The democrats are a waste

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > The democrats are a waste

Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed.
B	77	25.50%
K	160	52.98%
M	65	21.52%
Total:	229 votes

[Edit Poll (moderators only)]

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

call to action posted:

You sound exactly like the folks that got us into both Iraq wars. Let me guess, we need to "do something"

Actually I was pointing out how disgusting you were for calling the death of a massive amount of people "suboptimal" while you were pretending to actually care about black folks to try and distract from backing a racist but we already established that subtle burns don't seem to register on you.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 23:56

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 12, 2024 06:53

Condiv: May 7, 2008; Sorry to undo the effort of paying a domestic abuser $10 to own this poster, but I am going to lose my dang mind if I keep seeing multiple posters who appear to be Baloogan.

With love,
a mod

call to action posted:

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/06/factcheck_does_elizabeth_warre.html

She has been against single payer recently. Who gives a poo poo what someone's pivoted to in the wake of Piss Baby.

I mean, I get why you all don't think that's a big deal - because 3/4 of you were complete shitheads for Hillary until you were all proven wrong. The rest of us see y'all as weathervanes and poo poo allies.

no, i think you're being unreasonable and i never voted for hillary

# ? Jul 7, 2017 23:58

RaySmuckles: Oct 14, 2009; Grimey Drawer

Majorian posted:

This is the part where the scenario breaks down a bit, though. Russia shooting down an American plane or torpedoing a ship doesn't necessarily automatically lead to both countries being at war. It can mean that, but the logic of deterrence makes it not a terribly likely outcome, at least directly, IMO. What's more likely to happen, is the usual when this sort of thing happens between two powerful countries: mutual recriminations from both sides, followed by a doubling down on the proxy war at hand.

I get that you're posting what could happen, and you're right, it could. But I think the more likely (albeit less dramatic) outcome out of a No-Fly Zone is enough to make it a not-worth-it policy.

i hear you, but does "this sort of thing" happen between nuclear powers? i'm certainly no expert, but i can't think of any equally high profile instances of mutual antagonism.

i'm mean, sure sometimes north korea shells south korea. or some fighting breaks out in Kashmir (which is technically between to nuclear powers), but i feel like the US and Russia are on an entirely separate level.

wars have started for much less, but also been avoided for much more. i think part of the whole "no fly zone is a risk that's not worth it" thing is just one of those "why even tempt fate" sort of things.

to me, instituting a no fly zone in the first place in an act of immense aggression. the US would be playing a very high stakes game for very little reward. the US would be initiating an action that is only one step removed from war and would be responsible for the escalation. to me, that's pretty much all bad and no good. not to mention the whole slippery slope thing where even if there were a no fly zone the syrian war would continue wholesale and our presence would then likely lead to intervention which would only escalate american involvement in another middle eastern fiasco.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 23:59

The Kingfish: Oct 21, 2015

Majorian posted:

I'm not really seeing how the no-fly zone would have led to a nuclear war with a greater degree of certainty than Trump's ongoing mismanagement of the situation.

Sketch me out a chain of events on how the no-fly zone would have led to a nuclear war, if you would. I will, of course, have questions for you on this.

Any attempt to guess at the future looks retarded without the clarity of hindsight. That being said Russia would have violated the no-fly zone and would have retaliated either directly against us in Syria or by a show of force in Eastern Europe, possibly both.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:00

call to action: Jun 10, 2016; by FactsAreUseless

Condiv posted:

no, i think you're being unreasonable and i never voted for hillary

Personally I think looking around in 2012 and thinking "healthcare is awesome and we shouldn't attempt to make it cheaper or more accessible" is pretty unreasonable but hey, you're not voting for me right

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:01

Condiv: May 7, 2008; Sorry to undo the effort of paying a domestic abuser $10 to own this poster, but I am going to lose my dang mind if I keep seeing multiple posters who appear to be Baloogan.

With love,
a mod

call to action posted:

Personally I think looking around in 2012 and thinking "healthcare is awesome and we shouldn't attempt to make it cheaper or more accessible" is pretty unreasonable but hey, you're not voting for me right

there's a lot worse in the field, and elizabeth warren has been a good ally on a lot of other issues. shouldn't you give her a bit of the benefit of the doubt when she says she's realized the importance of singlepayer?

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:03

call to action: Jun 10, 2016; by FactsAreUseless

Condiv posted:

there's a lot worse in the field, and elizabeth warren has been a good ally on a lot of other issues. shouldn't you give her a bit of the benefit of the doubt when she says she's realized the importance of singlepayer?

Once you folks do the same for Gabbard, sure.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:05

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

call to action posted:

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/06/factcheck_does_elizabeth_warre.html

She has been against single payer recently. Who gives a poo poo what someone's pivoted to in the wake of Piss Baby.

I mean, I get why you all don't think that's a big deal - because 3/4 of you were complete shitheads for Hillary until you were all proven wrong. The rest of us see y'all as weathervanes and poo poo allies.

That article doesn't say she was against single payer, just that she thought it was more important in 2012 to focus on protecting the ACA.

quote:

Asked by MassLive.com earlier this year if she supports a single-payer health care system, Warren similarly said the focus needs to be on the current law. "I think the urgent question now is whether we�re going to be able to hold on to the health care reforms that just passed," Warren said in an emailed statement. "There are a lot of people who want to repeal them. I think we need to focus on protecting them and on finding new ways to lower costs, which are still too high."

Asked for its source on Warren�s support for a single-payer system, the Brown campaign pointed to �Get Sick, Go Broke,� a chapter written by Warren, a Harvard Law School professor, and Ohio University professor Deborah Thorne in the 2008 book �Health at Risk,� edited by Jacob Hacker. The chapter was based on an academic study in which Warren and Thorne analyzed questionnaires, court records and personal stories of families in bankruptcy. They found that more than half their sample filed for bankruptcy at least in part because of medical problems, and nearly three-quarters of those who fell ill had insurance.

Warren and Thorne wrote: �We approach the health care debates from a single perspective: maintaining the financial stability of families confronting illness or injury. The most obvious solution would be universal single-payer health care.�

They wrote that universal, single-payer care would allow people to get care without risking bankruptcy, and would �free families from dependence on an employer�s plan, and make certain that everyone is covered, whether or not they are employed.�

Warren and Thorne also noted the problems with single-payer care. �We recognize that there are cost-containment issues and the ever-present specter of rationing medical care,� they wrote.

They concluded, �From the perspective of family finances, this is the most obvious and workable solution.�

Warren and Thorne offered other solutions as well.

They wrote that if universal, single-payer health insurance is �politically unacceptable,� another option would be to guarantee all Americans access to �affordable and adequate� health insurance, which cannot be terminated if a family member is ill and which should not be tied to employment. They wrote that other reforms that would relieve financial burdens on families would include making prescription drugs and rehabilitation therapy available at lower costs, providing additional access to in-home care and providing paid leave for care providers.

Her position has consistently been protect the ACA and pass single payer if and when it is politically possible. She now thinks Single Payer should be the mantle of the Democratic Party and you oppose this because she wasn't pro-Single Payer enough in 2012.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:06

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

The Kingfish posted:

Any attempt to guess at the future looks retarded without the clarity of hindsight. That being said Russia would have violated the no-fly zone and would have retaliated either directly against us in Syria or by a show of force in Eastern Europe, possibly both.

Neither of which would likely lead to full-on nuclear war. As I said, one can condemn the no-fly zone as a terrible idea that would escalate the conflict, without catastrophizing.

call to action posted:

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/06/factcheck_does_elizabeth_warre.html

She has been against single payer recently.

Where in the article? Point us to where exactly it says that she has been "vocally against single payer" (your words) recently. Copy-paste the quote.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:08

paranoid randroid: Mar 4, 2007

call to action posted:

Once you folks do the same for Gabbard, sure.

so do you have like a Gabbard bodypillow or something because you seem real fixated

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:09

call to action: Jun 10, 2016; by FactsAreUseless

quote:

Asked by MassLive.com earlier this year if she supports a single-payer health care system, Warren similarly said the focus needs to be on the current law. "I think the urgent question now is whether we�re going to be able to hold on to the health care reforms that just passed," Warren said in an emailed statement. "There are a lot of people who want to repeal them. I think we need to focus on protecting them and on finding new ways to lower costs, which are still too high."

Politician speak for "gently caress off single payer wanters". The focus needs to be on shoveling taxpayer money to United Healthcare!

paranoid randroid posted:

so do you have like a Gabbard bodypillow or something because you seem real fixated

I honestly only keep replying when I'm being quoted a lot

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:10

Condiv: May 7, 2008; Sorry to undo the effort of paying a domestic abuser $10 to own this poster, but I am going to lose my dang mind if I keep seeing multiple posters who appear to be Baloogan.

With love,
a mod

call to action posted:

Once you folks do the same for Gabbard, sure.

why would i? she's a really recent convert to leftism from being p right wing (along with her dad). sure, she's a better ally than hillary clinton, but i don't see any reason to trust her much yet, unlike warren

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:11

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

call to action posted:

Politician speak for "gently caress off single payer wanters".

No it's not, you loon.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:12

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

call to action posted:

I honestly only keep replying when I'm being quoted a lot

Or when you think people forgot about the you backing out of calling her a racist

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:21

MooselanderII: Feb 18, 2004

Condiv posted:

there's a lot worse in the field, and elizabeth warren has been a good ally on a lot of other issues. shouldn't you give her a bit of the benefit of the doubt when she says she's realized the importance of singlepayer?

NO we can only give the benefit of the doubt to Islamophobes who have been endorsed by Richard Spencer!!!

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:24

call to action: Jun 10, 2016; by FactsAreUseless

Jaxyon posted:

Or when you think people forgot about the you backing out of calling her a racist

She's a racist, absolutely. Just like drone-loving Obama and Superpredator, No Ways Tired Clinton.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:24

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

call to action posted:

She's a racist, absolutely. Just like drone-loving Obama and Superpredator, No Ways Tired Clinton.

So you think they should get equal amount of support from you, right?

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:26

call to action: Jun 10, 2016; by FactsAreUseless

Trabisnikof posted:

So you think they should get equal amount of support from you, right?

I don't think Clinton or Obama support single payer. So no.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:28

Condiv: May 7, 2008; Sorry to undo the effort of paying a domestic abuser $10 to own this poster, but I am going to lose my dang mind if I keep seeing multiple posters who appear to be Baloogan.

With love,
a mod

call to action posted:

I don't think Clinton or Obama support single payer. So no.

if clinton supported single payer, would you vote for her?

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:29

The Kingfish: Oct 21, 2015

Clinton is a well known lier and shill. I'd vote for her if I believed she would fight for single payer.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:32

Lightning Lord: Feb 21, 2013; $200 a day, plus expenses

MooselanderII posted:

NO we can only give the benefit of the doubt to Islamophobes who have been endorsed by Richard Spencer!!!

I wonder how long a bunch of brown non-Christians think white supremacists will be ok with them? Like sure they both hate Muslims but that can't be sustainable.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:32

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

call to action posted:

She's a racist, absolutely. Just like drone-loving Obama and Superpredator, No Ways Tired Clinton.

Yeah which is what we all said.

Fun part is, neither of them is dumb enough to be chummy with Assad.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:37

call to action: Jun 10, 2016; by FactsAreUseless

Jaxyon posted:

Yeah which is what we all said.

Fun part is, neither of them is dumb enough to be chummy with Assad.

Just like those people that didn't want to invade Iraq were chummy with Saddam

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:42

The Kingfish: Oct 21, 2015

Clinton and Obama are just chummy with the Sauds is all. Huge difference.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:43

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

call to action posted:

Just like those people that didn't want to invade Iraq were chummy with Saddam

Actually no anti-war leftists didn't apologize for Saddam and meet with him because they understood that while hawks were in the wrong, so was Saddam

I love how Tulsi Gabbard is like a Rorschach test for people who don't know a bunch about stuff but feel real strongly

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:48

MooselanderII: Feb 18, 2004

I don't see why anyone would resolve all doubts in favor of a person who literally only dropped official opposition to same-sex marriage recently and did so for the wrong reasons and yuk yuks with Bill Maher about the evil of Islam.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:51

Lightning Lord: Feb 21, 2013; $200 a day, plus expenses

MooselanderII posted:

I don't see why anyone would resolve all doubts in favor of a person who literally only dropped official opposition to same-sex marriage recently and did so for the wrong reasons and yuk yuks with Bill Maher about the evil of Islam.

Some are in despair and figure the only way to fix America's extreme right wing economy is to make human rights concessions I guess?

# ? Jul 8, 2017 02:14

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

MooselanderII posted:

I don't see why anyone would resolve all doubts in favor of a person who literally only dropped official opposition to same-sex marriage recently and did so for the wrong reasons and yuk yuks with Bill Maher about the evil of Islam.

You see folks are often OK with selling out groups they don't belong to, if someone says the right things on certain issues.

See: Trump voters

# ? Jul 8, 2017 02:27

Kokoro Wish: Jul 23, 2007; Post? What post? Oh wow.
I had nothing to do with THAT.

Personally, though Warren does good things, I don't like her because she only grandstands or commits when it's politically easy for her to do so. One of the reasons I like Sanders is because he says and does the right things even when it's politically debilitating for him to do so. Warren is a bit of a weather vane when it comes to things and she refuses to spend political capital or put herself on the line in some pretty cowardly ways.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 03:26

Mineaiki: Nov 20, 2013

What ever happened with Bernie's whole bank fraud thing?

# ? Jul 8, 2017 03:50

RedSpider: May 12, 2017

Kokoro Wish posted:

Personally, though Warren does good things, I don't like her because she only grandstands or commits when it's politically easy for her to do so. One of the reasons I like Sanders is because he says and does the right things even when it's politically debilitating for him to do so. Warren is a bit of a weather vane when it comes to things and she refuses to spend political capital or put herself on the line in some pretty cowardly ways.

This is why I said the establishment has no problems with her. She's a pushover.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 04:04

Kokoro Wish: Jul 23, 2007; Post? What post? Oh wow.
I had nothing to do with THAT.

Mineaiki posted:

What ever happened with Bernie's whole bank fraud thing?

It's not even his "bank fraud thing", it's his wife's and has only been loosely tied to him. Also she wouldn't have even personally have profited from it, as it was funds for the college. Looks and smells sort of like a desperate smear job.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 04:09

call to action: Jun 10, 2016; by FactsAreUseless

MooselanderII posted:

I don't see why anyone would resolve all doubts in favor of a person who literally only dropped official opposition to same-sex marriage recently and did so for the wrong reasons and yuk yuks with Bill Maher about the evil of Islam.

But enough about Hillary Clinton

# ? Jul 8, 2017 04:49

Lightning Lord: Feb 21, 2013; $200 a day, plus expenses

call to action posted:

But enough about Hillary Clinton

And you are lynching negros!

# ? Jul 8, 2017 04:52

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

Kokoro Wish posted:

Personally, though Warren does good things, I don't like her because she only grandstands or commits when it's politically easy for her to do so.

She's been an elected official for all of five years, and a political entity in any sense for eight. Her major issue thus far has been reform of the financial sector, and she's been incredibly dogged on pushing for it. She was for single payer before the 2016 election, ie: before it became much more convenient to support it. She hasn't shown any indication of being a warhawk, and every thing we've seen from her suggests that she's not an interventionist. I think it's a little ridiculous to treat her like a Hillary Clinton or a Nancy Pelosi or a DWS, ie: in office for a long-rear end time, and acting as a weathervane the whole while. This isn't someone who does 180's on issues all that often.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 09:09

Condiv: May 7, 2008; Sorry to undo the effort of paying a domestic abuser $10 to own this poster, but I am going to lose my dang mind if I keep seeing multiple posters who appear to be Baloogan.

With love,
a mod

Kokoro Wish posted:

It's not even his "bank fraud thing", it's his wife's and has only been loosely tied to him. Also she wouldn't have even personally have profited from it, as it was funds for the college. Looks and smells sort of like a desperate smear job.

it is. the big source on all this fraud bs is a loving vermont republican and ranking member of the vermont republican party

and idiot hillaries are slurping it up without a second thought cause they hate sanders

# ? Jul 8, 2017 09:31

Cerebral Bore: Apr 21, 2010; Fun Shoe

Majorian posted:

Neither of which would likely lead to full-on nuclear war. As I said, one can condemn the no-fly zone as a terrible idea that would escalate the conflict, without catastrophizing.

Yeah, but the problem with escalation is that it's hard to predict where it'll stop, and people with good sense don't risk nuclear war just because it's unlikely to happen.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 09:40

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

Cerebral Bore posted:

Yeah, but the problem with escalation is that it's hard to predict where it'll stop, and people with good sense don't risk nuclear war just because it's unlikely to happen.

Oh sure, believe me, I'm 100% onboard with that. Nuclear nonproliferation is very much my pet cause. I just think it's helpful to remember that, even discounting the possibility of nuclear war, the no-fly zone was still a bad idea.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 09:56

Post 9-11 User: Apr 14, 2010

While it's true that both the RNC and DNC have been coopted by private interests, it's cute that people still argue that the party that openly and explicitly states its goal is to enrich the elites at the expense of the poor is somehow no worse than Democrats.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 10:38

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 12, 2024 06:53

Thug Lessons: Dec 14, 2006; I lust in my heart for as many dead refugees as possible.

Post 9-11 User posted:

While it's true that both the RNC and DNC have been coopted by private interests, it's cute that people still argue that the party that openly and explicitly states its goal is to enrich the elites at the expense of the poor is somehow no worse than Democrats.

The number of people who argue that is vanishingly small. It hasn't been a popular line since 2000 or so.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 10:42

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > The democrats are a waste

«‹›483 »