All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Kirby101]

The Bill is as bad as they say. Here is Kevin Drum to explain:
https://jabberwocking.com/here-are-a...***voting-law/

Mainly it gives the GOP dominated legislature complete power to determine an election. If this was in place last November, Donald Trump would have won Georgia and it would retain two GOP Senators.

As far as approval of voter ID, the Gallup question was "Requiring all voters to provide photo identification at their voting
place in order to vote" This is very different from asking for two forms of notarized ID for an absentee ballot.

And I love how Republicans say voter ID has approval but don't give a **** about any polls when it comes to Gun Laws, Abortion, Gay Marriage, Tax Cuts....

[PwrdOn]

The Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, The Ledbetter equal pay act. Title 9, Gay Marriage (yes, it was the Supreme Court that made it National, but that was because so many States enacted it. legalizing weed, Trans Rights.....Even the ACA as much a half measure as it was, was a step forward.

Doing the absolute minimum to make our society not so blatantly racist isn't really much to brag about. Like Malcolm X once said, pulling the knife out halfway is not progress, progress is when you pull the knife out and then begin to heal the wound that it made, and Americans are still too busy debating whether the knife even exists. And that's not even getting into all of the harm that American foreign policy does to marginalize and impoverish non-white communities around the globe.

[Kirby101]

Doing the absolute minimum to make our society not so blatantly racist isn't really much to brag about. Like Malcolm X once said, pulling the knife out halfway is not progress, progress is when you pull the knife out and then begin to heal the wound that it made, and Americans are still too busy debating whether the knife even exists. And that's not even getting into all of the harm that American foreign policy does to marginalize and impoverish non-white communities around the globe.

Sorry we all can't live in your Utopian worlds where anything short of everything is failure. The Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act were BFDs.

[PwrdOn]

Sorry we all can't live in your Utopian worlds where anything short of everything is failure. The Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act were BFDs.

They also happened over 50 years ago, and in that time a lot of what was accomplished in the 60s has been rolled back, evidenced most recently by this Georgia voter suppression law. I realize this sort of thing is not easy and takes time, but the least we could do is recognize the reality of the situation and not try to gloat about how the Europeans might have universal health care but we have racial equality and trans rights, when we actually don't have those things.

[Kirby101]

They also happened over 50 years ago, and in that time a lot of what was accomplished in the 60s has been rolled back, evidenced most recently by this Georgia voter suppression law. I realize this sort of thing is not easy and takes time, but the least we could do is recognize the reality of the situation and not try to gloat about how the Europeans might have universal health care but we have racial equality and trans rights, when we actually don't have those things.

Are you talking about the Country or the Left. It is the more and more fascistic Right that is rolling them back, not Progressives. We live in a Center Right Country and the Left can only accomplish so much. Who is gloating, we all acknowledge how much the GOP and it's voters have fucked things up here.

You said the American Left has never accomplished a goddamn thing, some of us gave you a list of accomplishments. Now you want to put all the failures of the Country on the Left. Don't work that way.

[worstblogever]

GPB News (A PBS/ NPR collaboration) looks at the Georgia voting reform legislation so controversial the MLB was pushed to cancel the All-Star game.

https://www.gpb.org/news/2021/03/27/...-law-sb-202-do

Will Saletan of Slate sums it up, suggesting that many of the criticisms were overblown.

https://twitter.com/saletan/status/1378394751339261961

Well, let's analyze some other things your source wrote.

Oh, just an entire book about "How Conservatives Won the Abortion War" and a series on genetics as related to IQ that quoted a bunch of white nationalists. This source sees no fascism in what's clearly a anti-democratic push against voting, because he's not biased. When his opinions are based on some of the worst people on the right.

Fun source you have supporting white nationalism again to prove your ridiculous argument, Mets. Should we start counting the number of times you "accidentally" look to people like this to justify your arguments?

[Malvolio]

Sorry we all can't live in your Utopian worlds where anything short of everything is failure. The Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act were BFDs.

I also think any woman who's benefitted from the Ledbetter Act would think it's a big deal. Also any gay couple who's married since the Obergefell decision.

[Kirby101]

I also think any woman who's benefitted from the Ledbetter Act would think it's a big deal. Also any gay couple who's married since the Obergefell decision.

Title Nine has changed more for women in education than almost anything. If one wants to say America's failures are because not enough people are on the Left and vote that way, Okay. But to say America's failures are all because the Left didn't change things, as if they had all the power, is ridiculous. It's like saying the problem in Russia is Navalny isn't doing enough to change things.

[Gray Lensman]

Well, let's analyze some other things your source wrote.

Oh, just an entire book about "How Conservatives Won the Abortion War" and a series on genetics as related to IQ that quoted a bunch of white nationalists. This source sees no fascism in what's clearly a anti-democratic push against voting, because he's not biased. When his opinions are based on some of the worst people on the right.

Fun source you have supporting white nationalism again to prove your ridiculous argument, Mets. Should we start counting the number of times you "accidentally" look to people like this to justify your arguments?

I will note that Slate is generally considered a center-left publication. If you don't look up the individual writer most people will presume they have the same bias attributed to the magazine/website as a whole.

Having read a few other things Saletan has written I know better, but I didn't know about him quoting White Nationalists.

[Mister Mets]

The Bill is as bad as they say. Here is Kevin Drum to explain:
https://jabberwocking.com/here-are-a...***voting-law/

Mainly it gives the GOP dominated legislature complete power to determine an election. If this was in place last November, Donald Trump would have won Georgia and it would retain two GOP Senators.

As far as approval of voter ID, the Gallup question was "Requiring all voters to provide photo identification at their voting
place in order to vote" This is very different from asking for two forms of notarized ID for an absentee ballot.

And I love how Republicans say voter ID has approval but don't give a **** about any polls when it comes to Gun Laws, Abortion, Gay Marriage, Tax Cuts....

Prominent Democrats have said objectively untrue things about the legislation, so it's not as bad as people say.

The Washington Post gave Joe Biden four Pinnochios for claiming inaccurately that it lowered voting hours.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...g-hours-early/

Voter ID is more popular than abortion. This bill does allow people to vote if they have photo ID, but also provides opportunities to vote if they do not.

There is a general understanding that a system of signature matches is deeply flawed, so going away from that makes sense. People change signatures all the time. People develop medical conditions that can affect their handwriting (which many younger voters barely do to begin with) and many change their names (there's an argument that signature match legislation penalizes women who are more likely to take their spouse's last name than men are.)

Drum's summary seems to exclude some key details, like the requirement that every county have at least one drop box, formalizing the online option for ballot applications, or allowing officials to process absentee ballots earlier. One complication in discussions is that there were changes in policy that were understood to be temporary due to Covid, so there are arguments about how to precede with this, as well as the appropriate rhetoric.

As for the sense that the bill "gives the GOP dominated legislature complete power to determine an election" it would be smarter if the messaging from critics of the bill stuck to that point, when the main complaints were about other stuff (Voter ID, an incorrect sense polling sites closed earlier, ban on third-party groups handing out water or food.) That way the discussion could be on the merits of those changes, rather than distractions. Making the Secretary of State a non-voting member of the State Election Board would seem sensible to people bothered by the secretary of state being a partisan elected official in charge of the elections of his political allies, or himself (check all the arguments in earlier threads about how wrong it was that Kemp could run for Governor.)

Well, let's analyze some other things your source wrote.

Oh, just an entire book about "How Conservatives Won the Abortion War" and a series on genetics as related to IQ that quoted a bunch of white nationalists. This source sees no fascism in what's clearly a anti-democratic push against voting, because he's not biased. When his opinions are based on some of the worst people on the right.

Fun source you have supporting white nationalism again to prove your ridiculous argument, Mets. Should we start counting the number of times you "accidentally" look to people like this to justify your arguments?

I notice that you're not addressing what he says at all.

Your argument is that a national correspondent at Slate, a left-leaning media outlet that is generally considered reputable, is so deeply flawed that we should dismiss his understanding of Georgia law.

One piece of evidence that you give is that he wrote a book called Bearing Right: How Conservatives Won the Abortion War in 2003. The book was an analysis, but he's not in agreement with conservatives on abortion. This is an indication of a troubling tendency to view analysis as endorsement.

Then there's your take on a wikipedia summary of Saletan addressing a hot-button issue, where he cited a study, and then apologized afterwards because the coauthor of one article he cited was deeply flawed.

One question with the ad hominem is whether writers should be allowed to make mistakes. If you quote a writer, is it okay for me or numberthirty or PwrdOn or anyone who disagrees with you to ignore your comments on the issue, and to go after you with the least generous interpretation of something the writer said about a completely different topic? I wouldn't do it because I'm not a fan of ad hominems, but it seems to be an approach you advocate for the people you disagree with.

[Tendrin]

I will note that Slate is generally considered a center-left publication. If you don't look up the individual writer most people will presume they have the same bias attributed to the magazine/website as a whole.

Having read a few other things Saletan has written I know better, but I didn't know about him quoting White Nationalists.

Will 'I <3 Race Science' Saletan is probably not the best source to go to over the concerns of black voters in Georgia, no.

[Mister Mets]

They also happened over 50 years ago, and in that time a lot of what was accomplished in the 60s has been rolled back, evidenced most recently by this Georgia voter suppression law. I realize this sort of thing is not easy and takes time, but the least we could do is recognize the reality of the situation and not try to gloat about how the Europeans might have universal health care but we have racial equality and trans rights, when we actually don't have those things.

Do you think the Georgia law is comparable to what things were 50 years ago?

Europeans may have universal health care but there are downsides to that, including a lack of innovation, which is why they're dependent on others for coming up with the vaccine.

Well, a government shutdown happened on his watch due to a complete failure of leadership and inability to stop his caucus from doing something incredibly stupid. With no goal as to what they would get once they shut the government down. Which led to what could have been the prototype to 1/6, where Ted Cruz led a mob to throw barricades on the White House lawn as militia groups like the Oathkeepers waved Confederate flags at the first black president. That happened because John Boehner was SO GOOD at his job.

There were also 60+ failed attempts at repealing the ACA, and a parade of bills aimed at non-scandals like ACORN, Solyndra, the IRS, Agenda 21, and Planned Parenthood during his tenure, where he let his party run on paranoia.

One might be able to notice these things if they weren't blindly fanatically loyal to the GOP as they embarrass themselves repeatedly for the past decade. That's kind of the key.

It's generally well-known that Boehner does not like Cruz.

Cruz did give a speech at a rally, but there's no indication that he told anyone to remove barricades. I think this is at least the second time you've posted that story on the board, so I'm sure you're familiar with the context but for everyone else this was during the 2013 shutdown, when the White House closed national landmarks including open-air memorials, which was an effort at political theater. The barricades surrounded the open-air memorial.

So Boehner's connection to the oathkeepers is really limited. Boehner was pushed into doing something Ted Cruz wanted him to do. Ted Cruz gave a speech at a rally. Others at the rally did something stupid.

John Boehner was the leader of the Republicans in the House, so he's not going to have the same interests as the Democrats. He'll pass legislation that a Democratic Senate Majority Leader won't put on the floor, just as Speaker Pelosi passed legislation Mitch McConnell didn't bring forward for a vote.

The shutdown was a mistake, and it cost Republicans.

It made sense to have legislation dealing with companies like Solyndra. Even if some of the criticism was overblown, Solyndra did use inaccurate information to get a loan from the Obama administration.

https://fortune.com/2015/08/27/remem...yndra-mistake/

The IRS should not target organizations because of their political affiliations, and the Inspector General's report found that conservative groups were singled out with unfair treatment.

https://www.cnn.com/2013/05/14/polit...ing/index.html

[worstblogever]

I notice that you're not addressing what he says at all.

Well, I have a habit of not promoting or defending the views of those who espouse white nationalist rhetoric.

You should try it. So should your party.

[Kirby101]

Do you think the Georgia law is comparable to what things were 50 years ago?
Europeans may have universal health care but there are downsides to that, including a lack of innovation, which is why they're dependent on others for coming up with the vaccine.

Except Germany funded the Pfizer vaccine, not the US.
https://fortune.com/2020/11/09/pfize...speed-germany/

Do you really still oppose Universal Healthcare?

[worstblogever]

DCruz did give a speech at a rally, but there's no indication that he told anyone to remove barricades.

There's a clearer indication he never TOLD ANYONE TO STOP DOING THAT. And he was there and could have, y'know, been responsible and told them not to.

I think this is at least the second time you've posted that story on the board, so I'm sure you're familiar with the context but for everyone else this was during the 2013 shutdown, when the White House closed national landmarks including open-air memorials, which was an effort at political theater. The barricades surrounded the open-air memorial.

Ah yes, "political theater". Where militia groups demand a sitting president surrender after being incited to devolve to a near-riot by a sitting Senator.

Ted Cruz and Trump both played this same game seven and a half years later. I mention it because it's a part of our modern history and relevant towards what's gone wrong with your party. I mention it because it it's but one of many embarrassing, brain-dead things your party's leaders have enabled over the past decade. I mention it because people need to not forget how we got here. And that maybe some people are smart enough to learn from their mistakes, rather than defend the worst actions of their party out of blind fanaticism in it.

Relevant to the discussion on Boehner: His lack of leadership couldn't stop the kooks from doing s*** like that. Shutting down the government and cosplaying as revolutionaries. Had he, or anyone been brave enough to condemn the actions of those that day, hell, we might be living in an alternate reality where things didn't keep spiraling down the toilet with how the GOP has folks trying to stage a violent coup when they don't win all the elections.