|
Condiv posted:https://twitter.com/K8brannen/status/938259468420308992 Which means there's no excuse for Obama not knowing as well, and allowing one of his daughters to intern under the man is criminal behavior and should result in Sasha being removed from his care. He was a bad president. He's a worse father.
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 03:39 |
|
|
Democrats are pieces of poo poo for turning a blind eye to at best or enabling sexual predators at worst but I'm totally 100% confident that Sasha herself was never any danger. Sexual predators like Weinstein don't go after people that have power and the capacity to fight back and frankly he needs the contact with the Obamas, not the other way around. The real dangers are for any interns or no-name staffers in her orbit that are about 5ft from rape city when she was working around Weinstein.
Iron Twinkie fucked around with this message at 19:02 on Dec 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:Which means there's no excuse for Obama not knowing as well, and allowing one of his daughters to intern under the man is criminal behavior and should result in Sasha being removed from his care. Barack Obama either didn't know and didn't need to care enough to go digging. Or he knew and knew his daughter would be safe from Weinstein. Basically every one of the harassive men that have been recently outed targeted women they could force to stay silent or could ensure would not be believed. A presidential daughter is probably the least safe target there is. e: ^^^ it was Malia who done the interning Ornedan fucked around with this message at 19:04 on Dec 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
quote:The memo requires that candidates hire “professional staff and consultants who can help execute a winning campaign” and says that the DCCC “will provide staff resumes and a comprehensive list of consultants” to help satisfy this requirement. Hahahahaha so much grift.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
Interesting. I wonder if something like that is how Doug Jones got saddled with Ossof's losing crew?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
Ornedan posted:Interesting. I wonder if something like that is how Doug Jones got saddled with Ossof's losing crew? This is the most reasonable assumption imo. In a small Nebraskan city, a battle over a Costco meatpacking plant reshapes political alliances.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:When you get down to it, class is just another form of identity. Someone can be poor just like they can be LGBT or a racial minority. So yeah, it is really bizarre to act like "idpol" (in the sense it's normally used) is separate from issues of class. You can change your class, its a lot harder to change your race. I think it has less to do with how well off the country they're from is than how they got here. Tons of Asians came in after the passage of the Immigration Act in 1965 but still had to be able to afford to get here, that guaranteed America would just poach from the upper classes in certain countries, but other Asians got in because of poo poo-stirring in SE Asia by America with the Vietnam War and the various Laotians/Cambodians/Vietnamese refugees that came over haven't done nearly as well). And yes, a lot of racial minorities should be conservative as gently caress (see Muslims) but the GOP just can't get stop letting that darn racism get in the way. There's more than a few Asians that grumble about affirmative action wrt college admissions too. And yes, Catholicism among Hispanics tends to have them trending more conservative on social issues like abortion but they are more for big government and big social spending programs, way a-ok with mixed race marriage, and about the same on gay marriage. Again, this needs to be broken down into country of origin as your average Cuban exile is going to be way different than your Hondouran etc etc. quote:It's an automatic recount if norwood wants it
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:Boomers dying off is far more likely to give immediate gains than gradual ethnic shifts, imo. Possibly. I still think that it will be gradual enough (they are saving the best public healthcare system in the world for their greedy selves, after all) that most of it will be countered by sleazy gerrymandering, laws to change how electoral votes are counted (once they manage to split californiait's basically game over), and plain old suppression that the change will be a slight bump rather than a crash. That, and we seem to have a lot of young, new assholes revering reactionary politics as a mean in itself, and the hot new professional class of app-makers and entrepreneurs is viciously conservative once you take weed and gay marriage out of the question.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
Oracle posted:She's already called for a recount and refuses to concede. Shocking. 🙃
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 19:37
|
|
|
Oracle posted:You can change your class, its a lot harder to change your race. You can...sometimes. Class is more than just your pile of cash and how many magazine covers you appear on. I worked for a brazilian multimillionaire who 'founded' a chain of programming schools (actually stole his wife's farm and sold it, then tok over his brother's budding business in that regard). His case is not uncommon. He really -really- wanted to be top dog. But it didn't matter how many times he was on the cover of Forbes, how many pedigree horses he bought in order to attend the fancy parties at the jockey club, they all still avoided him like a leper because he was once a street peddler. There was something Game of Thrones about it, as if he was a peasant granted a noble title by chance (I'd make a Onion Knight reference, but Davos is a swell dude and we are talking about a weeping rancid rear end in a top hat* here) and it got on the last nerve of the true Great Houses. Sure, they'd plaster on a smile if they met at event and take his money if he threw it, but he was never, ever given entry to their class status. Scions of families and industries that had been broke and penniless since the 60s were afforded more respect, social column inches and glitter than his, by orders of magnitude. So sometimes even losing tons of your cash can really change your class. At the extremes, class is just sticky; harder to gain AND lose. Hell, Trump is a bit of an example in that area. From what i know, he wanted to be a natural part of the Rockefeller NY elite with radioactive intensity, and they never accepted him because he had no museum wings named after him. *: Just an example of what kind of fellow we are talking about, in case anyone feels sorry for him: His great insight into computer schooling was not anything regarding lessons or hardware, but BILLING. He arranged his business to sell the -books- to be paid in installments, and by purchasing them, you get a full course completely free! What a bargain! Except that means that if you hate the course or have to change your job and need to cancel the class, you still have to pay the full amount, because you are not paying monthly teaching fees (The usual way of things in Brazil), but installments on a single lump sum. He grew filthy rich by draining low and middle income people who wanted to improve their careers with 100% efficiency, while previous methods sometimes let them get away with some blood still in their veins. There was no ethical factor to him being rejected by the local Lannisters, mind. They objected to his coarse looks and speech and origin, not how he got his money. Had he been nephew to one of them and learned hoe to use a fish fork, he'd likely be president by this point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Ornedan posted:Barack Obama either didn't know and didn't need to care enough to go digging. Or he knew and knew his daughter would be safe from Weinstein. So either: -Obama's not doing his due diligence as a parent and failing to keep his child out of harm's way, which is especially unacceptable when you consider he was the president of the goddamn country and Weinstein being a sexual predator was an open secret he should have known about. -Obama loving knew he was sending his child off to work under a sexual predator and did it anyway because "nothing going to happen because it's MY child  "Good lord. I hope you don't have children and if you do, please give them to someone who has a iota of common sense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:You can...sometimes. Class is more than just your pile of cash and how many magazine covers you appear on. I worked for a brazilian multimillionaire who 'founded' a chain of programming schools (actually stole his wife's farm and sold it, then tok over his brother's budding business in that regard). His case is not uncommon. This is the useless David Brooks conception of what class is. The useful definition of class is an objective description of a person's relationship to capital. The Kingfish fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Dec 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:This is the useless David Brooks conception of what class is. I think there's been a misunderstanding here, the original context for this was talking about class identity, which is related but not quite the same as class.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
Oracle posted:You can change your class, its a lot harder to change your race. This is nonsense. On a the scale of actual populations (which is the only one worth considering in this context) it is impossible to reliably change class. The percent of society that is lower class is more or less constant by the fact that our society needs low-paying jobs to be filled, so at best all you can do is shuffle around who is poor and who isn't. It's attitudes like this that reveal how similar many liberals are to conservatives in terms of their economic views. They may say that they think inequality is a problem, but deep down they believe the same myths about merit determining financial success that conservatives do; they just think that the "less deserving" should be better provided for. Just like class shouldn't be elevated above issues of race/gender/etc, the same goes for the inverse. People who try to do so are no better than the leftists who complain about "idpol" distracting us from class issues. Even when looking at individuals, the path from "rags to riches" is often the sort of thing that only seems to make sense in hindsight. You can point to a person and say "Doing X, Y, and Z lead to becoming wealthy," but that ignores all the people who also did X, Y, and Z and didn't become wealthy. edit: Another factor worth considering is that there are genuinely uncontrollable factors that could influence someone's capability of upward mobility, like whether they're naturally intelligent or have the right brain chemistry to make certain types of hard work easier. Or whether they're born into a good family (honestly this is probably more important than the other stuff I mentioned). That stuff is just as unchangeable as race or gender. Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Dec 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
Oracle posted:You can change your class, its a lot harder to change your race. So fuckin' what, though? Like people are arguing against the claim, but I just don't get why you claimed it. Doesn't seem to have any relevance to the conversation. Unless you're making the broader claim that "if you can change something, it can't be part of your identity and you can't do politics related to that identity" which, uh, well, there's lot of people who will rightfully disagree with that I think. Is that really what you're pushing? GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 20:29 on Dec 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:Possibly. I still think that it will be gradual enough (they are saving the best public healthcare system in the world for their greedy selves, after all) that most of it will be countered by sleazy gerrymandering, laws to change how electoral votes are counted (once they manage to split californiait's basically game over), and plain old suppression that the change will be a slight bump rather than a crash. This right here is why the youth aren’t gonna be some fountain of left wing politics you’d expect. By and large a good chunk of young people I know are economically conservative - believing the welfare state is full of abusers and that people are self made and have to hustle. A lot of these attitudes were born in spite of the political situation because they grew up, struggled with student loans etc and then got lucky. Others jumped on the tech bandwagon and managed to make money. So how because they “made it” they don’t see any problems and are contemptuous of government anything because the government never helped them. A lot of these people are socially progressive to various degrees and would very easily slide into the Hilary Clinton wing of the democrat party with pride. The rest are a mix of libertarians and alt right people. Again the abject failure of government to provide any kind of support to millennials has also discredited economically left political thinking as they were left to fend for themselves. Very few can see beyond their individual self interest and support an economically left leaning platform. I can count such people on one hand. Weed, LGBT acceptance and anti-racism are all the republicans need to adopt to guarantee their eternal control of the US political system. In my opinion if there was ever a dramatic realignment of American politics it would look something like this: 1. An economically conservative libertarian-lite/neoliberal party with inclusiveness towards minorities, LGBT and immigrants. 2. A socially conservative economically left party that represents religious people, racist rurals, disenfranchised blue collar workers and farmers. I think this would result in an extremely competitive political landscape and more realistically represents the values of the American electorate. Kraftwerk fucked around with this message at 20:39 on Dec 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/JoePerticone/status/938487770477223937 Your hero is a bad person.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
^^^ I really thought you were better than this kind of pointless sniping. Bernie isn't "our hero" he's a loving human like everyone else and humans aren't perfect.Kraftwerk posted:This right here is why the youth aren’t gonna be some fountain of left wing politics you’d expect. By and large a good chunk of young people I know are economically conservative - believing the welfare state is full of abusers and that people are self made and have to hustle. A lot of these attitudes were born in spite of the political situation because they grew up, struggled with student loans etc and then got lucky. Others jumped on the tech bandwagon and managed to make money. So how because they “made it” they don’t see any problems and are contemptuous of government anything because the government never helped them. This is laughably, provably wrong and a great example of confirmation bias at work. https://theintercept.com/2016/02/24/top-gop-pollster-young-americans-are-terrifyingly-liberal/ quote:In response to the question, “Which type of political system do you think is the most compassionate?”, 58 percent said socialism and 9 percent said communism. Just 33 percent chose capitalism. Sixty-six percent of the poll’s respondents said corporate America “embodies everything that is wrong about America.”
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Your hero is a bad person. The scourge of being an old white dude strikes again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
Seriously, Loam, I thought we had all these conversations about how we agree more than we disagree and yet you keep trying to rile up the leftists on here because you get mad at Twitter or something and it really needs to stop. If you are searching for a perfect politician, you will literally never find one. This is why I voted for Hillary in 2016 despite her numerous problems. E: VVV "Superpredators" WampaLord fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Dec 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:^^^ I really thought you were better than this kind of pointless sniping. Bernie isn't "our hero" he's a loving human like everyone else and humans aren't perfect. "Refuses to condemn sexual assault" = "Not perfect". 
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
I mean it really is kind of disappointing, that's such an easy layup, and there's already establishment Dem support for Franken resigning and he would've been staking out a strong moral position. Refusing to answer is better than "no I don't think he should resign" but it's kind of baffling honestly, I'd love to know what's happening at Our Revolution right now and what motivated him to do that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Seriously, Loam, I thought we had all these conversations about how we agree more than we disagree and yet you keep trying to rile up the leftists on here because you get mad at Twitter or something and it really needs to stop. Taking bernie's moral failings a bit personally? Wampa, I would genuinely like you to consider what you are saying here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:https://twitter.com/JoePerticone/status/938487770477223937 i recognize this concept may be difficult to grasp for someone who was busy pushing Franken 2020: political affiliation can come from a place other than hero-worship he's poo poo on the f-35 and most foreign policy, too
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:he's poo poo on the f-35 and most foreign policy, too Wait Bernie supports the F-35? lmao ok I can't be too mad about that but that's really funny.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Taking bernie's moral failings a bit personally? I'm more than willing to admit when people gently caress up. That was a gently caress up by Bernie. Can you stop with needless riling up poo poo? Like, honestly? You're acting like this is some fun trolling you get to do and not that you want to have a serious discussion. Loam, I am not lefty Twitter personified. We have had sane discussions in the past, yet you keep trying to dunk on me like I'm lefty Twitter personified.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Taking bernie's moral failings a bit personally? and so, we see the end of the long, slow road of the centrist partisan. all politics reduced to trying to trigger the libs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I mean it really is kind of disappointing, that's such an easy layup, and there's already establishment Dem support for Franken resigning and he would've been staking out a strong moral position. yeah i'd like to hear an explanation as well. i'd also like to know the context here: did he ask sanders during an interview? was there a presser? did he just shout at him in the hallway? if this is really a straight question and sanders refused to answer that's really bad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Can you stop with needless riling up poo poo? Like, honestly? You're acting like this is some fun trolling you get to do and not that you want to have a serious discussion.  Glad you admit that your preferred candidate is a moral failure. You seem to take umbrage with me pointing it out however.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Wait Bernie supports the F-35? lmao ok I can't be too mad about that but that's really funny. yuuuup, he got his piece of the pie for his constituents and is conspicuously silent on the subject as a result. the certain knowledge that He Would Have Won is tempered significantly by the knowledge he would have been just as happy to touch the Orb
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:
I honestly thought you were better than this. Like, what do you think you're achieving here? Why is this a productive line of discussion for you? Or are you just desperately grabbing at anything that makes leftists look bad?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I honestly thought you were better than this. Seriously, why is me pointing out the major moral failure of the preferred leftist candidate so terrible to you? It isn't a personal attack on you, unless you are bernie sanders. I didn't react this way when people pointed out Franken's horrible poo poo. I said "well, thats lovely, I hope he resigns."You seem to agree that this is a lovely thing for Bernie to do, but you want to attack me for it? what?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I honestly thought you were better than this. his preferred candidate for 2020 is resigning tomorrow. it's a hard time for him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:
I mean you really shouldn't be thrilled about Bernie having a fumble, it's not really a good thing. It's not the worst possible way it could've gone but your attitude is unnecessary.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Seriously, why is me pointing out the major moral failure of the preferred leftist candidate so terrible to you? It isn't a personal attack on you, unless you are bernie sanders. I agree that it was a moral failing. I'm done with this line of discussion with you, as it's clear you're not willing to engage in good faith and just want an opportunity to go "Suck it leftists!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:yuuuup, he got his piece of the pie for his constituents and is conspicuously silent on the subject as a result. the certain knowledge that He Would Have Won is tempered significantly by the knowledge he would have been just as happy to touch the Orb Yeah I can already imagine a hypothetical Bernie presidency currently stalling out with a still-Republican House and then him turning to foreign policy and getting chewed alive the same way Obama was. We'd be trying to justify his drone strikes with "well at least there's 10% less than Obama  "
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/JoePerticone/status/938496541832204293 hmmmmm
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I agree that it was a moral failing. As someone that voted for bernie in the primary, am I telling myself to suck it? What are you even arguing here?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
That's an alright save, I suspect he probably got ambushed by the reporter. He still should've immediately said "yes" but that is sufficient for me, personally.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 03:39 |
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:As someone that voted for bernie in the primary, am I telling myself to suck it? What are you even arguing here? Lightning Knight posted:I mean you really shouldn't be thrilled about Bernie having a fumble, it's not really a good thing. It's not the worst possible way it could've gone but your attitude is unnecessary.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 20:55
|
|