-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
US PoliERA 2018 |OT6| An Unmitigated Disaster
- Thread starter Midnight Jon
- Start date
- Status
Reality has set in. Canada isn't fucking around and Nieto is being replaced by a Populist in Mexico TODAY. He's cornered himself again all on his own because you want to bet he didn't even know Mexico had elections a few months after he went on the tariff tantrum?
He probably thought Mexico was a hellhole that didn't even have elections.
Yup. Perfect message to centrists/partisan-agnostics, while also completely shuts down GOP by making them play defense.
Have a Blue Message, a Purple Message, and a Red Message, (excite, entice, and depress) and that covers the latter two.
They never left.
I don't know if we want to get into ice abolishing debates with Trump, he'll bring up the fact that without ice our drinks are going to get very warm and we don't like warm drinks.
Cold drinks are the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. They are the opium of the people.
If that's the best they can come up with then that probably explains why they've been so ineffective in the special elections. This stuff is alot easier to do when you can just attack and make a scapegoat out of Hillary, now they don't have a boogeyman to rally people against.
I mean ,I really think it's just Hillary they can scapegoat, really.
Remember: the campaign to stop Hillary Clinton began when she was First Lady...of Arkansas. She's been attacked by the right for longer than most of us here have been alive.
Last edited:
But why? What's been so threatening about Hillary from the beginning that made the Republicans so keen on attacking her?
Because everyone knew she had more political chops then Bill did. And that they were a power couple.
And she just didn't stay on the sidelines like most governor's wives do.
She didn't quit her job and be a "good housewife."
That's it. That's all it took. The idea, I surmise, would be to make it look like Hillary Clinton was uppity and shrill, and hurt Bill Clinton through Hillary because he couldn't control his wife.
She made her own decisions as it pertained to her career, and when Bill became President, Hillary didn't stop, she campaigned, she pushed for liberal -- and I mean liberal -- reforms, in healthcare especially. That's where the ACA came from -- the rightwing (at the time they were only JUST starting to get as bad as they are now) plan that was presented as an alternative to the single payer plan that Hillary was pushing in public.
She's been the boogeyman because it basically runs counter to what Republicans wanted: A man who works, a woman who stays home and tends to the children. A woman who wouldn't shut up and do as she was told, but had her own ideas, her own plans, her own career. She wasn't dependent on Bill, like women should be, which was t he biggest existential threat to the Republican Party. A wife who does as her husband bids is a wife that votes Republican. This was a direct counterpunch to the culture of womens' independence and womens' rights fights that were going on throughout that time.
Shithole. They're called shitholes.
The main three planks of the Democrats' Better Deal agenda were the $15 minimum wage, an infrastructure bill and something to do with trade. I don't think they ever actually specified what the trade bill would entail, but Trump chickening out on NAFTA gives them yet another opportunity to eat his lunch (but why would you, it's probably like six Big Macs and a bucket of KFC). Much like how his utter failure to do anything on healthcare or infrastructure gives them an opening for Medicare For All as well as Schumer's trillion dollar infrastructure bill. Who knows, maybe they could even trick him into signing them.
True. They're probably more like a quarter-step.
Sorry to bring this back up because I didn't get chance to respond last night, but I do note that the biggest issue will be mass migration, but considering the environmental issues that we're going to be having in the short-term, that sort of mass migration is going to happen anyway. People aren't going to stick around a place that is unlivable for humans because of borders and immigration laws. In other words, might as well start working out how to deal with the stresses caused by mass migration now.
And I'm not shocked that economists love the idea of open borders. I do, too, in the sense that I would love to take my labor specialty (teaching English) to another country without having to worry about visas and immigration lawyers, etc., etc. I would just like to go where the market needs me with no stress. The idea of a lack of barriers between labor and the places that need that labor is probably a dream for the typical economist.
I liked how her campaign just used "G" because they knew no one knew how to say or spell that.
I don't see how you can guarantee a job in a capitalist economy and constitution. That others range from trivial to feasible, but you can't guarantee even a government job in a country that has literally abandoned normal infrastructure projects.
"Reading and writing" sounds extreme, but the judge is correct - and I imagine lots of other countries we consider civilized would have roughly the same gap in their constitutions. No reason we shouldn't amend it tho. But I bet religious home schoolers would object to ANY kind of basic standards.
To add to this, you know the episode in the last seasons of Parks and Rec where Ben is running for a seat and the media questions Leslie about a bakeoff that goes awry? Because how dare a candidate's wife not want to bake?
http://time.com/4459173/hillary-bill-clinton-cookies-history/
Yea, 1992. I was only 6 and I remember this shit. That's the level of pettiness and venality that Clinton got her entire goddamn career.
Chris Wallace really is a hack who likes the image of being serious. He glossed over trumps hatred he riled up for the media as a given to get to complaining about a couple people who mentioned trump with the Annapolis shooting and also ignored Hannity who blamed it on Maxine Waters.
..
i cant fucking believe this shit.
everyone should be running against these judges
It'd be interesting if a platform that included amending the constitution to expand fundamental rights to explicitly include housing, healthcare, food, education, and connectivity (probably a better term for it, basically internet or other communications) would amass votes. Obviously not something we could do, but it's hard to argue against, and provides a big, clear idea policy proposal. Those are always popular.
I get that you're kinda doing a bit, but I think that there does need to be an accounting on the left of why our organized labor movement ground out and other countries' didn't. US Unions are, historically, not super great on a lot of issues in ways that's diminished their popularity and political power. Corruption is the big obvious one - Hoffa et. al. being the archetypal examples - but they failed hugely to anticipate and expand to include intersectional ideas as well.
This idea that Republicans are the ones with serious economic chops is one of their greatest successes (probably due mostly to Autodidact's Strong White Daddy theory), and it's frankly galling. Most serious economic thought agrees squarely with the Democrats on a huge range of issues, but somehow, we're the pie-in-the-sky idealist idiots, and they're the strong, pragmatic decision makers.
I get that you're kinda doing a bit, but I think that there does need to be an accounting on the left of why our organized labor movement ground out and other countries' didn't. US Unions are, historically, not super great on a lot of issues in ways that's diminished their popularity and political power. Corruption is the big obvious one - Hoffa et. al. being the archetypal examples - but they failed hugely to anticipate and expand to include intersectional ideas as well.
This idea that Republicans are the ones with serious economic chops is one of their greatest successes (probably due mostly to Autodidact's Strong White Daddy theory), and it's frankly galling. Most serious economic thought agrees squarely with the Democrats on a huge range of issues, but somehow, we're the pie-in-the-sky idealist idiots, and they're the strong, pragmatic decision makers.
The country is going to go back further than that.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/...supreme-court-pick-could-undo-kennedys-legacy
If young liberals learn nothing else from the Trump years I hope it's that they shouldn't be relying on federal courts to make our policy and they should be campaigning on, voting for, and legislating the (often very popular) policies that are so important to them.
Is he smart enough to know killing NAFTA would probably hurt the GOP in the midterms?
The only ideas that Republicans have are a de-regulated market that affords labor no rights or protections, basically just like their equivalent (Giilded Age-era Democrats) did a hundred-plus years ago.
Mainstream Democrats have what I believe is the right idea: a well-regulated free market with robust immigration and visa programs and a strong social safety net to support workers that are displaced from the market.
I'm really discouraged about NAFTA being under attack because we should be using NAFTA (and CAFTA) as a stepping stone to a North American Union, ideally.
I think part of it is that they see these rich assholes in america and think "if the US wants to be a rich country, it needs to be an asshole country." Morality is seen as antithetical to success. When the left proposes something that helps people, it is assumed that it is at the expense of economic success. Also why they think political correctness makes us weak etc.
I remember people talking about Hillary aiming to be president ever since Bill left office and probably since even before that. GOP been afraid of her forever, as they would be any potential presidential opp.
I think Canada is having some serious doubts rn about that NAU lol
And they should be in this crappy timeline.
In truth, I think that Americans are too lazy (specifically Republicans) for an open market. They think that a good job with lots of benefits is their fucking birthright, and they shouldn't have to compete with anyone for it. Racism, of course, plays a part in the Republicans' idea of themselves. "I'm a white American, gimme, gimme, gimme!"
In a world where Americans understood the idea of competition in the market and how important re-training and adapting to labor markets is on an individual level, though, an NAU would be the shit.
No LATINOS would call themselves hispanics.
Also I never have heard a Latino last name "Vargoros"
? Mexican-American here, very common to hear Hispanics call themself Hispanic. Maybe I misinterpreted you though. Could also be a uniquely Texan thing.
they're not trying to fool Hispanics, they're trying to fool white people
Trump already had her in to talk to her about it- it's already done.
I figured as much, but what the play? White people leave the Democratic Party because these fictitious Hispanics did?
Also with regards to Latinos referring to themselves as Hispanic, I've heard it all kinds of ways. Don't think it matters.
FWIW there was a follow-up tweet:
Yeah, she didn't campaign in and had zero presence in the city that cost her the election -- Las Vegas. Steve Sisolak is far more well known and far more connected in a city that prefers it's moderate, free market Democrats over the more "social" Democrats.
The sound bite from her on NPR is that she will determine if someone will uphold Roe v. Wade by asking if they will respect legal precedent.
If she actually cared about the outcome, she'd ask about, y'know, their thoughts on Roe v. Wade.
- Status