|
You and your little circle of friends are not a representative slice of the American voting public. The average American is a 'I don't care much about politics' type that likes to claim that they're a smart and critical thinker but really just wants to vote for the candidate that tells them the lies that make them the happiest, most of them know they're being lied to, they just don't care. Or they are a "Both sides are the same"/"My vote doesn't matter anyways" type and doesn't vote because it takes too much effort, at least for non-presidential elections.
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 11:06 |
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Because I actually know some of the less informed. THey want someone they can trust. Not some limp wristed person who at the first sign of trouble says they want to discus their problems and come to a decision or whatever horseshit. I suggest you stop watching SNL and the West Wing and talk to some real people. There are a lot of people who think "why don't we just get along". I also think they're stupid, but they exist and pretending that they don't is very silly. Also SNL isn't some extreme liberal bastion and their political content is hugely influential (much more than it should be) Condiv posted:yes, when schumer said that copper plans and expanded waivers were concessions he'd be willing to make. those things should definitely not happen, and saying that he's willing to make those concessions gives ideological ground to republicans on those issues quote:are we supposed to compromise to the right to attract them? that doesn't sound like a good idea considering this country has drifted so far right we have nazis marching in our streets
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:You and your little circle of friends are not a representative slice of the American voting public. After a certain point not caring is indefensible, and we passed that point long ago.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
TGLT posted:Schumer won his last election with 70% of the vote. If anyone is best suited to fake an olive branch to convince McCain there's totally The Process over in this pasture, even if it means agitating some people who mistake "we totally swear we were thinking of some compromises, prom-sies" for an actual unbreakable blood oath, then it is Schumer. mccain's not going to be fooled, i don't know why you think he would be. if he's honestly a moderate republican like he pretends to be, then the prospect of destroying healthcare in america should be enough to convince him to vote against this bill on its own, without the dems ceding ground on maintaining what modicum of healthcare ppaca currently provides.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
A lovely Reporter posted:After a certain point not caring is indefensible, and we passed that point long ago. Pointing out that they exist is not defending them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
A lovely Reporter posted:After a certain point not caring is indefensible, and we passed that point long ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeeaYH7U9xM
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:13
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:You and your little circle of friends are not a representative slice of the American voting public. Ah good old liberal misanthropey. Yep that is the kind of person the democrats want. Thanks for proving my point about being cancer. Also the people who say "Can't we all get along" will vote for whomever offers them a better deal consistently. My uncle says that, but he owns a small buisiness and hangs out with other small buisinessman. He votes GOP.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
Condiv posted:mccain's not going to be fooled, i don't know why you think he would be. if he's honestly a moderate republican like he pretends to be, then the prospect of destroying healthcare in america should be enough to convince him to vote against this bill on its own, without the dems ceding ground on maintaining what modicum of healthcare ppaca currently provides. McCain does not give one poo poo about destroying healthcare Taerkar posted:Pointing out that they exist is not defending them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:It did not it does. sorry, but polticians advocating for things influences public opinion. the bully pulpit has power and the dems need to use it more effectively quote:didn't say it did, just saying that painting centrists as being anti-republican is silly copper plans and extended waivers are a compromise to the right. i don't mind trying to attract centrists, but we shouldn't be pushing right while doing it Taerkar posted:You and your little circle of friends are not a representative slice of the American voting public. i don't believe that. americans are getting more engaged with politics than they have been in a long time, and sending bad messages like schumer did hurts that enthusiasm
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:If there are 100,000 unfilled engineering positions, then yes it will almost exactly like that. But your narrow focus on "jobs" of one particular type is causing you to completely miss the point. Even if that were the case, there would at the very least be a downward pressure on the wages of engineers! Hellblazer187 posted:If overall IQ/intelligence/productivity of a population increases, their economic output will increase. Economic output is not just "salaries from employment." Even taking your example, which is dumb and misses the point, lets say we train more people to have engineering skills than there are current open positions for engineers. Those people will find other work and be better at it because of the skills and training they have. I'm a lawyer and accountant by trade, but because I've been the youngest person in the small offices I've worked for, I've also done a lot of the IT around the office. I'm not "in an IT job" but having basic computer skills has allowed me to be better at the jobs I did have, which improved company performance and improved my pay. Increased productivity, or increased economic output, does not necessarily result in an increased portion of higher-paying jobs. It allows for businesses to be more profitable by allowing them to use fewer workers to create the same amount of output. In your own personal example, you're saving your company the expense of having to hire another IT person with your skills. Companies can use their increased profits to expand their businesses and hire more people in higher paying jobs, but it's not a given. Hellblazer187 posted:Let's put it another way. Imagine you take the economy we have now, then we immediately halve the IQ/intelligence/productivity of the population. Do you think that will decrease economic output? I suppose it would, but it doesn't mean that everyone would suddenly be doing the jobs and making the income that people who have half the nornal iQ now do.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i don't believe that. americans are getting more engaged with politics than they have been in a long time, and sending bad messages like schumer did hurts that enthusiasm
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:McCain does not give one poo poo about destroying healthcare then why do you think bullshit concessions are going to make him not want to destroy healthcare?  that makes no sense whatsoever
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
Condiv posted:then why do you think bullshit concessions are going to make him not want to destroy healthcare? because he actually cares about decorum and other dumb stuff he's the one man in his party who does, but you have to make him really really upset before he cares! Again, this isn't a theory I'm committed to, it's one a dozen reasons you might make an offer you never intend to go through with - but demonstrating to John Mccain that his party isn't interested in fixing things, only in passing a vote NO MATTER WHAT, actually pulls him farther away from voting yes on Graham-Cassidy or not, negotiations are extremely complex
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
Why indeed does John "Appear to be a Maverick" McCain care about appearances?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
Why are y'all dumb enough to try to engage in conversation with someone who has openly and repeatedly called for genociding people who aren't left enough? Do you really think he is engaging in good faith? Do you think you will convince him?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:21
|
|
|
Condiv posted:mccain's not going to be fooled, i don't know why you think he would be. if he's honestly a moderate republican like he pretends to be, then the prospect of destroying healthcare in america should be enough to convince him to vote against this bill on its own, without the dems ceding ground on maintaining what modicum of healthcare ppaca currently provides. Maybe maybe not, but he's already making rumblings about The Process and he doesn't have to be fooled to see an obvious leap pad into the heights of ROGUE MAVERICK DEFENDER OF THE GOOD SYSTEM. I think my metaphors are getting stretched to thin but whatever. And the dems are not ceding ground. Like if there was an actual negotiation with this poo poo on the table you wouldn't be hearing about it right now because they'd be busy negotiating it. poo poo dems couldn't even if they wanted to, they don't have a hand until September 30th unless Republicans decide to ditch tax cuts for a fifth(sixth?) run at this wall.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:more or less nobody is ever going to hear about it, condiv so then what was the point? at all? why even have his spokesman make this dumb statement if no-one's paying attention?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
Xae posted:Why are y'all dumb enough to try to engage in conversation with someone who has openly and repeatedly called for genociding people who aren't left enough? i don't know Condiv posted:so then what was the point? at all? why even have his spokesman make this dumb statement if no-one's paying attention? this has to be a joke at this point
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
Xae posted:Why are y'all dumb enough to try to engage in conversation with someone who has openly and repeatedly called for genociding people who aren't left enough? it's a uspol tradition to be easily trolled by dumbasses
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
Xae posted:Why are y'all dumb enough to try to engage in conversation with someone who has openly and repeatedly called for genociding people who aren't left enough? when have i ever called for genocide of any kind 
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
Can we just nuke this awful thread and consolidate back into the Trump thread?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
Condiv posted:when have i ever called for genocide of any kind I think he is suggesting that I advocate genocide. Because I feel that people who advocate that their greed is good should be relocated to a secure location till they can sincerely state they were wrong to ever be that way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:26
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:because he actually cares about decorum and other dumb stuff nothing about this involves handing concessions over that don't fix things theflyingorc posted:i don't know you're the one claiming dems are pulling masterful political theater with this move that will be seen by no-one and that no-one will care about. you can't have it both ways theflyingorc
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
In a thread with a lot of lovely posts, this somehow manages to be the worst. Also, the best snub for Condiv is to put him on ignore like he himself suggested you do. Also, also someone earlier asked what deals with Republicans could possibly be made - which is incredibly naive since even this hilariously unproductive and partisan Congress has passed bills on a bipartisan basis on unheralded things like mental health, workforce development, etc... Boon fucked around with this message at 22:34 on Sep 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:29
|
|
|
TGLT posted:Maybe maybe not, but he's already making rumblings about The Process and he doesn't have to be fooled to see an obvious leap pad into the heights of ROGUE MAVERICK DEFENDER OF THE GOOD SYSTEM. I think my metaphors are getting stretched to thin but whatever. strongly disagree here positions have worth, and schumer taking the position that copper plans and expanded waivers will help fix ppaca hurts protecting ppaca. it gives republicans actual ammunition to use against him in public, and it helps the public come around to the idea that these ideas are useful fixes for ppaca
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
i mean, i'm of the opinion that people are really needing better healthcare right now, which is why singlepayer is polling so well. and so i don't think it's a bright move for dems like schumer to signal that they're willing to cut back on healthcare, even if it's political theater. dems have the wind at their back right now and they should be showing that they will not compromise on less people receiving healthcare or healthcare being worsened, and that republicans have to actually try to fix healthcare if they want an inch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
Xae posted:Why are y'all dumb enough to try to engage in conversation with someone who has openly and repeatedly called for genociding people who aren't left enough? congressional republicans: rational. sensible. must be debated and discussed with as equals. people saying "offering to trade people's healthcare away is a bad idea": ludicrous. genocidal. must be cut out from the conversation wherever possible. these people genuinely wonder why they lost everything to a senile game show host, you know
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
Like, I guess I just don't get what's wrong with 2 Dem senators pretending to do hearings with 2 republican senators if it helps defeat repeal, at all. Remember there's 10 days before repeal is dead. 10 days of theater is a small price for even a 1% improvement in the chance of keeping ACA. The next time democrats are in power, the proposal for fixing healthcare will be either single payer or a public option. Which one happens depends on the size of their majority. It's not going to be whatever weaksauce Murray or Nelson are pretending at right now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:Like, I guess I just don't get what's wrong with 2 Dem senators pretending to do hearings with 2 republican senators if it helps defeat repeal, at all. Remember there's 10 days before repeal is dead. 10 days of theater is a small price for even a 1% improvement in the chance of keeping ACA. because it doesn't help defeat repeal? the repubs are gonna continue mobilizing on repeal while pretending to do hearings while the dems pull their punches in hopes of talking down the republicans and avoiding alienating them
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:Why indeed does John "Appear to be a Maverick" McCain care about appearances? He's pretty much spending his free time coffin shopping so he wants to go out as a decent fellow. He's not decent. Not at all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:40
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:Like, I guess I just don't get what's wrong with 2 Dem senators pretending to do hearings with 2 republican senators if it helps defeat repeal, at all. Remember there's 10 days before repeal is dead. 10 days of theater is a small price for even a 1% improvement in the chance of keeping ACA. it's the "if" in that first sentence that's being debated. see, for example, the democrats' recent brainwave re: "let's signal we no longer are firmly pro-choice" if we lived in a world where Republican voters were swayed by hearing the Party of Babykilling (tm Fox News 2000-present) was now inviting debate on the subject, that would not be a hopelessly stupid move! unfortunately, in this one, it turns out for every working class vote you lose, you do not get two suburban republicans. if you alienate your base for the sake of trying to pick up moderate republicans, you learn the hard way that moderate republicans do not exist. and that you just alienated a segment of your base for nothing. sure is a good thing the Democratic Party isn't entirely reliant on the votes of working class women in midterm electi- oh. oh dear.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
Xae posted:Why are y'all dumb enough to try to engage in conversation with someone who has openly and repeatedly called for genociding people who aren't left enough? If ACA gets repealed, I'm not sure people shouldn't start using "2nd Am solutions", as per Trump. If you're going to die because the GOP literally pulled the plug on you, why not take the Biblical path of an eye for an eye, etc.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
Boon posted:In a thread with a lot of lovely posts, this somehow manages to be the worst. Also, the best snub for Condiv is to put him on ignore like he himself suggested you do. I see the liberal wants to have a safe space where they don't have their cherish hopes of bipartisanship mocked. Condiv posted:i mean, i'm of the opinion that people are really needing better healthcare right now, which is why singlepayer is polling so well. and so i don't think it's a bright move for dems like schumer to signal that they're willing to cut back on healthcare, even if it's political theater. dems have the wind at their back right now and they should be showing that they will not compromise on less people receiving healthcare or healthcare being worsened, and that republicans have to actually try to fix healthcare if they want an inch. Its at 49%.I call that polling pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
Xae posted:Why are y'all dumb enough to try to engage in conversation with someone who has openly and repeatedly called for genociding people who aren't left enough? A mixture of boredom and finding horrible amusement at how low they can go. Shimrra Jamaane posted:Can we just nuke this awful thread and consolidate back into the Trump thread? Only if we crash it into the bad thread before the nuke detonates. Mustached Demon posted:He's pretty much spending his free time coffin shopping so he wants to go out as a decent fellow. Okay? And if that keeps this horrible travesty of a bill from passing it's a bad thing because?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
I regret to inform you that the crew who knows fuckall about process is very upset about process. :arzy:, except hyperventilating over his own hyperbole. Dems would like the text "may" to be changed to "shall", and a few other changes to stabilize the system. The GOP would like to weaken the mandatory coverage standards and give states greater latitude in how they spend federal healthcare funding. Since neither group is able to accomplish this on their own, they work to cobble together an agreeable compromise. It would be wonderful if the Dems could accomplish this while giving up nothing of value, but that's rare when you control neither the White House nor a single chamber. Coincidentally, this is what made the Pelosi/Schumer & Trump deal so impressive-go ahead and look at the reactions to that in this subforum, if you think my label atop the post was too mean. Did the Dems offer to give up too much? I don't know. Neither do any of the other posters. The details aren't known at this point. If I were to guess, the concessions were likely heavy: both because the GOP dominates the vote count and because they are less troubled by the status quo. Was it a deal that would have worsened life for Americans overall, or marginalized Americans in particular? I don't know. Neither do any of the other posters. But sure. While the GOP is again aiming to trade the lives of Americans for small tax cuts, save your rancor for the Dems who dared to discuss ways to reinforce our system. It's not telling in the slightest. I'll take one of those Jamocha shakes to go. And if you can, please get Kale to shutthefuckup.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:If ACA gets repealed, I'm not sure people shouldn't start using "2nd Am solutions", as per Trump. If you're going to die because the GOP literally pulled the plug on you, why not take the Biblical path of an eye for an eye, etc. If Murkowski ends up passing this thing, I hope she never knows another moment of peace.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:it's the "if" in that first sentence that's being debated. You don't need to fool the voters. You need to give McCain and Murkowski just enough cover to fool themselves. I agree 100% re: choice though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:I see the liberal wants to have a safe space where they don't have their cherish hopes of bipartisanship mocked. Are you literally 12 years old?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
Just an escapee from the bad thread. The nice and helpful people with the strange jacket will be by soon to collect him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 11:06 |
|
|
Paracaidas posted:I regret to inform you that the crew who knows fuckall about process is very upset about process. why do we need to compromise at all? republicans either have enough votes to shoot themselves in the foot and ruin healthcare for everyone, proving once and for all how monstrous they are, or they don't have enough votes to do it and a compromise only nets us losses like you surmise. as i said before, i do not see at all how bipartisanly loving up healthcare helps dems at all. on the other hand, right now we're offering single payer and we're claiming to do everything we can to protect healthcare for americans. bargaining it away weakens us! Condiv fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Sep 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 23:01
|
|