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

[Gray Lensman]

Signing amicus briefs that won't go anywhere? Sure.

Over 100 of them though? That isn't a few extremist kooks, that's the party mainstream now.

The Banana Republicans have declared war on democracy itself.

[Mister Mets]

Over 100 of them though? That isn't a few extremist kooks, that's the party mainstream now.

The Banana Republicans have declared war on democracy itself.

Do you think the amicus briefs will change anything?

Will it encouraging the judges currently smacking down the Trump campaign lawyers to do anything differently?

Meanwhile, some of the worst people in the world are at each others' throats and I think that is beautiful.



But will the media do lots of "Republicans in disarray" stories now?

The difference is that the media (I'll define this as everyone in the decision-making process behind a "disarray" news item) generally likes Democrats. They're worried about Democrats in disarray because the majority want Democrats to win.

They don't write about Republicans in disarray because they see it as a good thing.

It increases the chances of their preferred culturally left policy outcomes.

[Panfoot]

Why the hell does it matter whether it will change anything? A huge part of your party just gave the biggest a-okay they can with attempting to overthrow a legitimate election. Jesus.

[Jack Dracula]

Why the hell does it matter whether it will change anything? A huge part of your party just gave the biggest a-okay they can with attempting to overthrow a legitimate election. Jesus.

Tacit Approval

[Mister Mets]

The **** you listed are hardly even liberal opinions.

Open Boarders. We've always had open boarders. That's how a country that is 99% immigrant works. It's not a "liberal opinion" to have open boarders so much as it's a Conservative opinion that they, for once, shouldn't be. I'm not defending how the country operates because some people think it should be different now that open racism is chill.

Late Term Abortion isn't even an actual thing. It's a construct. And it's one largely propagated by conservatives in their anti abortion arguments. Define "late term abortion" for me. Then tell me who gets them, how often and why. You can't, because "later term abortion" is nothing. It isn't a thing. Nobody defines it the same way. There is no definable parameter for "late term abortion." Abortions will happen regardless, so they should be legal so they can be performed safely. Being against healthcare is again a conservative ideal, not a liberal one. It's also a religious one, which:

Lack of respect for religious people. This is just more conservative boogeyman bullshit. We're happy to leave you be, if you'd let us live our lives how we best see fit. Go scream about Sharia Law while trying to enact your own version of it somewhere else.

Reparations are never happening, so why even talk about it? I don't know the last time I honestly heard a "liberal" talk about reparations seriously. This is just nonsense, dude.

All Cops Are Bastards... This is not a liberal belief. It just isn't. Spray painting **** on walls after protests doesn't make something a political belief. More conservative boogeyman hogwash.

how far they're willing to go to lower the rate of gun violence. This has been said time and time and time and time again. But nobody, and I mean nobody, is actually trying to take the guns away. Never mind the complete lack of infrastructure to do it, and the bloodshed it would cause in trying. Sensible gun laws going forward.

The rest, well, those involve far more nuanced conversations than I'm having on here.

But, the point stands that nothing on your list is something I would feel the need to hide my opinion on if asked, nor anything that would make me feel the need to hide my "liberal" values and opinions, because I don't think basic human rights, and healthcare access are wild ideas that I need to hide from the public.

Next.

Open Borders is generally seen as a left-wing political position. In polls, it does seem that a majority of Democratic voters are against any net increase in immigration, but this is not the stated position of elected officials or activists.

https://news.gallup.com/file/poll/24...mmigration.pdf

I did also clearly refer to "so-called late-term abortion" to sidestep that whole semantic argument. If you wish, we could refer to it as abortion after 21 weeks.

By all accounts, the majority are not due to situations in which the mother's life is in danger or the fetus is not viable. Any laws can be crafted to avoid those exceptions.

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R45161.pdf

In modern American politics, abortion is a partisan political issue.

Whether progressives are happy to leave religious people alone if religious people didn't make any policy decisions that would affect them is a separate question from whether they universally respect religious views. Plenty of people on the left think less of the faithful.

Reparations came up in the primary debates. Prominent democrats give lip service to it.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...-harris-castro

Gun-owners are aware of what policies would be necessary to make a dent in the number of gun deaths.

I'm not claiming that every Democrat/ liberal/ progressive will hide their views. Some would be open about it, even if it would result in professional penalties and social ostracization. Some would not. Just as plenty of conservatives will be very open about all of their controversial views, and some will be more quiet about it. It's going to depend on the individual as well as the setting.

Why the hell does it matter whether it will change anything? A huge part of your party just gave the biggest a-okay they can with attempting to overthrow a legitimate election. Jesus.

If it doesn't change anything, it's bullshit posturing. I don't like bullshit posturing, and would be glad to see a movement against it in all forms, but that's different from an attempted coup.

[Wildling]

Why the hell does it matter whether it will change anything? A huge part of your party just gave the biggest a-okay they can with attempting to overthrow a legitimate election. Jesus.

It's your fault for thinking smearing democracy in the first place doesn't make you a baby bad at politics, that needs to be kept in check by conservatives, I guess.

Sometimes I miss the drive-by Spidey avatar Trumpist trolls. At least the gig was always flaring up with them.

[Joker]

Well, ya know Mets, after what your party is pulling right now, I see no reason to hide or be ashamed of any liberal beliefs in public. At least we didn’t try to fucking destroy democracy and overturn an obviously fair election!

[Adam Allen]

I asked this before Mets and now I will ask you again. Do you think the democrats would go this far if the situation was reversed?

Signing amicus briefs that won't go anywhere? Sure.

The question was not whether you think the briefs will end up having the election reversed, though. You say it's just "political posturing". So, does that mean you think everyone who is afraid someone may get hurt over this, or those saying how it is an attempted coup, it weakens our democracy ... these people are just being paranoid? Alarmist? Making mountains out of molehills, I guess?

Anyway, thanks for explaining what you were referring to, on the gun thing. I would disagree on categorizing it as contentious, however. At least, not such that I think most would avoid discussing it. I say this because I am one who would be all for getting rid of so many guns floating around out there, if I thought it were feasible at all. I would also not hesitate to tell anyone that, despite that I do know there are those on the left who disagree, for various reasons.

I think we avoid getting into arguments about it, just because I am not willing to bother putting a ton of effort into arguing for something that will not happen. It's the same as for reparations for African Americans. I would, and have, tell anyone that I am in favor of it, and will explain why if people want to talk about it. But, also not going to pour a ton of energy into trying to get a whole room to agree with me about it, because ... again, even if that whole room ends up agreeing, we're not going to see that actually happen.

Or, for that matter -- I believe a socialist economic system is more compatible with democracy than capitalism. And I think dissolving nations so we can address class exploitation is the only possible path to world peace; and, ironically, that that is probably impossible without a worldwide revolution.

Obviously, lots of people on the left disagree with me on that stuff; those on the right, even more so. But, I was willing to express these opinions, even when I was in the military. I don't know, I guess I'm agreeing with the estimate that I think right-wingers are more likely to hide their opinions.

[JCAll]

Since it's sort of relevant to recent discussions, guess who just introduced a bill in the House targeting transgender athletes? It's our old friend "Two Delegate" Tulsi.
It'll probably go nowhere, but I thought it was bizarre that it happened just now. I also wasn't expecting her to have one more controversy on the way out. Silly me.

[worstblogever]

Why the hell does it matter whether it will change anything? A huge part of your party just gave the biggest a-okay they can with attempting to overthrow a legitimate election. Jesus.

IOKIYAR, enhanced.

[shooshoomanjoe]

Nevermind it's been mentioned here already.

[Tendrin]

Hey, WBE. Can we get a profile for Georgia House Speaker David Ralston?
https://www.northwestgeorgianews.com...0b97c672d.html

One of Georgia’s most powerful Republican lawmakers wants the General Assembly to pick the state’s chief election official instead of voters following backlash over the 2020 presidential election.

House Speaker David Ralston, R-Blue Ridge, said Thursday that he’ll seek a constitutional amendment in the upcoming legislative session that starts next month to let state lawmakers appoint Georgia’s secretary of state.

Ralston said his decision comes amid a flood of complaints from his North Georgia constituents over Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s handling of the presidential election.

[worstblogever]

Hey, WBE. Can we get a profile for Georgia House Speaker David Ralston?
https://www.northwestgeorgianews.com...0b97c672d.html

Hmmm... maybe? I mean, I'm booked full of Covidiots and Qanon supporters to just get them out of the way between now and the end of 2021.

That's not a typo.

[Gray Lensman]

Do you think the amicus briefs will change anything?

Will it encouraging the judges currently smacking down the Trump campaign lawyers to do anything differently?

Maybe not this time, but I'm sure that from now on every time a Republican loses a close election, or the presidential election no matter if it is close or not, we will see this reaction from now on. AGs are where future governors and judges come from, and 18 of them are openly supporting this garbage. Plus about half the Republican house membership. Next time will state legislatures take the next step and try to overrule the vote? Will the judiciary be willing to sign off on it next time?

If it was just Trump and a few loud voices I'd be less concerned, but...It. Is. Too. Many. Of. Them. This is the Republican party now, openly declaring themselves the enemy of democracy itself.

[Tendrin]

Hmmm... maybe? I mean, I'm booked full of Covidiots and Qanon supporters to just get them out of the way between now and the end of 2021.

That's not a typo.

I swear to god you need a ko-fi so I can send you beer money.