The End of the World: A Political Thread. A New Hope coming soon!
- Thread starter Plainview
- Start date
- Status
The Great Lakes are very wet too. Tremendous wetness. Like you've never seen before.
A flat out lie too. His actual budget cuts the initiative 90%, but I'm sure the red hat wearing morons won't realize they are being lied to.
A flat out lie too. His actual budget cuts the initiative 90%, but I'm sure the red hat wearing morons won't realize they are being lied to.
Conservatives have been trying to destroy the Great Lakes for years now.
I know most seem focused on Sanders, Warren, Harris, Beto and Biden and while I like them all as well (Harris the least of the bunch but she's grown on me a little) I'm more interested in Yang, Buttigieg and Gabbard. They seem to have some good ideas and seem to want to talk to more moderate voters as well which we'll need to get Trump out. I know a few here don't like Gabbard because they seem to think she's some kind of Russian operative lol but she's a much better choice than Trump I'd vote for any one of the people listed in a general but I like what the newer faces that aren't getting as much attention by the MSM are saying.
I just hope they don't focus every interview on his sexuality, he doesn't need to hide from it but once it's know it's known and they should focus on his ideas and what he wants to do for the country. Sadly I can already see nearly every interviewer introducing him as the first openly gay Presidential candidate.
Yeah but he does it in a way that's not obsessing on it, I just don't want everyone to introduce him as "the first openly gay" all the time. It's one thing if you are talking about your own life but the interviewer always bringing it up like they are putting you in a box is different IMO. Same thing with Yang, I know he won't win but if he did they'd focus on him being Asian as if we all can't see that, the same thing would happen with one of the female candidates even though they wouldn't be the first anymore.
I don't like her because she is trash and pulling the "both sides" card out of her ass for no good reason.
Anyway I like Buttigieg and want Yang at the debate. If we are going to talk about purely beating Trump then its Beto all day. Has the moderate appeal without the Biden baggage and has the passion to get people excited.
Pointing out that both sides are acting like jerks at times is just being honest, Trump and his hardcore supporters are a******s for sure but there are some on the left that should be called out at times as well. That's not creating a false equivalency because it's just pointing out that both can be doing bad things but one is much worse.
Trump is to blame but there is an argument to be made that Dems have dug in too deeply on defending illegal immigrants.
She supports a lot of progressive ideas, you don't seem to know much about her.
Which she said nothing about so my question is it fair to blame both sides when both sides had an agreement which was passed before Ann Coulter bitched about Trump?
It wasn't even like its a good political stance where you can score some points which is the kind of thing you can understand even if you don't agree.
The biggest problem is the GOP senate staying on the sidelines and not supporting Trump but being too afraid to vote against him.
The GOP doesn't want to stand with him, because they know his plan is moronic, but they won't appear to stand against him because they don't want to look bad to the alt right.
This is why we have a President and not a dictator. Congress is supposed to play a fundamental role in steering the country. At this point most in the GOP are terrified to even approach the wheel.
Trump is just making speeches and doesn't actually want a wall.
The Democrats are in a tough spot. Sure, they should be willing to compromise on the border (and they have in the past many times), but how do you compromise with Trump's rhetoric?
Trump has painted himself into a corner no doubt about it, if he compromises in any real way like an adult his base may finally start to realize his talk is just that , talk and he doesn't mean a word of what he says.
I do get how some could look at the dem position of no funding at all even when they offered to take less, after they threw dreamers under the bus more than once all of the sudden they grew a spine when people weren't getting paychecks? Yeah they " won" that in the end and Trump ended up taking the brunt of the blame which he should but if I were an employee who was living paycheck to paycheck and I saw that I could have my utilities shut off, miss a house payment or miss a month paying rent etc I may have looked at the Dems and thought maybe they should have been a little more willing to do something.
I think that is fine for them to say but someone running to be the Democratic nominee knows they shouldn't or couldn't cave to his blackmail. Its an unnecessary attempt to make everyone look bad in a situation when most of the country knew it was all Trump.
It would be different if Trump stuck to it all along and didn't decide at the last minute he wouldn't sign.
I get that but people were going unpaid for a month, when it was floated that the Republicans were willing to compromise and the Dems said no there were two ways to take that. One you could be happy that they said no funding at all for the wall or two that they were being unwilling to compromise and were now sharing in the blame for the suffering of people who weren't getting paid.
I guess that depends on whether you think floating extending daca to be a compromise when it was going to be anyway whether Trump liked it or not.
But really that is besides the point. We both know logic says Trump was to blame. We both know the public mostly blamed Trump. So with that in mind it kind of makes it clear what kind of a leader she would be if she thinks they should just be that weak when they are holding all the cards.
Trump doesn't actually want a wall. A lot of his big donors are the companies that just happen to contract out with the gov't to imprison illegal immigrants. It is just a racist dog whistle to distract people away from the fact that they are gutting health care, giving tax cuts to the very rich, and basically set us up for another GOP driven recession and deficit crisis.
The older I get, the more frustrating it is to watch the same cycles happen over and over.
The older I get, the more frustrating it is to watch the same cycles happen over and over.
I just try to put myself in the shoes of someone who's living paycheck to paycheck who's not getting paid over partial funding for a stupid wall and I hear one side is finally ready to negotiate and I think "maybe this will be over and I can pay my rent" and then the other side is saying they won't give at all regardless of who's right morally it would still make me feel like I want them to make a deal so I can afford to live.
No, he really doesn't. This is a very common technique used by both sides in politics. Identify a problem and pretend to want to fix it, but what you're really doing is using it as a way to constantly blast the other side.
Trump's wall is this. A lot of Democrats when they talk about gun control is the same thing. You know the party mainliners would never, ever dare to propose actual gun law changes outside of really simple stuff.
You have to remember where the "wall" talk came from. In the primary there were at one point 9 candidates running IIRC. Of course that's 9 people all running on mostly the same platforms. So, you need a way to differentiate yourself from the pack. Trump's people saw something - they all compromised on immigration. Boom - build a wall starts.
The rich hire immigrants all the time in their businesses. The issue is a distraction. He loves to play up the lie that the Democrats are "soft" on immigration (never mind that the facts show that Obama was actually tough on immigration).
Since immigration was never a major problem to begin with, he can point to his lies and say he's "fixing" the problem.
The only reason he doesn't back down is that Trump is Trump and he doesn't know the meaning of compromise. The Democrats would have given him funding for reasonable border improvements in exchange for DACA. Everyone would, because it isn't nearly as difficult an issue as Trump makes it out to be.
Initially it was a a primary cry. Now, this mother f***er, and his ego, want a monument to himself. That would be the wall.
I disagree. He wants the wall. He has good reason to want it. Illegal immigration is a serious problem. Also, he promised the wall (very loudly), and he wants to do what he promised. Also, his base wants the wall, and he wants to do what his base wants. Plus, at this point, he's got a lot of ego riding on getting some type of "wall" built.
- Status