and when his brother was elected he was told by the House Speaker not to waste their time like his brother.
    FDR the President never served in Congress, nor did he have a brother who served in Congress (looking this stuff up on wikipedia, he seems he had a brother 28 years older than he was.)

    FDR was pretty much in the political wilderness between being the vice presidential candidate that lost in a landslide in 1920, and getting elected Governor in 1928. This was when he suffered a paralytic illness, and began a careful recovery.

    You're thinking of his sons Franklin Delano Roosevelt Jr. and James Roosevelt, both of whom served in Congress. Speaker Rayburn told James Roosevelt not to waste their time like his brother did.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  5. #15365
    Astonishing Member PwrdOn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDarman View Post
    Yeah, I understand this sentiment as well. Sanders has earned himself a reputation as an outsider. I think that has generally worked out well for him in elections, but it certainly doesn’t help when you want to govern. If you cast anyone who disagrees with you as wrong and promise to be an existential threat to the only entity that has been consistently fighting alongside minority folks and for minority folks (or they are even a devout members themselves) it doesn’t build strong coalitions. It sets up a battle. And the last thing a Democratic President needs is intraparty fighting.
    You said yourself that there isn't really much overlap between economic progressives and social reformers in this country, so how exactly does nominating a candidate that doesn't represent either coalition building? It's pretty clear to anyone with a brain that moderates don't really care all that much about social justice, they're just using race and gender issues to try and browbeat progressives into compliance so that they can get in office and do exactly nothing to address the concerns of minorities. And if the social reformers gained a stronger voice within the party and started advocating for reparations or open borders or any of that stuff, they'd immediately be shouted down because my god think of the effect that'd have on the economy! I mean you constantly bring up how FDR put the Japanese into concentration camps, but then you turn around and spout the same kind of yellow peril nonsense about China, just like I'm sure that in the aftermath of 9/11 you probably thought that combating radical Islamic terrorism was more important than protecting the civil rights of Muslims, or in that in the 80s and 90s you probably were deeply concerned about black on black crime and the destruction of the black family. The kind of social justice that moderates advocate grants minorities just enough social mobility so that a few might be able to climb the socioeconomic ladder and be held up as examples of how modern and open-minded we are, but leaves the vast majority banging their heads against the wall constantly trying to prove themselves respectable and acceptable to whites and inevitably failing to do so. Nevermind that moderates are fully on board with the "foreign policy consensus" that sees our military run roughshod over the global poor, the consequences of which are the main reason why our demographics are so diverse in the first place.

  6. #15366
    Mighty Member TheDarman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PwrdOn View Post
    You said yourself that there isn't really much overlap between economic progressives and social reformers in this country, so how exactly does nominating a candidate that doesn't represent either coalition building?
    My point is that I do think Biden is a social one in the same way that Obama was and (yes, in America only) left-of-center on economic policy. We can disagree on this, but that’s just my take.

    It's pretty clear to anyone with a brain that moderates don't really care all that much about social justice, they're just using race and gender issues to try and browbeat progressives into compliance so that they can get in office and do exactly nothing to address the concerns of minorities.
    I think that is both quite condescending and too reductionist of a lot of really positive policy efforts put in place by “moderates” like Barack Obama. After all, a survey of historians placed him third behind LBJ and Lincoln on social justice performance as president. And, in my field (Political Science, which I hold a BA in), Obama’s actions in office are considered to be quite socially progressive.

    And if the social reformers gained a stronger voice within the party and started advocating for reparations or open borders or any of that stuff, they'd immediately be shouted down because my god think of the effect that'd have on the economy!
    Reparations have been discussed and shot down since the 2008 election. They have actually gained steam though. While Sanders took the Obama position and argued against reparations (a position I can sympathize with), candidates like Booker and Harris went out of their way to create a pseudo-reparation plan.

    As for open borders, that is a very fringe position in virtually every country on the planet. The truth is that moderate Democrats are further to the left on immigration than most European countries, with the odd lone exception of how we handle refugees.

    I mean you constantly bring up how FDR put the Japanese into concentration camps, but then you turn around and spout the same kind of yellow peril nonsense about China,
    I’m not scared of China. I just think that we should be realistic about how their government treats its people and the kind of damage they often cause to the world economy by underpaying their workers to lay claim to production of most things in the world economy. But I don’t think they are awful and I’m not fearing the moment that they inevitably surpass the U.S. with their annual GDP.

    just like I'm sure that in the aftermath of 9/11 you probably thought that combating radical Islamic terrorism was more important than protecting the civil rights of Muslims
    I was four when 9/11 happened. I hadn’t even seen Spider-Man yet (my earliest childhood memory). I wasn’t truly concerned with our foreign or domestic response regarding 9/11. I certainly would argue that we should’ve been more concerned with the infringement of civil rights of religious minorities.

    or in that in the 80s and 90s you probably were deeply concerned about black on black crime and the destruction of the black family.
    Nope. I wasn’t even a glimmer in my parents’ eyes at that point.

    The kind of social justice that moderates advocate grants minorities just enough social mobility so that a few might be able to climb the socioeconomic ladder and be held up as examples of how modern and open-minded we are, but leaves the vast majority banging their heads against the wall constantly trying to prove themselves respectable and acceptable to whites and inevitably failing to do so.
    Again, I think this minimizes what Obama and folks like him did in the last fifteen years to actually advocate for minorities. In particular, the work they did to advance sexual orientation and transgender folks’ visibility and normalizing them.

    Nevermind that moderates are fully on board with the "foreign policy consensus" that sees our military run roughshod over the global poor, the consequences of which are the main reason why our demographics are so diverse in the first place.
    I think that we should have a more careful approach on the world stage and I think it was one clear hit against Hillary Clinton in 2016. She was a hawk and it would not only cost American lives, but lives abroad. But it was clear to me Trump was not only more dangerous, but owed me nothing as I would never vote for him. Me holding Clinton’s feet to the fire would’ve meant more to her than the same means to Trump (not that either is worth much without mobilization).
    With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility

    Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

  7. #15367
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,759

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PwrdOn View Post
    I mean you constantly bring up how FDR put the Japanese into concentration camps, but then you turn around and spout the same kind of yellow peril nonsense about China, just like I'm sure that in the aftermath of 9/11 you probably thought that combating radical Islamic terrorism was more important than protecting the civil rights of Muslims, or in that in the 80s and 90s you probably were deeply concerned about black on black crime and the destruction of the black family.
    Why wouldn't Darman bring up the concentration camps, which occurred under FDR? That's a very good reason to bring up his faults rather than ignore them entirely. FDR was the best we had back then but today he'd be well behind the curve of social progressive views. Darman is a Democrat, not a Republican. Don't equate Republican reactions to 9/11 as being identical to Democrats, this Both Sides angle isn't compelling. All it shows is that you don't have a robust argument.

    In fairness, it's baffling you want to bring up China in the current climate in a topic with Muslims given their latest actions within their own borders.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewelina.../#21f52bfd2f73

    The report suggests that these companies have been using forced Uighur labor in their supply chains. As a result, they could find themselves in breach of laws which prohibit the importation of goods made with forced labor. Among the International Labor Organisation (ILO) forced labor indicators, the report identified the following factors as relevant for the case of the Uighur Muslims:

    “• being subjected to intimidation and threats, such as the threat of arbitrary detention, and being monitored by security personnel and digital surveillance tools

    • being placed in a position of dependency and vulnerability, such as by threats to family members back in Xinjiang

    • having freedom of movement restricted, such as by fenced-in factories and high-tech surveillance

    • isolation, such as living in segregated dormitories and being transported in dedicated trains

    • abusive working conditions, such as political indoctrination, police guard posts in factories, ‘military-style’ management, and a ban on religious practices

    • excessive hours, such as after-work Mandarin language classes and political indoctrination sessions that are part of job assignments.”

  8. #15368
    Horrific Experiment JCAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,533

    Default

    I don't envy WBE. It's just past April 1st, and now he has to hold on to this tweet for a whole year.


  9. #15369
    Astonishing Member PwrdOn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steel Inquisitor View Post
    Why wouldn't Darman bring up the concentration camps, which occurred under FDR? That's a very good reason to bring up his faults rather than ignore them entirely. FDR was the best we had back then but today he'd be well behind the curve of social progressive views. Darman is a Democrat, not a Republican. Don't equate Republican reactions to 9/11 as being identical to Democrats, this Both Sides angle isn't compelling. All it shows is that you don't have a robust argument.

    In fairness, it's baffling you want to bring up China in the current climate in a topic with Muslims given their latest actions within their own borders.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewelina.../#21f52bfd2f73
    It's not a both sides angle, you would have been hard pressed to find a single Democrat who dared to speak out on behalf of Muslims in the aftermath of 9/11. Indeed, it has pretty much always been open season on any group perceived as an enemy of the US to be targeted by racist hate crimes, while we always act shocked and appalled when it happens, we can never really wrap our heads around the basic idea that it's not whatever administration that happens to be in power that create this problem, but rather American foreign policy that ends up making so many enemies in the first place.

  10. #15370
    Old school comic book fan WestPhillyPunisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    21,086

    Default

    Trump Still Pushing Malaria Drug As Fauci Says No ‘Strong’ Evidence It Treats Coronavirus

    “I’m not acting as a doctor,” the president, contradicting doctors, said from the White House on Sunday. That orange skinned motherfucker is going to get people killed, especially his brainless lemmings who'll take his ramblings as gospel.

    **********

    Americans Brace For ‘Hardest, Saddest’ Week Of Their Lives

    The surgeon general warned the coronavirus pandemic would bring the “hardest and saddest” week of most Americans’ lives. Adams called it a Pearl Harbor or 9/11 moment, I would strongly debate that. Those incidents were sneak attacks (and, depending on who you talk to, even that's debatable), the COVID-19 crisis is more like Chernobyl, something that could've been prevented but wasn't.

    **********

    Dr. Fauci Warned In 2017 Of ‘Surprise Outbreak’ During Trump Administration

    “There is no question that there will be a challenge to the coming administration in the arena of infectious diseases,” he said.

    **********

    CNN Host To Pastor: How Is It ‘Pro-Life’ To Pack People Into Church Amid Pandemic?

    Tony Spell said he has a “command from God” to hold in-person services despite warnings from medical experts and state officials. I seriously doubt that God would want His parishioners put in jeopardy.

    **********

    Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker Says Trump Doesn’t Understand The Word ‘Federal’ Or His Role In Pandemic

    Trump blasted Pritzker, saying he is “always complaining.”

    **********

    Defense Secretary Defends Navy Captain’s Ouster, Downplays Virus Spread On Ship

    Mark Esper said “only 155 sailors” have tested positive for COVID-19 on the ship Capt. Brett Crozier commanded. Reportedly, Crozier has contracted the disease. Shit! There is NO downplaying a virus that can spread like wildfire in the cramped confines of a Navy ship! What was this fuckwad smoking?
    Last edited by WestPhillyPunisher; 04-06-2020 at 02:17 AM.
    Avatar: Here's to the late, great Steve Dillon. Best. Punisher. Artist. EVER!

  11. #15371
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    4,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    FDR the President never served in Congress, nor did he have a brother who served in Congress (looking this stuff up on wikipedia, he seems he had a brother 28 years older than he was.)

    FDR was pretty much in the political wilderness between being the vice presidential candidate that lost in a landslide in 1920, and getting elected Governor in 1928. This was when he suffered a paralytic illness, and began a careful recovery.

    You're thinking of his sons Franklin Delano Roosevelt Jr. and James Roosevelt, both of whom served in Congress. Speaker Rayburn told James Roosevelt not to waste their time like his brother did.
    Dammit I had the biggest lol brain fart last night when I posted this haha

  12. #15372
    Astonishing Member Tuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    2,994

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steel Inquisitor View Post
    Don't equate Republican reactions to 9/11 as being identical to Democrats, this Both Sides angle isn't compelling.
    The Patriot Act was passed with an overwhelming majority in the House, and only one no vote in the Senate (Russ Feingold).

    If you curb civil rights, it's not mitigated by not being as mean as your political opponents are to the people you've just empowered them to step on.

  13. #15373
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    816

    Default

    I think Trump is going to replace Dr. Fauci with Dr. Oz.

  14. #15374
    Invincible Jersey Girl Tami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    24,006

    Default

    2020-04-06 Sam Stein on Twitter New trump campaign email asks for campaign contributions to help.jpg

    New trump campaign email asks for campaign contributions to help him fight coronavirus

    Twitter Link
    Original join date: 11/23/2004
    Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn or imaginatively created.

  15. #15375
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    4,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by williamtheday View Post
    I think Trump is going to replace Dr. Fauci with Dr. Oz.
    **Dr Phil

    10char

Posting Permissions

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