All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[aja_christopher]

And what's going stop the GOP from obstructing Biden all the time, rebuffing his efforts at compromise and just nominating Trump Jr.

Americans voting Republicans out of power and keeping them out of power.

Anyway, save your arguments about what Sanders will do for when he actually is in a position to do it.

Not when he wins Iowa, not when he wins the Democratic primary, but when he wins the general election.

Until then, all you can factually state is his policies and how he plans to pay for them, and you can't even do that.

[PwrdOn]

I'm done with "ifs" and attacks on other Democrats -- the discussion is about Sanders policies so stop trying to drag down other candidates.

I've told you the facts about American voters -- you can either accept them or dismiss them as you will.

I'm already focused on the bigger picture -- getting Republicans out of office before they destroy our democracy, not attacking Democrats.

Vote Republicans out of power -- that's how you change things in America.

The Republicans were out of power from 2008-2016, yet they still seemed to be calling the shots on everything because the Democrats were too busy trying to reach across the aisle and got mired in the constant trolling about balancing the budget and government overreach. Even if Biden wins, he will inevitably fall into the same trap because transactional politics and cutting back room deals is all that he's ever been good for, but the modern GOP is far too ruthless and single-minded to deal with like that, and Biden doesn't really understand that. We need a president that will tell the whole rotten lot of them to go take a long walk off a short pier and use every last trick in the book to push through legislation that will actually do something to fix the country's problems.

[numberthirty]

I'm done with "ifs" and attacks on other Democrats -- the discussion is about Sanders policies so stop trying to drag down other candidates.

I've told you the facts about American voters -- you can either accept them or dismiss them as you will.

I'm already focused on the bigger picture -- getting Republicans out of office before they destroy our democracy, not attacking Democrats.

Vote Republicans out of power -- that's how you change things in America.

Those facts also suggest that said voters are unlikely to vote for a woman in numbers that will produce an Electoral College win.

Accounting for that reality, it is very interesting that the above fact gets right around "Zero..." discussion while the facts that suggest Sanders might have trouble are discussed repeatedly.

[aja_christopher]

The Republicans were out of power from 2008-2016, yet they still seemed to be calling the shots on everything because the Democrats were too busy trying to reach across the aisle and got mired in the constant trolling about balancing the budget and government overreach. Even if Biden wins, he will inevitably fall into the same trap because transactional politics and cutting back room deals is all that he's ever been good for, but the modern GOP is far too ruthless and single-minded to deal with like that, and Biden doesn't really understand that. We need a president that will tell the whole rotten lot of them to go take a long walk off a short pier and use every last trick in the book to push through legislation that will actually do something to fix the country's problems.

Negativity is not a solution -- anyone can criticize others.

Let's see Sanders actually do something instead of just trashing other candidates who have at least made progress on the issues at hand.

Again -- if you vote the Republicans out of power -- said progress will be protected.

Stop trashing the Democrats who actually win elections and pass legislation because they are not the problem.

Talk is cheap -- lets see the votes and the action.

[numberthirty]

The Republicans were out of power from 2008-2016, yet they still seemed to be calling the shots on everything because the Democrats were too busy trying to reach across the aisle and got mired in the constant trolling about balancing the budget and government overreach. Even if Biden wins, he will inevitably fall into the same trap because transactional politics and cutting back room deals is all that he's ever been good for, but the modern GOP is far too ruthless and single-minded to deal with like that, and Biden doesn't really understand that. We need a president that will tell the whole rotten lot of them to go take a long walk off a short pier and use every last trick in the book to push through legislation that will actually do something to fix the country's problems.

At the very least, we need a President who has a plan for attempting to deal with that likely possibility.

Thus far, I've seen very little to suggest that Biden has anything like such a plan.

[Tazirai]

AJA Christopher, I asked you some questions last page, that you never answered. Would you mind taking a look at them please?

Also, If you want options for paying for M4A, just go to Bernies page.

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/downl...2019-financing
https://www.sanders.senate.gov/downl...ll?inline=file

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/he...all-2019-04-10

Here ya go Aja

[The Overlord]

Americans voting Republicans out of power and keeping them out of power.

Anyway, save your arguments about what Sanders will do for when he actually is in a position to do it.

Not when he wins Iowa, not when he wins the Democratic primary, but when he wins the general election.

Until then, all you can factually state is his policies and how he plans to pay for them, and you can't even do that.

How about stop all the wars and cut the military budget in half and how about increasing taxes on the rich, would that work to pay for this stuff? It seems like stuff that should be done regardless.

I noticed you cut out most of what I said in the last point, are you going to cede those arguments to me, rather than address them?

The Dems lost a 1000 state house seats under Obama's watch, what do you think should be done under Biden's watch if he wins to prevent a repeat of that? Can you answer that or will ignore it and say that it is not my job and thus admit you have no real plan to counter Trumpism.

If you want to keep the GOP out of power, don't you think lessons should be learned from the past, rather than pretending nothing has changed and just trying to maintain a staus quo that created Trumpism in the first place?

[aja_christopher]

Here ya go Aja

So I read through the five pages and it's basically about raising taxes and charging fees.

Again -- traditionally people don't vote for candidates who raise taxes and it's hard to see where they will make an exception for Sanders.

How about stop all the wars and cut the military budget in half and how about increasing taxes on the rich, would that work to pay for this stuff? It seems like stuff that should be done regardless.

I noticed you cut out most of what I said in the last point, are you going to cede those arguments to me, rather than address them?

The Dems lost a 1000 state house seats under Obama's watch, what do you think should be done under Biden's watch if he wins to prevent a repeat of that? Can you answer that or will ignore it and say that is not my job and thus admit you have no real plan to counter Trumpism..

If you think Sanders can stop Trump and the Republicans then vote accordingly -- just stop trashing other Democrats in the process since they have done more for health care and and other progressive causes than he has, and they've won more elections as well.

That said -- let me know when people elect Sanders as president, and he stops wars and cuts the military budget to pay for Medicare.

And I'm not arguing with you at all -- the fact that you keep trying to make this an argument just proves how much of a waste of time this is.

[The Overlord]

So I read through the five pages and it's basically about raising taxes and charging fees.

Again -- traditionally people don't vote for candidates who raise taxes and it's hard to see where they will make an exception for Sanders.

Actually voters approve of taxing the wealthy more:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/19/b...th-warren.html

The wealthy have too much power and frankly, they should pay more in taxes, do you see how much Amazon pays in taxes:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/03/why-...ncome-tax.html

Do you think that is right?

[numberthirty]

So I read through the five pages and it's basically about raising taxes and charging fees.

Again -- traditionally people don't vote for candidates who raise taxes and it's hard to see where they will make an exception for Sanders.

Is he suggesting some sort of a "Traditional..." tax increase?

If he isn't, what is the case for trying to apply traditional responses to traditional attempts at raising taxes to it?

[The Overlord]

So I read through the five pages and it's basically about raising taxes and charging fees.

Again -- traditionally people don't vote for candidates who raise taxes and it's hard to see where they will make an exception for Sanders.



You're talking ideals and I'm talking reality -- if you think Sanders can stop Trump and the Republicans then vote (or complain) accordingly.

That said -- let me know when people elect Sanders as president, and he stops wars and cuts the military budget to pay for Medicare.

And I'm not arguing with you at all -- the fact that you keep trying to make this an argument just proves how much of a waste of time this is.

Then what are you doing, what is the point you are trying make?

Also, I live in Canada, I cannot vote in US elections unless I get US citizenship. I can still complain though, got plenty of family in the US, my mother is an American citizen and your government's actions effects our country more than the other way around.

[aja_christopher]

Actually voters approve of taxing the wealthy more:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/19/b...th-warren.html

The wealthy have too much power and frankly, they should pay more in taxes, do you see how much Amazon pays in taxes:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/03/why-...ncome-tax.html

Do you think that is right?

I already told you I'm done with this -- you can't argue someone into ignoring Sanders' loss to Hillary and progressive candidates failures' to win office.

Show me the votes and then the legislation and then the signed laws.

[Steel Inquisitor]

And if Biden wins and he if he just caves into the GOP all the time, is that defeating them? The current system allows the GOP to be the way they are, don't change it and you fight the same battle in 4 years, is that you want, to maintain a status quo where we have to fight Trumpism every 4 years, instead of trying to make it go away through policy changes?

And Sanders still could win, he is ahead in Iowa, if he wins, will you still complaining about Bernie Bros or will you want to focus on the bigger picture?

https://www.ft.com/content/40de11c2-...a-c4b328d9061c

Biden is better than Trump, but electing Biden is like putting a bandaid on a giant gaping wound. Yes vote for Biden over Trump if he wins, but if you want to actually defeat Trumpiusm, you will have to look beyond just defeating Trump and change the conditions that created Trumpism.

Sanders being president isn't going to destroy conservatism or the Republican party any more than Biden will. Electing Bernie's not going to defeat Trumpism, it'll survive when Trump leaves office. It's not written in stone that Sanders can do what Hillary failed, he hasn't been put into that kind of test as a politician in his life.

If Sanders is the nominee, by the logic I have heard in this thread, shouldn't they put aside their feelings and vote Bernie regardless, but because he could still win:

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/be...arn-2020-02-01

Nobody in this thread isn't saying they won't vote Bernie had he become the nominee, but there are many people who might in the general. Look at the last candidate who chose to ignore moderate voters, Sanders better be careful or he'll face the same fate.

Attachment 92430

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

This is what every candidate must do, and Sanders is horrible at it.

And really are working poor people in the Swing States who have no medical coverage really care about this stuff? It really comes as unserious if talk about this stuff over issues that actually affect people's lives.

You don't have to convince us of that, we're all agreeing with you. The electorate and congress, however, are where this runs into a wall of conservativism - where progressive policies go to die. This isn't Canada where Universal Healthcare is the norm, this is America - where political ads about Death Panels prove to be effective deterrents in congress.

https://www.npr.org/2017/01/10/50916...d-of-fake-news

But that Aug. 7, 2009, social media post from the former Alaska governor and GOP vice presidential candidate included a dire warning:

"The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society.' "

Conservative op-ed pages were on board. Talk radio, too. On his syndicated national radio program, Rush Limbaugh said of Palin, "She's dead right."

The specter of "death panels" became an instant rallying cry for the still-new Tea Party movement, whose supporters crowded into town hall meetings that summer and shouted down Democratic lawmakers considering support for the Affordable Care Act.

Progressives who don't believe conservatives are a serious threat in America end up losing, they're not facing a lame nobody like Stephen Harper here.

Snakes emojis are a first world problem, not a life or death issue like medical care, so do you want to talk about a sideshow or talk about things that can actually improve people's lives? It comes as completely unserious to talk about snake emojis over real issues and I say this as someone who thinks Warren is the second-best choice.

Why are you making light of harassment campaigns against high profile women? We're able to do more then one thing simultaneously. Politics is more than discussing policies, this isn't about candidates and people, sexism and racism, this came up earlier with Rogen and Sanders history. You're not electing a piece of paper you're electing a man, with all the flaws included. Harassment is a real issue, and that was an example of the Bros being nice. Why should women voters rally for Sanders when he refuses to take their concerns about harassment and sexism seriously? Women, being people who belong to the poorer classes, it's not like they don't get harassment online. You're not showing much respect for Warren here.

[The Overlord]

I already told you I'm done with this -- you can't argue someone into ignoring Sanders' loss to Hillary and progressive candidates failures' to win office.

Show me the votes and then the legislation and then the signed laws.

Okay, fine. Don't care about this, just let Trumpism grow and fester until becomes a cancer that consumes everything. Because if you do not deal with the issues that created Triumpism, beating Trump will be a small victory that will soon be overshadowed by another similar situation in 4 years. You can constantly play defense or you can try to play offense.

[aja_christopher]

Then what are you doing, what is the point you are trying make?

The point I was making is that you need to stop trashing other candidates just because you don't agree with them as it only helps Republicans.

Sanders' supporters can't seem to do that though -- apparently that's the only way you know how to support you candidate.

Okay, fine. Don't care about this, just let Trumpism grow and fester until becomes a cancer that consumes everything. Because if you do not deal with the issues that created Triumpism, beating Trump will be a small victory that will soon be overshadowed by another similar situation in 4 years. You can constantly play defense or you can try to play offense.

Offense is pointing out the problem with Republicans and removing them from office.

Just because you choose to attack Democrats instead doesn't make your ideology superior to others.