All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[4saken1]

It seems to be like you are giving up a little bit of your principals so the other guy doesnt win. I am not accusing anyone here of that. I dont follow this thread enough to know where everyone stands. But overall in general that is how it seems to me with the general public and with the people we voted for.

Not sure if I agree with this assessment. I don't have to agree with a candidate 100% in order to vote for them. Realistically speaking, no candidate will ever meet that criteria. Even if they did, it is unrealistic to think that they wouldn't have to compromise something once they are in office in order to get things done! I would love for a far left candidate to win the Presidency, not just because the ones that I've seen seem to truly want to make things better for those in our country who are less able to provide for themselves and stop the rich from taking advantage of the working class and buying politicians to do their bidding. Part of me would also like to see the fringe left Progressive purists lose their **** when these politicians inevitably have to compromise, or 'sell out', as it were, when they need to get something done. Because it's naive to think that we can always get what we want and not have to give something back in return.

[babyblob]

Not sure if I agree with this assessment. I don't have to agree with a candidate 100% in order to vote for them. Realistically speaking, no candidate will ever meet that criteria. Even if they did, it is unrealistic to think that they wouldn't have to compromise something once they are in office in order to get things done! I would love for a far left candidate to win the Presidency, not just because the ones that I've seen seem to truly want to make things better for those in our country who are less able to provide for themselves and stop the rich from taking advantage of the working class and buying politicians to do their bidding. Part of me would also like to see the fringe left Progressive purists lose their **** when these politicians inevitably have to compromise, or 'sell out', as it were, when they need to get something done. Because it's naive to think that we can always get what we want and not have to give something back in return.

I can agree that a person will never get a candidate they agree with 100 percent. My point was how people vote for a candidate they disagree with on most things because they dont want someone not of their party to win. There are a few Republicans that dont agree with Trump but will vote for the people who back Trump and dont hold him accountable. Or in 2016 when there were many Dems who didnt agree with Clinton but voted for her anyway becasue they couldnt stand Trump or because she was a woman.

[SquirrelMan]

While you guys are busy arguing over --- checks note --- Bill Maher and Barack Obama, Trump is snarling at the media because the Whistleblower's identity has not been published by them yet.

Also Trump Threatens to Cut U.S. Funding for California Wildfires

But hey, does anybody have any opinions on the Clintons? Any Clinton?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

While you guys are busy arguing over --- checks note --- Bill Maher and Barack Obama, Trump is snarling at the media because the Whistleblower's identity has not been published by them yet.

Also Trump Threatens to Cut U.S. Funding for California Wildfires

We already know Trump is awful. We already know he has to be removed from power.

Being anti-trump is not enough. The opposition to him and what he stands for has to actually be good, not just less worse.

But hey, does anybody have any opinions on the Clintons? Any Clinton?

Sure.

Since you asked, Hillary Clinton backed regime change in Honduras because she saw the democratically elected president as a leftist troublemaker.

Before her murder on March 3, Berta Cáceres, a Honduran indigenous rights and environmental activist, named Hillary Clinton, holding her responsible for legitimating the 2009 coup. “We warned that this would be very dangerous,” she said, referring to Clinton’s effort to impose elections that would consolidate the power of murderers.

But who cares about authoritarian right-wing governments in other countries. She's not as bad as Trump, so we shouldn't criticize her.

[Mister Mets]

I mean, I like the UFC, but why is a sitting president in attendence at an event? Respectfully, it's pretty lowbrow.

Fans of lowbrow stuff vote.

The Problem in the modern politics that we are in is that it is too hard to find a true ally. We are so divided as a county that we will vote for our party even if we dont fully agree with everything the candidate says just so the other party doesnt win. There are Republicans myself included that dont like Trump. Yet in local elections for Senate and the House they vote for people who support Trump just so the dems dont win. I am trying to escape this by researching more Dems and third party candidates. The same thing happened in 2016. Clinton was a very flawed candidate but people voted for her so Trump wouldnt get in. I dont know how many but I am sure there are a few who fell into that camp.

It seems to be like you are giving up a little bit of your principals so the other guy doesnt win. I am not accusing anyone here of that. I dont follow this thread enough to know where everyone stands. But overall in general that is how it seems to me with the general public and with the people we voted for.

I don't think the problem is a failure to find true allies as much as the inability to acknowledge shortcomings of allies.

You're probably going to disagree with the people likeliest to win an election on some major issues, but you might still think one of the candidates is the best.

The idea that true allies have to be perfect on every issue can lead one to defend candidates they support on every issue, when that's not always ideal.

Then spend your time trying to convince people like that, instead of people like me.

I am never going to side with the right-wing. I am never going to side against the oppressed, no matter how people personally treat me. If you know people that might vote Republican because mean things were said to them by people on the left, then talk to them. They are the threat, not us.

I am not going to walk on eggshells and tone down my criticism because some people care more about their own feelings than the oppression of others.

I doubt we're always working to persuade the other guy, as much as to persuade others reading the discussion. Responding to extreme posts works as a way to articulate one's position, even if you're not likely to sway the person making the extreme post.

I often used the example of the gay marriage debate for this. There have been some people who consider anyone against gay marriage to be a total raging homophobe. Now some of them are exactly that. But there are some people who have no other problem with homosexuals, but just can't quite wrap their heads around the idea of two men marrying each other. Those people can be reached without vilifying them. They are not the enemy. But when you insist on making them the enemy, you drive them away entirely.

To add to this, there are plenty of people who have changed their mind on gay marriage.

Vilifying those who are less than a decade behind Obama is probably not the best way to persuade them.

[Tami]

We already know Trump is awful. We already know he has to be removed from power.

Being anti-trump is not enough. The opposition to him and what he stands for has to actually be good, not just less worse.

Or what? There is no such thing as perfection. If that is what you are waiting for, you won't see it in your lifetime. There are millions of people, each with their own ideas and preferences, each with their own ideas of 'Perfection'. Sometimes in life, you need to take a chance roll the dice, and go with the best choice. Even if that choice isn't 'perfect'.

Rank every candidate, as long as they rank higher than Trump then they are worth voting for. It's not an all or nothing proposition.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

While you guys are busy arguing over --- checks note --- Bill Maher and Barack Obama, Trump is snarling at the media because the Whistleblower's identity has not been published by them yet.

Also Trump Threatens to Cut U.S. Funding for California Wildfires

Another case of meaningless spite because he lost California to Hillary Clinton three years ago and refuses to forgive or forget.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

Because that's usually how bigotry works. Something makes you afraid for a reason you don't really understand so you hate it. But if someone isn't against homosexuals being teachers in public schools, or homosexuals moving in next door to them, then maybe they can be convinced on gay marriage, but not if we treat them the same as those who are against homosexuals moving in next door or teaching their children.

And if they're against gay marriage because of their ignorance, then isn't it our duty to remove that ignorance in the most constructive way possible? I mean, in school, kids generally don't learn anything from teachers telling them how stupid they are. They just learn to hate school.

Removing their ignorance is a secondary priority.

The main priority is to prevent them from gaining power, and reduce whatever power they already have.

If you want to address their ignorance, then do it but don't expect everyone else to coddle them.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

Or what? There is no such thing as perfection. If that is what you are waiting for, you won't see it in your lifetime. There are millions of people, each with their own ideas and preferences, each with their own ideas of 'Perfection'. Sometimes in life, you need to take a chance roll the dice, and go with the best choice. Even if that choice isn't 'perfect'.

Rank every candidate, as long as they rank higher than Trump then they are worth voting for. It's not an all or nothing proposition.

No one is asking for perfection.

But maybe don't use Trump to whitewash other politicians. Maybe don't use Trump to dismiss criticism of other politicians, when they have devastated the world and people are still suffering because of their actions.

[PaulBullion]

According to a new Harvars-Harris poll, Clinton jumping into the Democratic primary would not be as hopeless for her as some people might think: She's actually ahead of Sanders in the national primary poll that includes her. She's barely behind Biden.

Biden 19%
Clinton 18%
Warren 13%
Sanders 12%
Kerry 8%
Bloomberg 6%
Harris 3%
Booker 3%
Buttigieg 2%
O'Rourke 2%
Yang 2%
Steyer 1%
Klobuchar 1%
Gabbard 0%
Williamson 0%
Messam 0%
Gravel 0%
Castro 0%
Swalwell 0%
Delaney 0%
Gillibrand 0%

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/s...149649408?s=20

[Theleviathan]

According to a new Harvars-Harris poll, Clinton jumping into the Democratic primary would not be as hopeless for her as some people might think: She's actually ahead of Sanders in the national primary poll that includes her. She's barely behind Biden.



https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/s...149649408?s=20

Let's hope she never sees that. That is the true worst possible scenario for the Democrats in 2020

[Mister Mets]

Bill Maher also wants his show to be entertaining. He's not going to have on someone he disagrees with if their argument is boring. He also won't have on someone he agrees with, whom he finds boring. Whatever else you may say about Milo Y. (I won't even attempt to spell his last name) or Ann Coulter, they do raise the heat in the room, and like it or not, that can be entertaining.

In addition, having someone like Milo allows other to articulate their opposition, as Larry Wilmore did.

https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/...los-bill-maher

The greater exposure of his appearance on Bill Maher did also lead to the posting of an earlier interview than helped destroy his career (it didn't help that he's a proudly ignorant intellectual lightweight.)

There is also the question of how one would determine which views are so unacceptable as to not be worth airing, and there's the dangerous implication that those views are so appealing the viewers must be kept away lest they be swayed to that side.

... you think Van Jones represents the Far Left? Get back to me when he invites someone with the politics of Zoe Samudzi on his show.

How would you define far left?

His guests do seem to be all over the map ideologically.

https://www.real-time-with-bill-mahe...ategory=GUESTS

Maher captures the whole white middle class moderate Democrat zeitgeist very well, in that their opposition to Trump and the GOP stems mostly from the optics and not anything related to actual policy, like the real problem is people saying racist things rather than, you know, people being racist.

Maher's views aren't middle class moderate. There's much he believes that the majority of Democrats do not, especially on religion.

Christopher England elected new Alabama Democratic Party chair

Local politics can be messy, but the airing of disputes seems to be counterproductive.

I'm sure the two who got kicked out had their shortcomings, but the Alabama Democratic party is not likely to win elections by kicking the old people out. They'll need as wide a tent as possible.

[Mister Mets]

Removing their ignorance is a secondary priority.

The main priority is to prevent them from gaining power, and reduce whatever power they already have.

If you want to address their ignorance, then do it but don't expect everyone else to coddle them.

Who makes the decision about who the ignorant people who must be kept from power and stripped of existing power are?

According to a new Harvars-Harris poll, Clinton jumping into the Democratic primary would not be as hopeless for her as some people might think: She's actually ahead of Sanders in the national primary poll that includes her. She's barely behind Biden.



https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/s...149649408?s=20

A differently phrased poll has 27 percent support for her.

https://twitter.com/NumbersMuncher/s...95218440605696

It also suggests Michelle Obama would immediately dominate.

An issue for Clinton is that she hasn't figured out some kind of path to relevance as a losing nominee.

Romney's a key figure in the Senate. McCain was a major figure in the Senate.

Al Gore became an environmental activist.

Kerry became Secretary of State.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

Who makes the decision about who the ignorant people who must be kept from power and stripped of existing power are?

Not people like you, that's for sure.

[worstblogever]

On this date in 2014, 2015, 2016, as well as 2017, “Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day posted profiles of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who has a deserved reputation as a bully, not just for doing whatever it takes to get his way politically, but for acting like an extra from The Sopranos and screaming at reporters and constituents alike, calling them “idiot” and “stupid” for having the nerve to ask him questions. (Honestly, he might have been the impetus for Donald Trump thinking he could be taken seriously as a candidate.) And wow, speaking of Donald Trump and Christie, nothing was sadder than Trump making Gov. Christie stand behind him in press conferences with a look on his face like a deer in headlights, lie on his behalf on cable news as a surrogate for months on end, get picked on for his weight and eating Oreos by Trump at a press conference, and if rumors are true, be reduced to running errands like picking up McDonalds for Trump during his 2016 presidential campaign as Christie begged to be named his VP pick, or during the transition, begged to be Attorney General. Perhaps his lowest moment was his speech on the second night of the 2016 Republican National Convention, when he held a trial for imagined crimes committed by Hillary Clinton with her in absentia, leading the crowd to shout out her being found “GUILTY!” of all of them before leading them in chants of “LOCK HER UP!”

Christie’s strict Catholic upbringing has him opposed to abortion, and birth control, but somehow also makes him able to refuse to take in refugees even if, and we quote, “they are orphans under the age of five” and to lie about climate change and claim “it’s not a crisis” as the Jersey shoreline slowly moves inland due to rising sea levels, and Superstorm Sandy devastates New Jersey. Gov. Christie is also been under constant corruption investigations, from everything to usage of the state helicopter to fly to his son’s basketball games, to handing out wreckage from the 9/11 Ground Zero site to allies and donors, to closing down almost entire lanes of highways as a “screw you” to mayors in his state that wouldn’t endorse him for his re-election campaign in 2013 (trust us, we’ll be talking some Bridgegate here today) and several senior aides to Christie went to jail as a result. The citizens of New Jersey are also still trying to figure out what happened to all the Hurricane Sandy relief funding he was put in charge of, and were less than thrilled to discover $25 million was spent on “Stronger than the Storm” ads that, in effect, were presidential campaign ads where Christie declared himself a hero who successfully rebuilt the state. An FBI, federal, and statewide investigation all simultaneously are going on to figure out how the aid money was so mismanaged, and Christie’s approval ratings dropped from levels that were the highest in the country in 2012 all the way to the lowest in the country, and in the teens by 2017. In classic abrasive d*** mode, Christie responded in June 2017 to his state’s disgust with him by saying, “I don’t care”, and proceeded to demonstrate how true of a statement that really is when a few weeks later, he ordered the closure of a public beach over the Fourth of July weekend, and then photos surfaced that showed Gov. Christie took his family to that beach on the holiday so they had it all to themselves. He now has almost zero chance of being elected to anything in New Jersey or anywhere else after his disgraceful time in office.