All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

[aja_christopher]

And personally, I take issues with your description of religious minorities and environmentalists as Democratic "crazies". As for Communists, they have their own party.

The fact that he would equate environmentalists and religious minorities (such as Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, etc) on the "left" with the bigots and racists on the "right" speaks volumes.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Again -- these aren't complex issues -- they are simply divisive issues.

The Democratic party and "liberals" (like Obama) -- generally speaking -- support gay rights, abortion rights, the Voting Rights Act, affordable health care for all, and gun control legislation.

Republicans and "conservatives" (like Pence) -- generally speaking -- do not.

https://www.diffen.com/difference/De..._vs_Republican

Even Trump recognizes this simple truth, which is why he was able to play the Republican party like a fiddle last election.

Moreover, I notice that you failed to address how the Republican party wasted trillions of dollars and destroyed thousands of lives with the Iraq War while simultaneously presiding over one of the worst recessions in our nation's history the last time they were in power, and how Republicans paved the way for Trump to take office and are now doing nothing to prevent further Russian meddling in our elections.

That's kind of good marketing though. As Mets pointed out, you couldn't get a Democrat to be caught dead on stage supporting gay marriage in Obama's first election. The party itself didn't really make the shift until over half the country supported it and it became politically safe to do so and by that point it was just a matter of time. As far as healtcare, as Democrats loved to point out in 2012, the absolute best case of affordable health care in any state in the country occurred in MA under Republican governor Mitt Romney. I'll give you gun control, but Democrats are terribly inept cowards at it and either don't know enough about the issue to push anything meaningful or are too timid to push anything impact because they are scared of Republicans, if Democrats were serious they would have done something on it.

For the most parts it's just scraps they throw the base.

[aja_christopher]

That's kind of good marketing though. As Mets pointed out, you couldn't get a Democrat to be caught dead on stage supporting gay marriage in Obama's first election.

But now they do so it's a moot point.

The fact remains that it's now the Republicans -- for the most part -- who don't support said rights, and that's the side that Mets has chosen.

If it weren't for the Republicans obstructing the Democratic party at nearly every opportunity, most of what you are complaining about wouldn't even be an issue right now.

[numberthirty]

But now they do so it's a moot point.

The fact remains that it's now the Republicans -- for the most part -- who don't support said rights, and that's the side that Mets has chosen.

If it might be a reason why voters aren't exactly trampling each other to show up and vote for them, it may not be the moot point you believe it to be.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

But now they do so it's a moot point.

The fact remains that it's now the Republicans who don't support said rights.

No it's not a moot point. When it mattered, Democrats didn't step up. They were cowards and on the wrong side of history. They bandwagon'd it when it became convenient. This is why independents who would otherwise vote Democrats can't stand them. They are full of it and try to pretend they are something they aren't. The parties full of cowards who never took a brave stance unless they had enough political cover. They aren't the party of gay marriage. Gay rights groups are. The Democrats just road coattails when it became convenient. Pretty much every Republican outside of a few crazies all but gave up on fighting it at the same time. At least one part was honest about standing in the way of progress. The Democrats were just complicit in their silence and unwillingness until they pretended they were always secretly champions of the cause. It's insulting.

[The Overlord]

Fair question. A lot of it comes down to regulations and spending. I think Democrats often want to spend money poorly, and advocate for excessive regulations.

Except how many Republican Presidents succeeded in reducing the national debt? How much did the Iraq War cost? How much money will Trump's plans to increase the nuclear arsenal cost?

Republicans insist they are for lower spending, except with the military they spend like drunken sailors. The US spends more then the next 8 countries combined on the military, you will never reduce the debt with that level of spending.

Also those tax cuts will add to the debt, and a lot of the gains from them, such as they are, will be affected by the tariffs Trump will impose on foreign goods and the counter tariffs other countries will put on US goods.

The idea that the GOP is a small government, fiscally conservative party, seems like a overly idealized version of them that does not reflect reality, the GOP always seems to comfortable increasing the size of the national debt, when they are in power. Dick Cheney said as much.

Also the GOP has been attracting some bad people lately:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/05/polit...ier/index.html

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...nehlen/551312/


Not to mention Roy Moore.

[aja_christopher]

No it's not a moot point. When it mattered, Democrats didn't step up.

Except they did step up, which is why the Affordable Health Care Act passed, gay marriage is now legal, and they continue push for gun control even as we speak.

If it might be a reason why voters aren't exactly trampling each other to show up and vote for them, it may not be the moot point you believe it to be.

I'm not even going to waste my time arguing this -- you didn't show up, and you've got your Trump in office now.

Enjoy.

[numberthirty]

I'm not even going to waste my time arguing this -- you've got your Trump in office now.

Enjoy.

That this is the justification folks throw out when you point this out?

Telling.

[aja_christopher]

That this is the justification folks throw out when you point this out?

Telling.

Not justifying anything, 30 -- just not wasting my time debating politics with someone who couldn't even be bothered to vote.

Actions will always speak louder than words.

If you -- and Knight -- don't want to support the Democratic party, then don't -- it's your life to do with as you choose.

Except how many Republican Presidents succeeded in reducing the national debt? How much did the Iraq War cost? How much money will Trump's plans to increase the nuclear arsenal cost?

Republicans insist they are for lower spending, except with the military they spend like drunken sailors. The US spends more then the next 8 countries combined on the military, you will never reduce the debt with that level of spending.

Also those tax cuts will add to the debt, and a lot of the gains from them, such as they are, will be affected by the tariffs Trump will impose on foreign goods and the counter tariffs other countries will put on US goods.

The idea that the GOP is a small government, fiscally conservative party, seems like a overly idealized version of them that does not reflect reality, the GOP always seems to comfortable increasing the size of the national debt, when they are in power. Dick Cheney said as much.

Quoted because maybe if I do so, he'll actually address the question at hand.

At this point I don't even expect a reasonable response -- but I'm still curious as to how he can stomach this kind of hypocrisy with a clean conscience.

[numberthirty]

Not justifying anything, 30 -- just not wasting my time debating politics with someone who couldn't even be bothered to vote.

Actions will always speak louder than words.

Apparently not.

You just tried to tell us that Democratic inaction was a "Moot" point.

Now, you are saying that actions speak louder than words.

Seems like that pair are butting heads.

[aja_christopher]

Apparently not.

You just tried to tell us that Democratic inaction was a "Moot" point.

No, I pointed out that the Democratic party did act (gay marriage, health care, Wall Street regulation, federal minimum wage hike, DOJ investigations of police brutality, DACA, etc) and is still attempting to doing so as we speak (gun control, immigration bill, Russia investigation, etc).

https://washingtonmonthly.com/magazi...complishments/

Thanks for further proving why it's a waste of time to even bother discussing this with you.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Except they did step up, which is why the Affordable Health Care Act passed, gay marriage is now legal, and they continue push for gun control even as we speak.



I'm not even going to waste my time arguing this -- you didn't show up, and you've got your Trump in office now.

Enjoy.

Gay marriage had nothing to do with Democrats. Honestly it's ironic but the first state to have gay marriage and the first state to have the healthcare they wanted passed had a Republican governor (granted Romney wasn't a fan of gay marriage, neither was the last two Democratic Presidential nominees at the time). Hell the deciding votes on gay marriage in the Supreme Court were Republican nominees.

As far as gun control, as I've said Demcrats are cowards on that issue and would rather posture and fight for meaningless reforms that WOULDN'T DO A THING to save anybody because they are afraid of being labled nuts. They aren't serious about it. They just use it to rally their base in the safest way possible, not pushing for anything they know would get them push back, and then let it die when it doesn't amount to anything.

If Democrats actually had guts we wouldn't be where we are right now. They are spineless cowards that like to come in at the tail end of already decided issues. They are the Lannisters of American politics and then can't understand why people on the right side of history don't fall in line with them. It's pathetic. It's a distraction. It's disingenuous.

[aja_christopher]

Gay marriage had nothing to do with Democrats. Honestly it's ironic but the first state to have gay marriage and the first state to have the healthcare they wanted passed had a Republican governor (granted Romney wasn't a fan of gay marriage, neither was the last two Democratic Presidential nominees at the time). Hell the deciding votes on gay marriage in the Supreme Court were Republican nominees.

As far as gun control, as I've said Demcrats are cowards on that issue and would rather posture and fight for meaningless reforms that WOULDN'T DO A THING to save anybody because they are afraid of being labled nuts. They aren't serious about it. They just use it to rally their base in the safest way possible, not pushing for anything they know would get them push back, and then let it die when it doesn't amount to anything.

If Democrats actually had guts we wouldn't be where we are right now. They are spineless cowards that like to come in at the tail end of already decided issues. They are the Lannisters of American politics and then can't understand why people on the right side of history don't fall in line with them. It's pathetic. It's a distraction. It's disingenuous.

Ok.

Later.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Ok.

Later.

Thought so.

[numberthirty]

No, I pointed out that the Democratic party did act (gay marriage, health care, Wall Street regulation, federal minimum wage hike, DOJ investigations of police brutality, DACA, etc) and is still attempting to doing so as we speak (gun control, immigration bill, Russia investigation, etc).

https://washingtonmonthly.com/magazi...complishments/

Thanks for further proving why it's a waste of time to even bother discussing this with you.

No it's not a moot point. When it mattered, Democrats didn't step up. They were cowards and on the wrong side of history. They bandwagon'd it when it became convenient. This is why independents who would otherwise vote Democrats can't stand them. They are full of it and try to pretend they are something they aren't. The parties full of cowards who never took a brave stance unless they had enough political cover. They aren't the party of gay marriage. Gay rights groups are. The Democrats just road coattails when it became convenient. Pretty much every Republican outside of a few crazies all but gave up on fighting it at the same time. At least one part was honest about standing in the way of progress. The Democrats were just complicit in their silence and unwillingness until they pretended they were always secretly champions of the cause. It's insulting.

Someone is laying out clear periods of "Inaction" here.

Just because some folks seem to want to ignore those periods while trying to point to Democrats getting with it way after the fact, that doesn't mean that most folks don't see the prior periods of inaction for what they actually were.