• The GiftBot 2.0 Launch Giveaway Extravaganza has come to a close with an astounding 8073 games given away to the community by 696 members, a huge success thanks to you! The gifting now continues with more official prizes in the new Gaming Giveaways |OT|. Leftover Steam codes are also being given away to the PC Gaming Era community.

Nancy Pelosi: "The new House Democratic majority will swiftly pass legislation to re-open government in January" if shutdown is continued into January

Oct 30, 2017
707
A lot of progressive young people grew up in the shadow of Fox News and conservative parents. They've internalized the rhetoric about Democrats.
I get the sense from most of your posts that someone could be a full-blown anarcho-communist and you'd still say their dissatisfaction with the Democraric party was fueled by a right-wing perspective because they're not the exact kind of poli-sci liberal you and poliera are
 

Autodidact

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,575
I get the sense from most of your posts that someone could be a full-blown anarcho-communist and you'd still say their dissatisfaction with the Democraric party was fueled by a right-wing perspective because they're not the exact kind of poli-sci liberal you and poliera are
Wow, I have been exposed. Take my scalp. What prize do you get for finally nailing one of us?
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
27,282
I get the sense from most of your posts that someone could be a full-blown anarcho-communist and you'd still say their dissatisfaction with the Democraric party was fueled by a right-wing perspective because they're not the exact kind of poli-sci liberal you and poliera are
Many on the "economic left" are not actually on the left on social issues. They are two separate axes, which is why you have Obama->Trump voters, who flip flop depending on whether they're angry about a recession or angry about seeing nonwhite people move into the neighborhood.

And insulting people for studying data an elections? Says everything.
 

jviggy43

Member
Oct 28, 2017
15,298
I mean, we could use her record of achievement as Speaker - you know, passing more legislation since LBJ and seldom losing votes - and her ability to extract concessions from Republicans even in the minority to judge what might happen.

But let's wait.
And funding Bush's wars, the patriot act, bailing out wall street but sure totally not worth waiting for actual actions. Taking politicians at their word is a much smarter outlook.
 

Autodidact

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,575
And funding Bush's wars, the patriot act, bailing out wall street but sure totally not worth waiting for actual actions. Taking politicians at their word is a much smarter outlook.
She voted against the Iraq War but later voted to fund and support the troops already there.

She passed the TARP because we were four days from having no economy, but I guess it would've been worth it to stick it to those bankers, huh?
 

Shoeless

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,789
I would say the chances of it lasting are entirely dependent on Fox's reaction over the next few days. If Fox applauds Trump for holding out, Trump will stay the course, and really, he has very few sensible advisors left to tell him when he's being stupid and to not do something that would be a self-inflicted wound.

On the other hand, if some of Fox's investors/sponsors suffer because of stock market fluctuations, or he does something really dumb, like fire the head of the Federal Reserve, that's going to drip down to Fox, and they'll spin up the "Trump MUST get the government running again for the good of the people," message and then he'll do it.

Really, whatever Fox says is whatever the President does. It's that simple, unfortunately. And Fox knows it.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
27,282
And funding Bush's wars, the patriot act, bailing out wall street but sure totally not worth waiting for actual actions. Taking politicians at their word is a much smarter outlook.
Being mad about Pelosi voting for TARP, which saved the country from economic collapse, sure is a telling take.
 
Oct 30, 2017
707
Wow, I have been exposed. Take my scalp. What prize do you get for finally nailing one of us?
The prize being the possibility of making you realize that you're not thinking particularly critically, creatively, or intelligently about politics, which you seem to be so very fond of. Do you even have any interest in genuinely engaging with the labour oriented left-wing?

.

And insulting people for studying data an elections? Says everything.
If you think I'm insulting "studying data" and not the broader political culture of your group, then that also says a lot.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
27,282
The prize being the possibility of making you realize that you're not thinking particularly critically, creatively, or intelligently about politics, which you seem to be so very fond of. Do you even have any interest in genuinely engaging with the labour oriented left-wing?

If you think I'm insulting "studying data" and not the broader political culture of your group, then that also says a lot.
Given that "Poly Sci" is a college major and you used it as a slur, this being a veiled anti-intellectual/anti-education attack is how I took it, yes.

edit: Ah, an edit to add anger at not being "Labour-Oriented". My take was correct.
 

Morrigan

Armoring
Moderator
Oct 24, 2017
12,494
Official Staff Communication
Let's dial it back with condescending jabs and personal attacks, please.
 

jviggy43

Member
Oct 28, 2017
15,298
She voted against the Iraq War but later voted to fund and support the troops already there.

She passed the TARP because we were four days from having no economy, but I guess it would've been worth it to stick it to those bankers, huh?
Voting against the war and then funding it isnt much of a distinction for me to be honest. And keeping the economy up by having us bail out the people responsible which ultimately gave them millions of dollars in bonuses, yeah I would have rather let it crash and then have real consequences then prop it back up and keep them all in power.
 

Autodidact

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,575
Do you even have any interest in genuinely engaging with the labour oriented left-wing?
Define "labor-oriented left wing."

If that term means "racist white people who haven't voted Democratic in 50 years because they're still salty about civil rights and instead knowingly support the party of white supremacy because sticking it to the blacks and maintaining their status is more important than their own economic security," then no, I have no desire to engage with that group. I know what they REALLY want, and I'll fight like hell never to give it to them.

If that term means "working people of all stripes struggling to afford the necessities of life," I sympathize with and in many respects belong to that group and support a variety of policies to ameliorate their - our - material condition: increased housing stock; expansion of the EITC; a more equitable tax table, reform of K-12 education (not just subsidized college education for middle-class white people) that alters the current property-tax scheme that deliberately disadvantages schools in poor (read: brown and black) areas; infrastructure projects and telecommunicative opportunities; universal healthcare, including a public option, enhanced subsidies, Medicare/caid buy-in expansion (the latter has better cost controls), and all-payer rate setting to control premiums; and strengthening of unions and collective bargaining whenever and however possible, though we could probably have a discussion about the viability of traditional unions in a knowledge-based rather than production-based economy.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
27,282
Voting against the war and then funding it isnt much of a distinction for me to be honest. And keeping the economy up by having us bail out the people responsible which ultimately gave them millions of dollars in bonuses, yeah I would have rather let it crash and then have real consequences then prop it back up and keep them all in power.
Voting against sending them in vs voting to make sure they're not going to get killed from supply funding getting cut off is a very big distinction.

And wishing a depression on people to have "real consequences" is an unbelievably cruel perspective.
 

jviggy43

Member
Oct 28, 2017
15,298
Being mad about Pelosi voting for TARP, which saved the country from economic collapse, sure is a telling take.
Saying you dont care that hundreds of thousands of innocent people being murdered by us and it isnt a major issue (that you repeteadly never respond to) is the most telling of takes.

See above for my take on the global economy collapse.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
27,282
Saying you dont care hundreds of thousands of innocent people being murdered by us and it isnt a major issue (that you repeteadly never respond to) is the most telling of takes.

See above for my take on the global economy collapse.
I opposed the Iraq War. Years into the invasion when the war itself is technically over, supporting the troops that are there doing reconstruction/cleanup is a responsibility to them, to the US, and to Iraq.

You support subjecting the citizens of the United States to a depression in order to satisfy your desire for retribution. I find that horrific.
 

Ada

Member
Nov 28, 2017
1,668
What's stopping the dems from waiting till the 3rd and then passing a bill similar to the one that passed the senate and then having a veto proof bill?
 

jviggy43

Member
Oct 28, 2017
15,298
Voting against sending them in vs voting to make sure they're not going to get killed from supply funding getting cut off is a very big distinction.

And wishing a depression on people to have "real consequences" is an unbelievably cruel perspective.
It's difficult to have a serious conversation with someone trying to use the economy as the basis for real consequences and seems cruel who blatantly and brazenly said hundreds of thousands of innocent victims being murdered by our military isnt a serious issue worthy of our attention sorry kirbar you dont get to keep pretending like you didnt try making that argument and then try to tell people their stance is cruel.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
27,282
It's difficult to have a serious conversation with someone trying to use the economy as the basis for real consequences and seems cruel who blatantly and brazenly said hundreds of thousands of innocent victims being murdered by our military isnt a serious issue worthy of our attention sorry kirbar you dont get to keep pretending like you tried making that argument and then try to tell people their stance is cruel.
When the invasion is already over, Saddam has been deposed, and there's a lack of critical government infrastructure, pulling troops out would be a unmitigated disaster that would lead to far more death and destruction and plunge Iraq into far more internecine warfare than we saw post-Saddam in the timeline in which we stayed. The Pottery Barn rule is real. We fucked it up, it was our responsibility to help unfuck it as best we could, not double down and abandon Iraq.

Similarly, not passing TARP would have plunged the US into a depression, cost millions more people their jobs, and led to even more ruin and disaster than the timeline in which we passed it.
Absolutely nothing.

That might be what happens.
McConnell adjourning till after Xmas is a signal that he's just going to wait for Nancy.
 

TerminusFox

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,851
It's difficult to have a serious conversation with someone trying to use the economy as the basis for real consequences and seems cruel who blatantly and brazenly said hundreds of thousands of innocent victims being murdered by our military isnt a serious issue worthy of our attention sorry kirbar you dont get to keep pretending like you didnt try making that argument and then try to tell people their stance is cruel.
Your seemingly inability to see things in nuance, rather than blanket statements is troubling to say the least.
 

Sheepinator

Member
Jul 25, 2018
6,975
It is astonishing how badly Trump has been played here. First, he fails to make a deal to include his wall despite having full control of the govt. Then he foolishly states he'll own the shutdown. Then, he's goaded by television pundits to shut down the govt. Imagine that, a POTUS so easily swayed by television. It's not only laughable, it's dangerous. Finally, we're at the point where it's looking likely that Dems will open it back up on Jan 3rd anyway, so his choices are to cave on the red line he was so easily lured into drawing, or let others take the credit for cleaning up his mess. What a fool. And is he going to Mar-a-lago anyway? That's going to look great, playing golf while this is going on.
 
OP
OP
KSweeley

KSweeley

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,916
Baltimore, Maryland, USA
It is astonishing how badly Trump has been played here. First, he fails to make a deal to include his wall despite having full control of the govt. Then he foolishly states he'll own the shutdown. Then, he's goaded by television pundits to shut down the govt. Imagine that, a POTUS so easily swayed by television. It's not only laughable, it's dangerous. Finally, we're at the point where it's looking likely that Dems will open it back up on Jan 3rd anyway, so his choices are to cave on the red line he was so easily lured into drawing, or let others take the credit for cleaning up his mess. What a fool. And is he going to Mar-a-lago anyway? That's going to look great, playing golf while this is going on.
Also, I believe during a government shutdown, Secret Service agents will be working without pay which means if Trump does go to Mir-a-Lago during the shutdown, he will be forcing his protective detail to protect him with absolutely no pay.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
27,282
Also, I believe during a government shutdown, Secret Service agents will be working without pay which means if Trump does go to Mir-a-Lago during the shutdown, he will be forcing his protective detail to protect him with absolutely no pay.
This is only a partial one because one of the prior CRs actually funded a ton of stuff through 2019. Not sure if Secret Service is affected.
 

Pikachu

Traded his Bone Marrow for Pizza
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,239
Only the poors live paycheck to paycheck and they deserve what's coming.

-Republican asshole.
This is completely unfounded guessing, but I'm assuming that members of Secret Service on the president's team are probably vetted to ensure that they don't live paycheck to paycheck.
 

rjinaz

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
10,629
This is completely unfounded guessing, but I'm assuming that members of Secret Service on the president's team are probably vetted to ensure that they don't live paycheck to paycheck.
Likely. Casinos will vet you to hell and back to make sure you have good credit so as you won't try to rip them off. I'm assuming positions like this would want financial stability to ensure you wouldn't allow a hit for a few mil.
 

Jersey_Tom

Member
Dec 2, 2017
2,933
DAMN!!! So that means that Trump's protective detail is NOT getting paid then to protect him and his family.
It's a super simplistic view of what's going on that the media tends to run with.

Realistically, the money these people are owed who have to work is being recorded. Further, pay day for a lot of employees apparently was this past week, so Federal employees were paid before the holiday.

The first time that we can truly say that government employees will be working without pay will be sometime in January two weeks from now, roughly. If a deal is reached before then "not being paid" is not really going to be felt by them in any realistic fashion. Now those who've been furloughed is a different story.
 

TarNaru33

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,045
Voting against the war and then funding it isnt much of a distinction for me to be honest. And keeping the economy up by having us bail out the people responsible which ultimately gave them millions of dollars in bonuses, yeah I would have rather let it crash and then have real consequences then prop it back up and keep them all in power.
You should rethink this, it's a huge difference between those 2 things. One is authorizing a war, the other is making sure we do our part responsibly in something that was already authorized.

The war was already ongoing, trying to stop it by not funding it, can be a direct attack on troops. Political suicide, really, I dont know what you think would have came from that (nothing good)

You do not grasp the consequences of doing what you are saying, I think, otherwise you wouldn't be for that.
 

samoyed

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,974
To employ a handy metaphor here it would be the difference between refusing to embark on a ship you believe will sink versus already being on that sinking ship and refusing to help bail out the water.
 

Dark_EMT

Banned
Apr 19, 2018
571
I hope Pelosi works something out for DACA. I can’t believe this government bs holding them as polical pawns. Both Democrats and Republicans keep playing with DACA like if it’s nothing.
 

jviggy43

Member
Oct 28, 2017
15,298
Your seemingly inability to see things in nuance, rather than blanket statements is troubling to say the least.
There is no nuance to take when were drone striking innocent families which is what our conversation was regarding. I
You should rethink this, it's a huge difference between those 2 things. One is authorizing a war, the other is making sure we do our part responsibly in something that was already authorized.

The war was already ongoing, trying to stop it by not funding it, can be a direct attack on troops. Political suicide, really, I dont know what you think would have came from that (nothing good)

You do not grasp the consequences of doing what you are saying, I think, otherwise you wouldn't be for that.
So civilians in the middle east were more deserving of harm than our soldiers were? If they wanted funding they shouldn't have carried out an illegal war.
 

jviggy43

Member
Oct 28, 2017
15,298
When the invasion is already over, Saddam has been deposed, and there's a lack of critical government infrastructure, pulling troops out would be a unmitigated disaster that would lead to far more death and destruction and plunge Iraq into far more internecine warfare than we saw post-Saddam in the timeline in which we stayed. The Pottery Barn rule is real. We fucked it up, it was our responsibility to help unfuck it as best we could, not double down and abandon Iraq.

Similarly, not passing TARP would have plunged the US into a depression, cost millions more people their jobs, and led to even more ruin and disaster than the timeline in which we passed it.

McConnell adjourning till after Xmas is a signal that he's just going to wait for Nancy.
Invading Iraq in the first place was illegal, our presence there brought more harm than good, and I was referring to your egregious stance on drone strikes that posited they are not a pressing issue for us.

The 2008 collapse then resulted in a slow death rather than a catalyst of change where the same people kept their jobs and are seeing weaker regulation beings stripped away like Frank Dodd which is only going to give us a repeat of last time.
 

TarNaru33

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,045
There is no nuance to take when were drone striking innocent families which is what our conversation was regarding. I

So civilians in the middle east were more deserving of harm than our soldiers were? If they wanted funding they shouldn't have carried out an illegal war.
That's the thing you aren't getting though, those who voted against the war but for funding were the ones trying to fulfill our obligations to the troops and the people of Iraq by not leaving them with a country in disrepair and instability. Blame those who decided to go in (with no plan at that) not those who were forced to fix the screw up.

In fact, if U.S truly wanted to ensure we (U.S and Iraq citizens)came out of it better, more funding and a significantly higher occupational force was necessary.

Again, dont blame those who as Samoyed said, tried help get the water out of a sinking boat that they were forced on.

Invading Iraq in the first place was illegal, our presence there brought more harm than good, and I was referring to your egregious stance on drone strikes that posited they are not a pressing issue for us.



The 2008 collapse then resulted in a slow death rather than a catalyst of change where the same people kept their jobs and are seeing weaker regulation beings stripped away like Frank Dodd which is only going to give us a repeat of last time.
Oooh, okay I think I know what post of his your talking about, I will leave him to respond to that bit.

I will respond to your criticism of the bailouts though. I understand where you are coming from, but you must understand that doing nothing meant an economic depression.

The goal shouldn't be retribution, it should be about trying to prevent it from happening again. Though i wouldn't mind if a lot of those people went to join or had assets taken, I am not well knowledgeable of any actual laws being violated since a lot of the regulations were removed.
 
Last edited: