|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
WampaLord posted:Her plan was a constitutional amendment. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/hillary-clinton-citizens-united-225658 She either doesn't know how amendments work, especially in a world where republicans control the majority of state houses, or she's just paying lip service to it. Either way, that's really bad, almost 100% bad!
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 08:12 |
|
|
Condiv posted:i did and still do, cause she was all too eager to start sucking on that megadonor tap There would still be plenty of ways for her to get donor money even with that decision being overturned. I'll drop it, cause I don't really want to be defending Hillary in this thread, but a little nuance every now and then is good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:it is the part where you said voting for trump was okay It is fine that people like Call me Charlie were idiots and got duped by Trump. It's literally no worse than getting duped by Clinton. Both Clinton voters and Trump voters should be allowed to enter the sanctum and repent for their sins. Voting for Trump isn't ok, there's a reason I vote third party. But I understand people who get duped by the rhetoric on both sides and neither of them should be lambasted for their 2016 votes but for their current opinions. quote:stop trying to use minority issues you do not care about as a cudgel to win internet arguments. not only is it grotesque, you are extremely bad at it. By what measure do I not care about minority issues? I support reparations, affirmative action, immigration reform, ending the war on drugs, reforming the gently caress out of the police, etc etc This is exactly what I mean, do you see me accusing people of "trying to use minority rights you don't care bout to win internet arguments". no, of course not, thats loving stupid. why would you accuse someone of not caring about minority rights? what do you gain by that and how do you even pretend to go about proving it? now, people who use minority rights to attack third party voters on the left for not voting for clinton, that's the real stupid NewForumSoftware fucked around with this message at 19:07 on Jul 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:now, people who use minority rights to attack third party voters on the left for not voting for clinton, that's the real stupid He says, on the day that Trump just banned all trans people from the military.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
oh nevermind I said mean words so clearly I hate black peopleWampaLord posted:He says, on the day that Trump just banned all trans people from the military. This is basically "HIRE MORE PRISON GUARDS". Who the gently caress wants the "right" to join the military that's a goddamn joke. Either way, I don't support that and voting for Hillary wouldn't have changed it. hth What you don't understand (or you do and you're just bitter about living in a swing state) is that not everyone's vote matters come election day, particularly when it concerns the presidency. This, again, is part of the reason attacking people based on who they voted for nine months ago is pretty stupid. NewForumSoftware fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Jul 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
Condiv posted:n, some of them are extremely conservative, some of them are left-leaning. you're fishing really hard to find a reason for what i said to be unreasonable Who is extremely conservative on the Supreme Court out of the four justices appointed by Bill Clinton or Obama? And who is a "worthless centrist" by your definition. Grow the gently caress up and define your parameters.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Who is extremely conservative on the Supreme Court out of the four justices appointed by Bill Clinton or Obama? And who is a "worthless centrist" by your definition. Grow the gently caress up and define your parameters. All of them you gigantic baby, especially by the standards of any reasonable leftist. How could anyone with reasonable political views possibly survive the gauntlet of bullshit to get to the level of supreme court justice?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
Condiv posted:why are you asking me who constitutes a worthless centrist when i already gave you an example of one (garland)? another example would be kennedy Why do you act so assured that these would be the exact type of justice appointed by a democrat when the four on the court you admit lean left?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:What you don't understand (or you do and you're just bitter about living in a swing state) is that not everyone's vote matters come election day, particularly when it concerns the presidency. This, again, is part of the reason attacking people based on who they voted for nine months ago is pretty stupid. The problem is I bet you encouraged other people to vote third party as well, and some of other people lived in battleground states.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:oh nevermind I said mean words so clearly I hate black people Also not what was said, friend in your rush to be offended by those goddamn idpol-users you have, again, picked up the cudgel and smashed yourself in the face with it. your goals are still laudable. you are still a worthwhile ally. your heart is in the right place, you just get too into defending your beliefs and say some stupid poo poo. we merely ask you to stop trying to play more-idpol-than-thou, because you are not good at it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Why do you act so assured that these would be the exact type of justice appointed by a democrat when the four on the court you admit lean left? Because that's all you can get through a republican congress you dolt. We've covered this already.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Who is extremely conservative on the Supreme Court out of the four justices appointed by Bill Clinton or Obama? And who is a "worthless centrist" by your definition. Grow the gently caress up and define your parameters. sorry, i missed the democratic part of your post. no, the dem picks are not extremely conservative yronic heroism posted:Why do you act so assured that these would be the exact type of justice appointed by a democrat when the four on the court you admit lean left? cause obama appointed merrick garland, a republican (and charitably, a centrist)? this is some extremely fundamental stuff yronic. obama is centre-left and he appointed "centrist" merrick garland. hillary is centrist and i do not believe she'd appoint someone that's not a centrist (she couldn't even bring herself to support $15/hr  )
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:we merely ask you to stop trying to play more-idpol-than-thou, because you are not good at it. this but to every poster who comes in here with this sort of poo poo: yronic heroism posted:Since a big part of this thread is immune to irony: the thread only talks about slaves when it's a convenient hobby horse. Of course if actual minorities were to come in and talk about their concerns let alone why they choose to vote rather than just whine on a podcast, suddenly a great mass of white dudes would have a lot of opinions about identity politics that they'd need to express. Here's an idea Ze Pollack, why don't you substantiate the idea that I'm "pretending to care about minority concerns" instead of actually caring like... you? That's a pretty big accusation in my book. lol at falling back to "we're merely asking you to stop trying to play more-idpol-than-thou" after you play "you're faking your concern for minorities" you're drat right I'm your ally because I'm actually fighting for what we believe in instead of sitting on the sidelines trying to make the most calculated possible moves possible to do the bare minimum possible NewForumSoftware fucked around with this message at 19:30 on Jul 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Here's an idea Ze Pollack, why don't you substantiate the idea that I'm "pretending to care about minority concerns" instead of actually caring like... you? That's a pretty big accusation in my book. How about regarding the ban on trans people in the military announced today: NewForumSoftware posted:This is basically "HIRE MORE PRISON GUARDS". Who the gently caress wants the "right" to join the military that's a goddamn joke. Either way, I don't support that and voting for Hillary wouldn't have changed it. hth Yeah, it's a stupid loving thing that Trump is doing just to distract from the healthcare discussion, but let's not pretend you actually give a poo poo about trans people with that "voting for Hillary wouldn't have changed it" bit at the end, which is utter bullshit. You're so focused on "Hillary is worse than Trump" that you've backed yourself into a corner and look like a fool. DeadlyMuffin fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Jul 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:37
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:Yeah, it's a stupid loving thing that Trump is doing just to distract from the healthcare discussion, but let's not pretend you actually give a poo poo about trans people with that "voting for Hillary wouldn't have changed it" bit at the end, which is utter bullshit. Uhh it absolutely is not bullshit, no amount of votes for Hillary in blue states was going to win it for her. this is exactly what I mean by people just being ignorant of how the voting system works. voting Hillary in California literally accomplishes nothing, there is no reason not to vote third party there but here we go again with "you don't give a poo poo about trans people or you would have piled another vote for hillary in california" get over yourself you self-righteous dingus your vote didn't do poo poo, trump is president and the only people at fault are the DNC DeadlyMuffin posted:You're so focused on "Hillary is worse than Trump" that you've backed yourself into a corner and look like a fool. the fact that she is in several ways is just the sort of  that the DNC delivered this election cycletrust me, I wish the DNC didn't run a poo poo candidate more than you do, it's not my fault they didn't. It's not Call me Charlie's fault, hell, it's barely Hillary's fault. Hillary is going to Hillary, the DNC just backed the wrong horse. Bernie was better re: minority concerns than Hillary and no amount of crying over Trump is going to change that. Hate the DNC for selling out minorities, not third party voters. NewForumSoftware fucked around with this message at 19:46 on Jul 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:You're so focused on "Hillary is worse than Trump" that you've backed yourself into a corner and look like a fool. you are very focused on saying someone else is wrong without saying why
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:You're so focused on "Hillary is worse than Trump" that you've backed yourself into a corner and look like a fool. Except he's explicitly said that's not the case multiple times in the last few pages, I think.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
tbqh everyone should be banned from joining the military
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:The problem is I bet you encouraged other people to vote third party as well, and some of other people lived in battleground states. "The problem is you MIGHT have done X?" I enjoy your posts both here and in other threads, but this doesn't hold up. The discourse here is wearing thin, which is a far worse thing than being 'uncivil'. Let's turn it around.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:tbqh everyone should be banned from joining the military Do you support a full, unilateral disarmament by the US? It's an interesting idea, but seems rather impractical, both politically in the US and on the world stage; geopolitics will still be played.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:The problem is I bet you encouraged other people to vote third party as well, and some of other people lived in battleground states. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3793404&userid=219367&perpage=40&pagenumber=3#post465310428 NewForumsSoftware, third party voting thread, october 13th 2016 posted:She's not calling me a Trump supporter, she's talking to me like I am one. I would vote Hillary if I lived in a battleground state, I don't disagree she's the most progressive option. But that's a far cry from Hillary being a leftist or there being no legitimate complaints from progressives, as she's said many times. You know for how much ya'll obsess over my posts you don't seem to read them all that much.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
Matt Zerella posted:She either doesn't know how amendments work, especially in a world where republicans control the majority of state houses, or she's just paying lip service to it. Either way, that's really bad, almost 100% bad! More realistically she would be willing to pass an amendment but it would only cover "dark and unaccountable" money in politics. Open corruption would be A-OK. That's the dodge I see the centrists using these days anyhow.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3793404&userid=219367&perpage=40&pagenumber=3#post465310428 That's fair, I apologize.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:Do you support a full, unilateral disarmament by the US? It's an interesting idea, but seems rather impractical, both politically in the US and on the world stage; geopolitics will still be played. Honestly I was joking but I'm about as anti-interventionist as you can get. Obviously there's still going to be a military and yeah, obviously we shouldn't exclude transgendered individuals from being included. That being said, we should end pretty much all foreign intervention that involves bombing people. Drop food, not bombs. The amount of financial resources we pour into murdering innocent third worlders is astounding. You know how much cheaper it would be to just move Syrian refugees here? Hell one of my favorite places to eat where I live is a Syrian food truck and I say their cuisine is good enough without having another reason to assimilate them NewForumSoftware fucked around with this message at 20:07 on Jul 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Snark all you want. We know how each party's Supreme Court nominees come down on these issues. And you know that's what's being discussed. The virtue of the person doing the appointing is not relevant to who gets appointed. Wikipedia posted:In March 2010, the Court of Appeals expressly applied the precedent set by Citizens United v. FEC in its ruling in SpeechNOW, a case involving a non-profit organization that sought to (a) accept contributions in excess of $5000 from individual contributors (not corporations) for the exclusive purpose of running independent expenditures (IEs), and (b) not register as a political committee or be subject to PAC reporting requirements. SpeechNOW.org argued that, because it would not make any candidate contributions and would only make independent expenditures, it was a violation of both its and its donors’ free speech rights to require SpeechNOW to register, report, and be subject to contribution limits. Merrick Garland was on this court and joined in this decision. B B fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Jul 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
Not to throw shade on painstaking wikipedia but that tells me nothing about how Garland would rule on overturning Citizens United on the Supreme Court. It only tells me he applied the law as the Supreme Court determined it. Which is what almost all lower court judges would do. Also, the only reason we have Citizens United in the first place is because of Republican appointed justices. I think they should not be elected so they don't appoint more. And I'm actually willing to vote and encourage others to vote rather than sit on my rear end. yronic heroism fucked around with this message at 20:34 on Jul 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:That tells me nothing about how Garland would rule on overturning Citizens United on the Supreme Court. It only tells me he applied the law as the Supreme Court determined it. Which is what almost all lower court judges would do. yronic heroism posted:Snark all you want. We know how each party's Supreme Court nominees come down on these issues. And you know that's what's being discussed. The virtue of the person doing the appointing is not relevant to who gets appointed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:That tells me nothing about how Garland would rule on overturning Citizens United on the Supreme Court. It only tells me he applied the law as the Supreme Court determined it. Which is what almost all lower court judges would do. That's cool. Are you also willing to work towards removing the current dem establishment from their positions within the party? Because their continued incompetence is the number one reason why republicans keep getting elected right now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
If you mean do I want new leadership at the DNC/House/Senate. And I always said Hillary Clinton was a terrible candidate. Do I want to primary every Senator? No. There's other ways of pushing the party.twodot posted:So I agree this doesn't say a lot, but you claimed: There is a lot of research on judicial ideology based on voting patterns. Unsurprisingly, on left/right ideology Garland is basically another Breyer, and Gorsuch is to the right of even Scalia.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:If you mean do I want new leadership at the DNC/House/Senate. And I always said Hillary Clinton was a terrible candidate. Do I want to primary every Senator? No. There's other ways of pushing the party. i'd say the dems who voted to confirm gorsuch would make a good initial list of dems deserving a primary then wouldn't you? though really the entire leadership needs replaced, cause dems practically gave away that sc seat
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i'd say the dems who voted to confirm gorsuch would make a good initial list of dems deserving a primary then wouldn't you? Pelosi, Feinstein, and Booker get added to that list please. Probably even Schumer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 20:47
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:NFS was being stupid, Trump is obviously worse than Hillary when it comes to race and is responsible for more exploitation of minorities than she is due to his businesses. Then again, Clinton does have that whole thing about basically loving over the whole of Haiti by directing funds meant for reconstruction into things like making a sweatshop complex for use by US based multi-nationals, while also actively working to suppress a raise in their pitiful minimum wage to something slightly less pitiful while Secretary of State. Also directing said funds to build a hotel for wealthy people whilst people were still living in actual ruins. While Trump is bad in his exploitation of labor, I'm not sure he's quite up to the level of disaster relief profiteering. Kokoro Wish fucked around with this message at 20:57 on Jul 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
Owning a bunch of businesses that may or may not incidentially exploit minorities as part of their operations is a whole lot different from specifically loving over a country hit by a disaster to fill your own pockets.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
I don't care who gets primaried but in the general I will not apologize for voting to keep the seat from going to some Tea Party crazy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:I don't care who gets primaried but in the general I will not apologize for voting to keep the seat from going R. When  we should stop voting for republicans who pretend they're democrats like manchin. they're making progress that much more difficult
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:I don't care who gets primaried but in the general I will not apologize for voting to keep the seat from going R. When That's fine, a lot of people ITT have that mentality, and the whole vote shame stuff has really only flared up one way (not voting Clinton/Quist/Ossoff/Whoever's blue). Manchin and Lieberman have been exceptions, but even then most people have the 2017 GE to see where yelling at people for voting X or not voting gets you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
ugh its Troika posted:Owning a bunch of businesses that may or may not incidentially exploit minorities as part of their operations is a whole lot different from specifically loving over a country hit by a disaster to fill your own pockets. It's morbidly humorous that Haiti was a nation founded by a slave rebellion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
Condiv posted:
What would be better if his GOP opponent in 2012 won?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:What would be better if his GOP opponent in 2012 won? Let me guess "west virginians are genetically centrist and will never accept someone who wants good things, even if they won the democratic primary"
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 08:12 |
|
|
yronic heroism posted:What would be better if his GOP opponent in 2012 won? well, i don't see how one GOP candidate is better than the other. i was thinking more like running a democrat to take over manchin's seat though
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 21:20
|
|