|
An Angry Bug posted:That 5% is millions of people, zoux. Yes I've said they are bad and should be repealed/fought where ever but they are not an insurmountable barrier that will keep the GOP in power even when the whole country is only 10% white in 200 years.
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:33 |
|
|
Daniel Bryan posted:Not understanding why needing an ID to vote is a ridiculous burden comes from a place of privilege. Republicans have been trying to push through voter ID laws for a good 15 years now. It's not something they just sprung on people out of the blue. Get your poo poo together, poor people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
SquadronROE posted:This is an aside, but what word is the word filter filtering out. I've seen it periodically but can never figure it out because I am old and bad at technology. You can see the unfiltered version of any post by quoting it, the filters don't work in the reply field.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
zoux posted:I guess if "knows about political history" is a worrying thing. For US political history it's been pretty much used to preserve the right of one specific group to vote. Pretty much every time it targeted white people was when it was the "wrong kind of white people", such as the Irish, Mormons, etc...
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 18:31
|
|
|
Voter suppression has been a thing forever but the modern GOP has been disgustingly shameless about it lately and it should really piss off more people than it does. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
5% is a huge number in the realm of the electoral college.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/RosieGray/status/718128250053128193 menino posted:5% is a huge number in the realm of the electoral college. Here http://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/research-and-publications-voter-id
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
lmao @ thinking this though https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/718134372575141888
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://twitter.com/RosieGray/status/718128250053128193 OK thanks for the link to the links
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
SquadronROE posted:This is an aside, but what word is the word filter filtering out. I've seen it periodically but can never figure it out because I am old and bad at technology. If you quote the filtered post, you can see what word was filtered out, hth Try it on this post!
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
metachronos posted:If you quote the filtered post, you can see what word was filtered out, hth Got it, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://twitter.com/RosieGray/status/718128250053128193 Isn't like rule one of dealing with journalists is that unless you specifically say you're off record before saying something, you're on record?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:Isn't like rule one of dealing with journalists is that unless you specifically say you're off record before saying something, you're on record?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 19:14
|
|
Volcott posted:Republicans have been trying to push through voter ID laws for a good 15 years now. It's not something they just sprung on people out of the blue. Get your poo poo together, poor people. The best part is they are completely opposed to any mandatory or automatic Federal ID.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:Isn't like rule one of dealing with journalists is that unless you specifically say you're off record before saying something, you're on record? Rule one is "Off the record is a handshake agreement so if you say something that's good enough for them to burn you as a source, they're gonna." But yeah it's even dumber to say it after a live radio interview
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:The best part is they are completely opposed to any mandatory or automatic Federal ID. Because that's just one step away from tattooing the mark of the beast on your forehead, you monster. (I wish I were joking)
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/nrsc-officials-sharron-angle-didnt-know-social-security-worked#sthash.1B6R2IOM.dpuf
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
Voter fraud like the one they are describing is really non existent because there are better ways to rig them. Like it presumes that the person they're impersonating isn't going to vote in the election at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:This is the same woman who wanted to allow people to barter things like chickens for healthcare if Obamacare was repealed Nope, that was her primary opponent, Sue Lowden, who was the establishment pick and endorsed by the NRSC. lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:Isn't like rule one of dealing with journalists is that unless you specifically say you're off record before saying something, you're on record?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
BobTheJanitor posted:Because that's just one step away from tattooing the mark of the beast on your forehead, you monster. Well, that's one half of the equation. The rest of them don't want the national stuff because it would be harder for them to control it. If you keep the voter stuff local/state wide it's a lot easier to tinker with stuff here and there to suppress the vote and keep a handful of states red than doing it blanket wide over the nation. The federal government's bureaucracy is a lot less interested in letting politicians play that sort of game with their systems.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
If you want to depress Republican turnout, just make it so you can vote at any polling place statewide and start busing poor people to the ones in GOP heavy districts
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
Big reason to be hopeful for the future. Today's young republicans are far more moderate than their predecessors. http://www.vox.com/2016/4/7/11379022/young-republicans-moderate Young moderate republicans, and young super liberal democrats bode very well for the future.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
Having an RFID chip implanted in your hand would actually be super convenient.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
theblackw0lf posted:Big reason to be hopeful for the future. Today's young republicans are far more moderate than their predecessors. I'm not sure why the democrats getting their very own tea party bodes very well for a future that's going to require compromise.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:23
|
|
Cat Army 
|
Volcott posted:Having an RFID chip implanted in your hand would actually be super convenient. Makes it easier for you to be rounded up for UN-FEMA death camps, you mean! #Agenda21 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Volcott posted:Having an RFID chip implanted in your hand would actually be super convenient. Kind of a pain in the rear end/hand if it gets cloned, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
The Iron Rose posted:I'm not sure why the democrats getting their very own tea party bodes very well for a future that's going to require compromise. How do you get that read from that article? The whole point of it there's less ideological differences between younger voters than the current party stalwarts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
theblackw0lf posted:Big reason to be hopeful for the future. Today's young republicans are far more moderate than their predecessors. Yeah that Jacobson study looks pretty damning to social conservatism in general and pretty much backs up Michael Lind's theory that social conservatism will cease to exist soon. http://thebreakthrough.org/index.php/journal/past-issues/issue-4/the-coming-realignment
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
The Iron Rose posted:I'm not sure why the democrats getting their very own tea party bodes very well for a future that's going to require compromise. Yeah the Tea Party really boned the GOP in Congress
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
The Iron Rose posted:I'm not sure why the democrats getting their very own tea party bodes very well for a future that's going to require compromise. A Democratic Tea Party would be the LaRouchites.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
menino posted:Yeah the Tea Party really boned the GOP in Congress Electoral success is one thing, but compromise is quite another. Eventually we're going to have a Republican President, guys. And unlike some of you I'm going to want my Representative and Senator to cooperate and work together to build a better future that's amenable to most Americans instead of sticking to ideological battle lines.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:Isn't like rule one of dealing with journalists is that unless you specifically say you're off record before saying something, you're on record? Yes, and even then, ethically as a journalist, you should always tell them that nothing is ever "off-the-record" -- though thats an idealistic convention that sometimes hurts your ability to find things out
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Yes, and even then, ethically as a journalist, you should always tell them that nothing is ever "off-the-record" -- though thats an idealistic convention that sometimes hurts your ability to find things out Most reporters are going to honor good faith off the record/background requests, because once it gets around that you burned someone like that, no one is going to talk to you. If they're like "Off the record, I gently caress prostitutes" yeah, that's a story, but if they're like "off the record, senator X is a huge dickhead" they aren't going to write that up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:How do you get that read from that article? No, the entire point of the article was that young republicans are more moderate than their elder counterparts. And that's great! And you'd have a story about the end of gridlock if you also found that younger democrats were less ideological, less radical and less left wing than their elder counterparts. Unfortunately, that's not the case. If the response to young Republicans moderating is for young "super liberal" democrats to sprint towards the left a la the Tea Party, then gridlock is going to be even more heavily entrenched, not alleviated. Compromise is a good thing, folks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
I think it might have something to do with the shift to the right that we've seen in the past few decades, so what we consider to be super left right now is not, in the grand scheme of things, super left.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
The Iron Rose posted:No, the entire point of the article was that young republicans are more moderate than their elder counterparts. That's not how congressional dynamics work. A more moderate, less ideologically rigid party is going to be much more likely to agree to compromise with a more radical opposing party. In real world terms, a more moderate congressional GOP is going to make more and more progressive legislation possible. I mean it's going to depend on the moderation going hand in hand with less ideological rigidity but that's usually taken as a given. It's the rigidity that's the problem, not necessarily where the overton window is. zoux fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Apr 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
zoux posted:Most reporters are going to honor good faith off the record/background requests, because once it gets around that you burned someone like that, no one is going to talk to you. yeah. its sort of a convention of the trade. the problem with a lot of modern, particularly political journalists, is their propensity to print stories where the only thing they have are "anonymous sources" which is basically an "well, off the record, X candidate was loving pissed at [insert]" it's really bad journalism
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
zoux posted:That's not how congressional dynamics work. A more moderate, less ideologically rigid party is going to be much more likely to agree to compromise with a more radical opposing party. In real world terms, a more moderate congressional GOP is going to make more and more progressive legislation possible. Yes, I agree with you that moderate parties are likely to agree to compromise with a radical opposing party. However, you just need to look in YCS or even in this thread to find people who abhor the thought of compromise with the Republican Party. Just look at Sanders (not cheerleading for or against here) as am example of the way in which many young Democrats are expressing their dissatisfaction with what they perceive to be an overly conciliatory and right wing Democratic Party. I want to see two moderate parties who can cooperate with one another. I don't want to see more radical politics, even if I happen to like the direction they might be going with.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:33 |
|
|
I mean what exaclty does the "Radical Left" want in this country anyway? A 4-5% rise in effective tax rates up to 1970 levels to fund a universal health care scheme, green energy, and reduced fee higher ed? Versus "repeal Social Security and the 14th Amendment"? One's beneficial to society, one's not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:49
|
|