And yet his ratios still aren't great for such a public figure.
-
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.
US PoliERA 2019 |OT2| #PresidentPelosi
- Thread starter Midnight Jon
- Start date
- Status
Point out the people who want her to lose her job or fuck off
"There's no evidence of collusion!"
Manafort meetings with Kliminik, Stone's collusion with Wikileaks, the Trump Tower Russia Meeting, Trump's attempts at building a Trump Tower in Moscow and this is just the shit that we all know about, let alone potential classified information.
this is the extent that i will play this game
OP
OP
actually pretty weird how apparently your position is that no mistakes can be called out to a degree deemed by anyone else to be appropriate if the person making the mistakes is sufficiently "diverse"
A lot of the criticism is absolutely bad faith, but a great deal of it is good faith, and what I'm seeing from people is that I'm not allowed to criticize her for dogwhistling against my people because she's on our side. Fuck that. She should do better.
Oh jeez, I logged into facebook for the first time in a year and saw someone I used to drink with went on an insane rant about how lbgtq community is part of the bourgeois and is no friend to working people.
What a bunch of shit.
Trump absolutely, in no way made anything "clear", except for the fact that he doesn't want to pin this murder on the Saudis.
Kevin McCarthy is an embarrassment.
Amazing how the GOP gave a complete moron one of the top positions in their party because no one else wanted it. No forward thinking at all. Nancy stayed as minority leader and thus was in a prime position to take the reins when Dems got the House back.
I hadn't spoken to him in years.
Feeling disgusted and disappointed that he went down this path.
At the same time, I think it's weird to say that money needs to get out of politics, and that the Ukraine, Russia, Saudis, etc are all buying influence, yet somehow Israel is exempt from it. I get the anti-semitic angle, but to ignore the fact that the state of Israel has enormous influence over congress is foolish.
Ramussen gooses their numbers to send messages to Trump. They allowed it to tank during the shutdown to try and get him to understand how bad the shutdown was hurting him and they're probably now boosting them to try and hope he doesn't shut it down again.
I should stop looking at the Off-Topic/Etcetera section. The hangouts are cool, but the OT is just getting worse.
I'll play a different game.
Is Maduro still a legitimate president of Venezuela?
How about we get all of this money out of politics period? I know Omar to be a kind hearted and understanding person. We all knew she was talking about money in politics and not something specific to Jewish peoples. Optics, ya, whatever. AIPAC is still one of the most evil lobbies in this country alongside the NRA.
The small nonprofit I used to work at would chronically book rooms too small to make it appear like a madhouse. I hated it because it often meant complete chaos in every aspect.
There's gotta be a middle ground.
---
Convince me that this guy isn't Milo in "disguise."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.aj...on-red-carpet/38hP2ZdXXUpdDDZpnjkzlO/amp.html
Last edited:
You ain't gonna do the whole "my views have evolved", you gonna straight up jump to "I'm from Jamaica, we love the ganja!" like it's nothing?
I mean, you know there were video cameras in 2014 and there's a record of you talking about this issue, right?
Hahahahahaha
hahahahaha
hahaha
I truly think OT is worse than gaming side in a lot of ways.
Seriously. I thought the defeatism wave would cool down for a bit after the midterms, but my goodness it's only gotten worse.
It's just constant negativity and panicking.
Some issues move fast, and thinking changes fast. Progressives should be the ones who can appreciate that better than others.
Right? If you're just going to attack everyone who comes around to your view for flip-flopping, there's no incentive for them to do so.
I think it's okay to question the sincerity sometimes (see Tulsi's night and day shift on LGBT issues), but you don't build a successful social movement from everyone being 100% right from the getgo.
So do the dems want Pelosi to do the same condemnation they did to Steve King where it goes to a House vote?
Was her family not Jamaican back when she opposed recreational legalization? :P
It just feels a bit cheesy but no not a big deal
The midterms should be an example of people putting in the work and proving what we can do if we act. I think there is a group of people on this website are just wanting their own narrative to be true.
I have no problem with people changing their mind, I do have problem with people trying to pretend like they didn't change their mind, which is what Kamala Harris is doing here, and that shit is gross.
I mean, she actively campaigned against legalization as recently as 2014. That was an actual campaign issue and she went against it.
Good on her for getting on the right side of history here, but I think she also need to explain how come she was adamantly against it very recently. The fact that she smoked actually make this whole shit worse. Like, you put people in jail for shit you also did and you fought to keep that practice going.
Sincerity is almost a non factor when it comes to issues that exhibit a strong groundswell of support from the majority in the party. That's what we want, so candidates should be outwardly supportive of it regardless of previous stances or messaging.
That's certainly an issue that I would expect candidates to appear to have flip flopped on if they were on record about it years ago.
Her views haven't evolved in the way you're implying. Marijuana activist have been on her for that video for years, as seen here through comments made by journalist and marijuana activist David Downs:
But, as he notes:
https://blog.sfgate.com/smellthetruth/2014/08/06/kamala-harris-laughs-at-pot-legalization/
California moved ahead of the entire country on the pot issue largely because of the executive and legislative team that was in place during those times, not in spite of it. These people were never against anything.
Talking about how people only recently came around to an issue is just a standard part of a primary battle. See: everyone here that gives Bernie shit for his views and votes on gun control when he moved from campaigning in Vermont to campaigning nationally. Because people naturally prefer candidates that held their current position for as long as possible.
I'm not great at understanding the nuances of anti-semitism, but its kind of wild how much a tweet I read as a criticism of the influence of money in politics has exploded into DEFCON 1 level issue.
Spot on. November was a turning point and evidence that it's not all downhill.
I'll still read OT for the occasional stupid threads but have started to avoid the political ones. PoliEra will always be where it's at.
Her actual stated position was:
https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2...ala-harris-re-elected-state-attorney-general/
tbf she co-sponsored Booker's marijuana bill as early as last year. I don't know if she made a statement of public support earlier than that.
Of course, that was probably a move anticipating a presidential run, but it's not like she flipped on this like yesterday.
But then you have people misinterpreting even the House results based on their own ignorance. Like some guy the other day was saying the House results weren't important because "it was a good map for Democrats" based on a comment he overheard on CNN.
I never understood why candidates having evolving stances is seen as a bad thing. Culture and society changes quickly and people's thinking changes with it. It's normal. There are plenty of things I believed in 2014 that I don't believe any longer.
Even if we're being cynical and think Kamala changed her stance on marijuana strictly to be more electable...isn't that democracy working as intended? I want my representatives to advocate for the interests of the people who elect them, not forever be beholden to comments they made in the past because they are afraid of appearing inconsistent.
Even if we're being cynical and think Kamala changed her stance on marijuana strictly to be more electable...isn't that democracy working as intended? I want my representatives to advocate for the interests of the people who elect them, not forever be beholden to comments they made in the past because they are afraid of appearing inconsistent.
Lmao. I do somewhat laugh when I hear someone in ot talking about the gaming side being trash. Both sides generally have about the same type of discourse.
Did they get on Trump for his Soros' tweet? Not that they are the same, but do they call out actual defamation ?
Where the fuck have they been this entire administrations 2 years? Fuck them for this.
Yeah it's not an issue for me but in 2010 she supported medical use but not recreational use and helped stop Prop 19. A bit behind the curve but nothing egregious.
My point is more about why this sort of attack happens during primaries. People will find any difference they can to make their preferred candidate look better and try to turn small things into big things.
Last edited:
Yeah, this is lame. She deserves pushback, but some folks are taking it too far.
- Status