All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[The Overlord]

Problem is, I really don't think that person is Bernie Sanders.

And I can present videos to the contrary:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YD7NYwpbGOk&t=232s

You don't think Trump will bring up Biden's record against him? That's what he did against Clinton, brought up her record and muddied the waters. He will bring up ''forced busing'' and the crime bill and anything else to the muddy the waters.

I also think without real structural change we will see President Donald Trump Jr. in short order. If you don't change the system, we will see an endless parade of Trump clones seizing power.

Right now we are in the primary, not the general election, there is no obligation to rally around one person, there is still a case to be made who is the best person to beat Trump.

I'd have to see the evidence.

One factor is that cost-cutting measures were restricted in areas with a history of racist policies circa 1965 until the Supreme Court's 2013 decision.

I found an article about changes in the city of Daphne Alabama, where seven polling places have been consolidated to two. This includes the removal of three polling places that were used by the African-Americans in the town. On the other hand, the African American population was 11 percent, which does suggest their three preferred polling places might be used less than the remaining four.

https://www.al.com/news/mobile/2016/...questions.html

There are multiple complications with dog whistles.

The racist is going to avoid saying anything directly incriminating.

You may even have people in positions of power who don't know what's going on, especially when a generation or more has passed. Some elected officials will believe the pretext.

There will also be false positives, assumptions about dog whistles that end up being false.

Why should I assume the benefit of the doubt for these officials when they constantly act in bad faith? The Southern Strategy is a strategy of bad faith.

And it's not just bad faith on racism, its bad faith on everything.

They constantly complain about the debt when the Democrats are in power and raise the debt when they are in power, making arguments about the debt look to be completely in bad faith.

And let's not forget all the times the Right said we had to do something or not something and when they turned out to be wrong, did they take responsibility for their mistake? No, they just wipe their hands of it and move on to the next manufactured crisis. Their supposed ideology of ''personal responsibility'' need not apply to them.

The Right said if we didn't invade Iraq in 2003 it would have been a disaster and said that if gay marriage was legalized it would be a disaster, tell me, who took responsibility for being wrong on both these counts? Now they are saying we have to invade Iran and prevent transgender people from entering the military to prevent future disasters, who take responsibility when these arguments and policies turn out to be wrong?

Its the constant bad faith on the part of the conservative movement that makes them with very little moral or intellectual standing, IMO. Racism is a big part of the bad faith, there is a ton of it on the right, on a variety of issues.

Bob Jones University did apologize for "racially hurtful" institutional policies over a decade ago, so an argument would be that there's no need to eject the racism in this case.

Oh wow, it only took them till what 2009 or something to do so, big deal.

I am sorry, but I do not think racism has been purged from the religious right, because Bob Jones apologized for something they should have ended decades before they did it.

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/201...regation-south

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Tucker Carlson Made Sense On Iraq And The World Is Upside Down

To answer those questions:

1) nope
2) TRUMP, accept no substitutes
3) what makes people think Republicans care about an exit strategy?

Problem is, I really don't think that person is Bernie Sanders.

I understand, but it’s hard for me to get past the bottom line of ABT (Anyone But Trump).

[Mister Mets]

Feel the Bern

If Bernie wins Iowa, he'll probably dominate in New Hampshire (where he currently has a slight lead) and Nevada, where he has an existing organization. It'll be tough to stop him.

In New Hampshire, Bernie has a slight lead (27-25 with Warren in third with 18, Buttigieg in fourth with 14, and Klobuchar in fifth with 7.)

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...mary-6276.html

So based on current polls, Biden would probably get enough of a boost after winning Iowa to win New Hampshire, and barring scandal/ major gaffe (the equivalent of a speech where he doesn't know where he is) be the overwhelming favorite.

If Buttigieg wins Iowa, the results will be much more mixed. He'll get a boost in New Hampshire, but it might not be enough to stop Sanders.

Warren seems to be falling, so there's the question of where her voters go: Sanders for liberals, Klobuchar for those who want a woman in the White House, Buttigieg for those who want someone wonky.

And I can present videos to the contrary:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YD7NYwpbGOk&t=232s

You don't think Trump will bring up Biden's record against him? That's what he did against Clinton, brought up her record and muddied the waters. He will bring up ''forced busing'' and the crime bill and anything else to the muddy the waters.

I also think without real structural change we will see President Donald Trump Jr. in short order. If you don't change the system, we will see an endless parade of Trump clones seizing power.

Right now we are in the primary, not the general election, there is no obligation to rally around one person, there is still a case to be made who is the best person to beat Trump.

Trump would have a tough time convincing anyone he feels differently about ''forced busing'' and the crime bill than Biden did.

[Robotman]

People are missing the point entirely. That’s how I see it. The goal for Democratic voters is to unite behind the candidate that can best defeat Donald Trump, issues, ideologies, everything else be damned. I’m a black man, and I don’t give even half a fuck about anything other than that. Anyone who thinks differently needs to pay attention to what Trump’s been doing the last few days, bringing the country to the precipice of war for no other reason than to bolster his re-election chances. This is an issue about the greater good of voting Trump out of office, because god only knows what damage that maniac will do with another four years under his belt.

Agreed. But I think that’s it’s very sad that with all that’s at stake (democracy and the future of our country and possibly the world) the Democrats couldn’t find a candidate that can generate excitement. Sure Bernie still has his fanatical followers but I’m not excited about his candidacy like I was in 2016. Then there’s Biden who’s only positive is that he’s not Trump.

[The Overlord]

If Bernie wins Iowa, he'll probably dominate in New Hampshire (where he currently has a slight lead) and Nevada, where he has an existing organization. It'll be tough to stop him.

In New Hampshire, Bernie has a slight lead (27-25 with Warren in third with 18, Buttigieg in fourth with 14, and Klobuchar in fifth with 7.)

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...mary-6276.html

So based on current polls, Biden would probably get enough of a boost after winning Iowa to win New Hampshire, and barring scandal/ major gaffe (the equivalent of a speech where he doesn't know where he is) be the overwhelming favorite.

If Buttigieg wins Iowa, the results will be much more mixed. He'll get a boost in New Hampshire, but it might not be enough to stop Sanders.

Warren seems to be falling, so there's the question of where her voters go: Sanders for liberals, Klobuchar for those who want a woman in the White House, Buttigieg for those who want someone wonky.

Trump would have a tough time convincing anyone he feels differently about ''forced busing'' and the crime bill than Biden did.

But Trump does not have to do that. He just has to make everything a wash, he just as to paint Biden as being bad on these issues, to depress Biden's turn out, because he knows he has a solid base of supporters who will show up for him, no matter what.

When Trump was accused of sexual assault several times in 2016, what did he do? He brought in Bill Clinton's accusers to his debate with Hilary, framing the Clintons as hypocrites on this issue and ultimately it did not hurt him. He will use the same bag of tricks on Biden.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

But Trump does not have to do that. He just has to make everything a wash, he just as to paint Biden as being bad on these issues, to depress Biden's turn out, because he knows he has a solid base of supporters who will show up for him, no matter what.

When Trump was accused of sexual assault several times in 2016, what did he do? He brought in Bill Clinton's accusers to his debate with Hilary, framing the Clintons as hypocrites on this issue and ultimately it did not hurt him. He will use the same bag of tricks on Biden.

Exactly. It’s how you match up and how they can counter.

Biden wants to criticize how Trump handles foreign policy, Trump only needs to bring up how aggressive Biden was in his support of the Iraq War.

Biden wants to criticize Trump on his sexual offenses, well Trump’s just going to bring up all the videos if women looking uncomfortable while Biden smells their hair or something

Even with the impeachment, Biden’s the one candidate Trump can make it messy on.

More importantly, Trump’s supporters don’t give a shit. Democrats do. The muddier you make it, the more it hurts Democratic turnout

[Kirby101]

What's sad is how voters, and the Media will equate back runs with 20 accusations of sexual assault and rape.

[Malvolio]

Agreed. But I think that’s it’s very sad that with all that’s at stake (democracy and the future of our country and possibly the world) the Democrats couldn’t find a candidate that can generate excitement. Sure Bernie still has his fanatical followers but I’m not excited about his candidacy like I was in 2016. Then there’s Biden who’s only positive is that he’s not Trump.

You don't have to get excited. You just have to vote. Unfortunately, we live in a country where a significant number of citizens think that voting for Dancing With the Stars is more important than voting for our government.

[The Overlord]

What's sad is how voters, and the Media will equate back runs with 20 accusations of sexual assault and rape.

I actually think the Juanita Broaddrick accusation is pretty bad for old Bill, way worse than the affair the Republicans tried to oust him over.

But here's the thing a lot of people just ignored, 2 wrongs don't make a right and I do not think it's fair to blame Hillary Clinton for these things her husband is accused of doing and what Trump did was a cheap stunt to avoid responsibility for his actions.

I do not like Hilliary Clinton, but I wouldn't put all the baggage from her husband on her, I disliked her policy positions and criticize her for those, but I do not think Bill's actions negate Trump's actions and I do not think that should have made things a wash.

I would be worried about seeing a repeat of 2016 if Biden is the pick.

You don't have to get excited. You just have to vote. Unfortunately, we live in a country where a significant number of citizens think that voting for Dancing With the Stars is more important than voting for our government.

But if you have an exciting candidate, people are more likely to go out and vote for that person, over someone who isn't.

Hilliary Clinton's campaign was based on not being Trump and that was not enough. Biden needs a better reason for people to vote from beside the fact that he is not Trump, Warren is not Trump, Yang is not Trump, Bernie is not Trump, Mayor Pete is not Trump, etc.

Biden has done little to articulate a vision that would make him exciting.

I also think the failure of neoliberal economic policies is part of the reason we see the rise of Trumpism.

[numberthirty]

You don't have to get excited. You just have to vote. Unfortunately, we live in a country where a significant number of citizens think that voting for Dancing With the Stars is more important than voting for our government.

Is there some magic number of times this can be said to actually make it the case?

Because so far, it hasn't worked all that well.

[AnakinFlair]

Graham threatens to 'take matters in our own hands' if Pelosi doesn't send articles of impeachment to Senate

Can the Senate vote to change the rules in the House? And if so, could the House vote to change the rules in the Senate?

Problem is, I really don't think that person is Bernie Sanders.

I can't stand Bernie Sanders. But if he gets the nomination, he's got my vote.

Looks like Iraq voted to kick the American troops out.

[numberthirty]

Tucker Carlson Made Sense On Iraq And The World Is Upside Down

Tucker Carlson spent a full minute on his show — wait for it — making sense. He talked about the Trump's ordering the assassination of Iraq's top military leader, Qasem Soleimani, with alarm and disgust, and asked exactly the right questions.

1. Is Iran really the greatest threat we face?
2. Who's actually benefitting from this?
3. If we're still in Afghanistan nineteen sad years later, what makes us think there's a quick way out of Iran?

That the guy occasionally says something correct(see his take on Bolton...) is just part of his bit.

[JCAll]

Looks like Iraq voted to kick the American troops out.

I don't think they have any other option. One way I've heard it, Iraq was asked by us to be a mediator between ourselves and Iran. Soleimani was in Iraq as part of that process when he was killed, making Iraq an unwitting accomplice. Iraq isn't going to make itself the battlefield for our war with Iran, they're going to tell us to get out.

EDIT: Our clown of a president basically used a peace negotiation as a set up for murder, nobody is ever going to trust us again. Nor should they.

[Kirby101]

Can the Senate vote to change the rules in the House? And if so, could the House vote to change the rules in the Senate?

]

No 67 Senators have to vote to change them. Not going to happen.

[Robotman]

Looks like Iraq voted to kick the American troops out.

Sadly they’re gonna learn that once US troops are in your country they are there for good. Unless of course you’re the Vietcong.