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

[numberthirty]

I've heard too that the fact that Republicans were out in full force campaigning, often to crowds largely sans masks, while Democrats tended to play it safe and stay away from public events, helped Republicans, especially incumbents, win their Congressional races. From what I understand, the Democratic seats that got flipped were almost entirely by Republicans that were either female, minority, veterans, or some combination thereof. Basically, Democrats didn't really give any seats up to the typical crusty old white male that comprises the vast majority of Republicans in Congress. Hopefully this is a good sign for things to come within the Republican Party, but I'm not holding my breath.

Let's say this might be a possibility.

There's still a ways until things change even a little when it comes to Republicans, and you've got dead weight like Manchin in the picture.

Still going to be(barring Dems really upping their collective game...) years of Charlie Brown trying to kick a football.

Not the worst thing that could happen, but still a downer and time wasted.

[Madam-Shogun-Assassin]

People only start hating progressive policies when you attach Democrats to them.

Exactamundo!!!

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Okay, hardline progressive than.

AOC is a major fundraiser for the party and draws more eyes via media than moderates do. The first time many people are hearing about Spanberger and Conor Lamb is because of their tiff with AOC. (Prison rules, "Pick on the biggest one", also Prison rules, "Come at the Queen, best not miss.") So she does have a level of power and influence, at least personal power, and in Congress she's worked on amendments and other policy stuff. AOC's influence led to Ed Markey winning a Senate Primary against a Kennedy in MA (where no Kennedy ever lost before), despite said Kennedy dude being backed by Pelosi and other figures.

So AOC isn't a fringe figure at all. She's an influential Congresswoman, wouldn't say the most influential of course (at least not yet) but certainly the most famous member of Congress after Nancy Pelosi herself.



Fringe is Jill Stein, the Libertarian party.

[The no face guy]

AOC is a major fundraiser for the party and draws more eyes via media than moderates do. The first time many people are hearing about Spanberger and Conor Lamb is because of their tiff with AOC. (Prison rules, "Pick on the biggest one", also Prison rules, "Come at the Queen, best not miss.") So she does have a level of power and influence, at least personal power, and in Congress she's worked on amendments and other policy stuff. AOC's influence led to Ed Markey winning a Senate Primary against a Kennedy in MA (where no Kennedy ever lost before), despite said Kennedy dude being backed by Pelosi and other figures.

So AOC isn't a fringe figure at all. She's an influential Congresswoman, wouldn't say the most influential of course (at least not yet) but certainly the most famous member of Congress after Nancy Pelosi herself.

Fringe is Jill Stein, the Libertarian party.

Fair enough, I did amend my writing, she has a strong base of support just like Tom Cotton does in the Republican Party, but her views are often far from moderate.

Cortez's biggest drawback is her age, as (I believe) the youngest member of the house she lacks maturity, that will change as she learns how to play the game, and doesn't push away mainstream voters.

Anyways I didn't come on here to talk about Cortez, someone else brought her up, and now the argument is now taking the shape Republicans would like it to, infighting amongst liberals.

I liked your article because it pointed out that full mobilization amongst voters is what largely determined the election, not what policies democrats did or did not choose to campaign on.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Fair enough, I did amend my writing, she has a strong base of support just like Tom Cotton does in the Republican Party, but her views are often far from moderate.

As a senator with military credentials, Cotton actually does have more practical power in terms of being a veto voice in a senate with tight margins for the GOP.

Cortez's biggest drawback is her age, as (I believe) the youngest member of the house she lacks maturity,

AOC is 31 years old right now. Nobody would say a 31 year old is too young to be immature. This kind of patronizing talk is nonsense.

...that will change as she learns how to play the game, and doesn't push away mainstream voters.

The mainstream isn't what it used to be.

I liked your article because it pointed out that full mobilization amongst voters is what largely determined the election, not what policies democrats did or did not choose to campaign on.

The article I shared. I didn't write it.

But thanks.

[worstblogever]

We are talking about the Democrats who just face planted on holding onto gains in the House, right?

It's not like we are talking about a set of politicians who are eight innings into pitching a shutout.

"I'm not a member of the club, but I'll tell you who should run it."

Uh huh. No thanks, keep walking and collect your terrible takes to put in a bindle to take with you.

[The no face guy]

As a senator with military credentials, Cotton actually does have more practical power in terms of being a veto voice in a senate with tight margins for the GOP.

He does, but that is because the Republican Party is further from the center as a whole than the Democratic Party.

AOC is 31 years old right now. Nobody would say a 31 year old is too young to be immature. This kind of patronizing talk is nonsense.

31 is extremely young for a representative of the house, she was the youngest women to get elected in American history, and saying she acts immature isn't patronizing it's a fact, which is why she draws the ire of the mainstream public. That will change as she gets older and more expeirenced.

The article I shared. I didn't write it.

But thanks.

Your welcome.

[numberthirty]

"I'm not a member of the club, but I'll tell you who should run it."

Uh huh. No thanks, keep walking and collect your terrible takes to put in a bindle to take with you.

Look, the idea that the party is gonna let Warren/Sanders(never mind anyone to their left...) near the wheel?

That's not even enough of an outside chance to bother with saying "Letting Those Folks Have More Of A Say Might Make Sens..."

That said, it's got nothing to do with the House seat that the folks who apparently should be running it just oversaw losing.

If you are focused on the former?

One would have to wonder if priorities are not almost completely misplaced. Who is making the calls won't matter much if you take yourself out of a position to be able to make them.

[numberthirty]

...

31 is extremely young for a representative of the house, she was the youngest women to get elected in American history, and saying she acts immature isn't patronizing it's a fact, which is why she draws the ire of the mainstream public. That will change as she gets older and more expeirenced.

Did having been around longer and having this experience create a plan that picked up seats in the house during what was about as close to an "Opponent Shoots Self In Both Feet..." year as Democrats are liable to get?

Because if the answer is a "Well, No...", you have to ask yourself what that experience got you.

[Malvolio]

Why are we funding police forces to evict people instead of using those funds to house people? Its **** like this (among a lot of other things) why I fully support defunding the police. Police unions are waaaaay too fuckin powerful.

But they're only powerful when trying to stop any meaningful reforms. But when it comes to getting better pay and pensions for their rank and file, they seem to be woefully weak. Why is that, I wonder?

[Tendrin]

But they're only powerful when trying to stop any meaningful reforms. But when it comes to getting better pay and pensions for their rank and file, they seem to be woefully weak. Why is that, I wonder?

The average member of the NYPD makes 96k a year.

In fiscal year 2019, the most recent year of available data, the average full-time NYPD employee earned $96,072 in total pay, which is the sum of base pay plus overtime and supplemental pay (such as holiday pay or shift differentials)

https://cbcny.org/research/seven-fac...0differentials).

[worstblogever]

Look, the idea that the party is gonna let Warren/Sanders(never mind anyone to their left...) near the wheel?

That's not even enough of an outside chance to bother with saying "Letting Those Folks Have More Of A Say Might Make Sens..."

First off... reminder, I voted for Warren in the 2020 Primary, and advocated for her repeatedly. Don't project it like I'm in line with the "moderates leadership" or I'm scared of the progressives.
Second, I know enough not to listen to the opinion of someone who relentlessly has made sexist attacks against the women leading the way of the Democratic Party, and neither should its leaders. Whoever the person making those attacks might be.

Which, not for nothing, is the crux of the right's fearmongering and trying to convince Democrats that rallying behind AOC is a non-starter. She's "too young", "too radical" and "too shrill a woman". They can piss off with that nonsense. There's no reason to let the right tell us why a progressive leader isn't the right pick. Or which progressive it might be.

There's a shake-up in the works. Cheri Bustos won't be running the DCCC in 2022. Pelosi might get one more term as speaker, if that. If the Democratic Party wants to bring change, they're going to have to change something about themselves to inspire people more.

Right now, though, they have two things the GOP doesn't:

Sanity and Competence.

[numberthirty]

First off... reminder, I voted for Warren in the 2020 Primary, and advocated for her repeatedly. Don't project it like I'm in line with the "moderates leadership" or I'm scared of the progressives.
Second, I know enough not to listen to the opinion of someone who relentlessly has made sexist attacks against the women leading the way of the Democratic Party, and neither should its leaders. Whoever the person making those attacks might be.

Which, not for nothing, is the crux of the right's fearmongering and trying to convince Democrats that rallying behind AOC is a non-starter. She's "too young", "too radical" and "too shrill a woman". They can piss off with that nonsense. There's no reason to let the right tell us why a progressive leader isn't the right pick. Or which progressive it might be.

There's a shake-up in the works. Cheri Bustos won't be running the DCCC in 2022. Pelosi might get one more term as speaker, if that. If the Democratic Party wants to bring change, they're going to have to change something about themselves to inspire people more.

Right now, though, they have two things the GOP doesn't:

Sanity and Competence.

What's in blue?

That feels more like something you are trying to read in than anything else. In the same way that there tends to be kind of a "Joe McCarthy Seeing 'Reds' Everywhere..." aspect that tends to run through this thread when it comes to "Who The 'Conservatives' Are...", it kinda feels like you are looking for a judgement that I have not made.

Ditto for the "Sexism ..." bit. Not even really worth going into much past "Cortez Obviously Has Something Along The Lines Of A 'Leadership...' Position. Show Me The Supposedly 'Sexist' Attacks I Have Made Against Her."

As for what's in green, should it really take a face plant to get the ball on that sort of change potentially rolling? Never mind the time and possibilities that it wastes.

Never mind opportunities where Republicans are actively attempting to take a flame thrower to their chances. Even they will probably not be quite that stupid a second time.

As for "Sanity And Competence..."?

While it ain't the worst thing that one could be, would you really be in a hurry to hire a lawyer whose pitch was "Well, I happen to be both sane and competent..."?

[worstblogever]

On this date in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, as well as 2019, “Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day posted profiles of Steve Scalise, the current U.S. House Representative for Louisiana's 1st District, who was revealed to have spoken before a group of White Supremacists, EURO in 2002, a group that was actually founded by David Duke. Oh, and Duke says he and Scalise are of like mind, which is easy to believe considering that as a state legislator, Scalise voted against a resolution for the state of Louisiana to apologize for slavery. Scalise has frequently appeared as a guest on the Fox News Channel as well as maintained a close-knit relationship with the Family Research Council (an anti-gay hate group) that has seen him appear a number of times on Tony Perkins’ Washington Watch program to say they are both “on the right side of history” on their stance against same sex marriage (and has celebrated whenever anything is done to threaten same sex marriages with them).

We noted at the time that Scalise had lied that the Affordable Care Act would “lead to healthcare rationing” while trying to fight tooth and nail from healthcare in any way including contraceptive coverage. He repeatedly kept trying to defund Planned Parenthood, falsely claimed the Bush era tax cuts created an economic boom, denied climate change because President Obama wore a coat to his second inauguration (that would be in January), defended the racist nickname of the Washington D.C. NFL franchise. He also claimed Obama really didn’t want to fight ISIS, and called for his impeachment over his executive orders over immigration. As late as 2018, Scalise has argued against the Founding Fathers wanting there to be a separation of church and state, citing an alternate history that never happened where he confuses the author of the Declaration of Independence with the authors of the Constitution.

Now, Scalise coasted to re-election in 2018 with 71% of the vote, partially because voters in a conservative district were compelled to give Steve Scalise a free pass out of after he missed a plurality of votes after being shot by a deranged gunman during practice for the annual Congressional baseball game. He still fundraised for 2018 by sending out mailers claiming that former President Barack Obama was “rigging our elections”. Now, given that Scalise has always been opposed to any and all gun control, we wondered if being the victim of gun violence might make him have a change of heart, and want to do something about stopping a man like the shooter, a man with a history of domestic violence and anger issues from having owned a gun in the future. NOPE. Scalise learned nothing, and still will be in the pocket of the gun lobby. He has literally said being shot “fortified” his view on gun rights, if by fortified you mean hospitalized for months. James Brady wept.

Anyway, the other detail of the shooting? The woman on the security detail that is largely credited for saving Scalise’s life, and that of other Congressmen present is an African American lesbian. Why, with Steve Scalise’s history of being associated with White Nationalists like David Duke, or his staggering anti-LGBTQ record of votes, maybe he’d have a change of heart there after a woman who’s the embodiment of what Scalise’s pals hate saved his life, right?

NOPE. Four months after a lesbian saved his life, Steve Scalise learned nothing, and went to speak at the “Voter Values Summit”, an annual conference run by the anti-gay hate group the Family Research Council. The same FRC that’s run by Tony Perkins, a longtime GOP Platform Committee member who as a state legislator, paid tens of thousands of dollars in 1996 for David Duke’s mailing list. This is like if the ending of a Christmas Carol saw Ebeneezer Scrooge rolling around in a pile of money in bed with a cut to Tiny Tim dying in bed while his family weeps, frankly. The villain, even when presented with his own mortality and given a last chance to change is like, “NAW, F*** IT.”

Scalise defended Donald Trump for celebrating Congressman Greg Gianforte having body-slammed a reporter, saying he was just “ribbing” the Montana Congressman, and not endorsing violence. Well, wouldn’t you know it, within a week of that statement, a Trump supporter mailed off pipe bombs to CNN, Robert DeNiro, and a bunch of high-ranking Democrats, so maybe Scalise is just full of s*** about not seeing a link.

[worstblogever]

Here's what infuriating things Scalise has done as a legislator the past two years:

• January 23rd, 2019: Rep. Scalise voted against HR 648, because he was gleefully enjoying the longest government shutdown in history.
• February 28th, 2019: Scalise votes against HR 1112, a bill which would have required universal background checks on all firearm purchases, and close the gun show loophole.
• April 4th, 2019: Steve Scalise is one of 158 Republicans who choose to vote against the re-authorization of the Violence Against Women Act.
• May 17th, 2019: Scalise votes against The Equality Act, which would have prevented discrimination towards Americans based on their gender identity or sexual orientation.
• June 4th, 2019: Rep. Scalise votes against the Dreamers Act, because he’s too xenophobic and partisan to care about immigration reform.
• July 16th, 2019: Steve Scalise votes against a resolution to condemn Donald Trump for his racist statements that four people of color in Congress should “go back where they came from”.
• October 23rd, 2019: Scalise is one of 41 Republicans who, while staring down the possibility of Donald Trump being impeached, stage a ridiculous publicity stunt in response by crashing a classified impeachment inquiry hearing for a “protest”.
• December 18th, 2019: Scalise ignores his Congressional duty to hold a president who has been proven to commit high crimes and misdemeanors accountable and votes against the impeachment of Donald Trump.
• May 15th, 2020: Scalise votes against the HEROES Act, to further support the healthcare industry and citizens affected by the Covid-19 pandemic.

Steve Scalise has, for about the past year, been doing a full-on run off a cliff at top speed for King Lemming, aka Donald Trump. On Halloween 2019, Scalise gave a speech on the floor of the House where he deemed Congressman Adam Schiff’s efforts in the Trump impeachment inquiry regarding Ukraine to be “Soviet Style”, showing up with a giant posterboard of the Kremlin to present alongside himself. This voracious defense, however, only served to remind the public that Trump has that whole bizarre allegiance to the Kremlin, himself, that impacts the majority of decisions he makes from the Oval Office. Days later, he went on Fox News to be interviewed by Chris Wallace, and tried claiming the members of the Trump administration testifying in the impeachment inquiry should not be believed because they are partisan and simply, “Adam Schiff’s witnesses”. Most to that point had been apolitical career diplomats, but one was a member of Trump’s National Security Council, and another was on Vice President Pence’s staff. While he was at it, Scalise also praised Donald Trump’s decision to pardon war criminals, falsely claiming that by doing so, it would increase troop morale.

In the buildup to the 2020 election, Scalise also defended the Trump campaign’s use of doctored video of a disabled activist interviewing Joe Biden to make it appear Biden wanted to defund the police. Voters in Louisiana’s 1st District saw no reason to reject a guy with a history of palling around with white nationalists from lying to prop up a deceitful white nationalist president and re-elected him with 72% of the vote. Thus, his district will be represented by this little toad for another two years.