|
https://twitter.com/OsitaNwanevu/status/1060990935146860544
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:01 |
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:jesus christ his profile picture. He found a friend. Squalid posted:leon makes cogent arguments which lead to interesting discussion. I may not always agree with him, but most importantly he's not boring. And being boring is the worst thing a poster can be. He denied the Holocaust.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
Squalid posted:leon makes cogent arguments which lead to interesting discussion. I may not always agree with him, but most importantly he's not boring. And being boring is the worst thing a poster can be. eh, the past week or two all our best trolls have been getting really sloppy with the facts and imho that's inherently boring.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:i'd love to be a rep or senator but only to talk poo poo to these people's faces. The $174,000 salary we talked about on the last page wouldn't be too bad either  Crow Jane posted:You'd think my anger at this cursed image would wear off with time and exposure, but nope! It's the most powerfully bad of McCoy cartoons, which is saying something. It has competition!
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:Wasn't there an article recently claiming Trump is trying to divide the Democrats based on Pelosi being speaker? tim ryan tried to depose her last time i'm famously a pelosi-liker, but if she can't wrangle the votes to be speaker i'm willing to accept that means she'd be less effective at wrangling the votes after becoming speaker
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
foobardog posted:This is the only solution. But then what happens when there's only one person left? Can you guillotine yourself, or should we start training animals to operate them?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/OsitaNwanevu/status/1060715289745211392Bicyclops posted:The $174,000 salary we talked about on the last page wouldn't be too bad either no doubt but it'd truly be to poo poo on cruz and graham et al to their faces. vote for me. vote for spite.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
Eltoasto posted:Huh, so Republicans can replace their leader with the help of troll Dem votes, but not the other way around? Only counting votes within the Dem caucus sounds like the best way, but requiring 218 is pretty crazy. If they want to unseat Pelosi this is the smart way to do it. By requiring 218 votes in conference you ensure that you won't have the Republican choice become Speaker (as the Dem choice will, by definition have a majority of the overall House).
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
Crow Jane posted:But then what happens when there's only one person left? Can you guillotine yourself, or should we start training animals to operate them? Yes, you can absolutely guillotine yourself. It has a cord for a reason.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
Crow Jane posted:But then what happens when there's only one person left? Can you guillotine yourself, or should we start training animals to operate them? I think it's just pulling a lock out, so you probably can do it yourself or train animals or robots!
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:
Alright, but you better stock up on whoopie cushions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
fishing with the fam posted:The tax free component must be capped. Its a straight forward tax dodge in its current form. It would probably be fine to cap it, but "get appointed United States Treasury Secretary and serve at least 2 years" is an extremely limited tax dodging scenario. They also lose all of their tax-advantaged space when they are forced to divest from their IRA and 401(k) because there are $5,500 per year contribution limits on your IRA. So, if they do it relatively early in life (mid 50's or younger) then they will lose money in the long-run.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:Yes, you can absolutely guillotine yourself. It has a cord for a reason. Cool, I know what my nextDIY project is now
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:28
|
|
|
Rick Scott's looking good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:The $174,000 salary we talked about on the last page wouldn't be too bad either It's worth noting that, while this is a pretty sweet salary, it does have to cover quite a lot of expenses, because the congressperson needs somewhere to live in DC and also needs to maintain a residence in their state. DC real estate ain't cheap, so unless you're otherwise wealthy or have a partner who makes good money doing something else, that $174,000 isn't quite the huge salary it sounds like. (Maybe the pro move is just to rent a studio apartment in the absolute cheapest part of your state and never actually live there or something.) I mean, it is, it's certainly a shitload more than I make, but, y'know, it's not like members of the House are going to get rich on their House salary alone. (Which should make anyone immediately suspect of congresspeople who are wealthy, especially those who become more wealthy after entering office.) Really, though, it's just one of the many reasons why it's way too difficult to run for office if you're not already rich.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
axeil posted:If they want to unseat Pelosi this is the smart way to do it. By requiring 218 votes in conference you ensure that you won't have the Republican choice become Speaker (as the Dem choice will, by definition have a majority of the overall House). edit: quote:Although no rule exists, based on tradition and practice from the earliest days of the nation, to be elected speaker a candidate must receive an absolute majority of all votes cast for individuals, i.e. excluding those who abstain. If no candidate wins such a majority, then the roll call is repeated until a speaker is elected. The last time repeated votes were required was in 1923, when the Speaker was elected on the ninth ballot.[9] Ague Proof fucked around with this message at 21:32 on Nov 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:Cool, I know what my nextDIY project is now Personally, I'm frantically typing up a GoFundMe for my new business training bald eagles to operate guillotines
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:Cool, I know what my nextDIY project is now https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1428408/Suicide-by-DIY-guillotine-and-an-ingenious-timing-device.html A builder took 12 sleeping pills and lay on his bed under his home-made guillotine. Hours later the blade was released by an "ingenious" timing device and cut off his head. Boyd Taylor, 36, had spent three months assembling the 8ft-high guillotine. (Don't kill yourself)
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:30
|
|
|
Eltoasto posted:Huh, so Republicans can replace their leader with the help of troll Dem votes, but not the other way around? Only counting votes within the Dem caucus sounds like the best way, but requiring 218 is pretty crazy. The Speaker of the House is a position the whole House votes on. The way it generally works is the majority votes on their speaker candidate internally, majority rule, then everyone in the majority votes for the Speaker on the floor. But if a minority dissents strongly enough to refuse to vote for their party's candidate on the floor, because that vote requires a majority the party cannot make their nominee the Speaker. The HFC threatened to do this (and their predecessor tried) to do this several times. What those democrats are doing is trying to make it so that they don't need to publicly buck their caucus and veto her on the floor, but veto her before she gets to the floor. It's sort of like how the Senate frequently just agrees to set a 60 vote threshold for key votes rather than insist people actually go to the effort of voting down cloture and all the associated votes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:30
|
|
|
Ague Proof posted:Doesn't it only matter who the caucus picks as a plurality and Republicans have no say? I thought that was how it works in the Senate. It's plurality overall. So, there could be weird scenarios where Republicans + 30 Democrats pick a speaker.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:30
|
|
|
Harrow posted:It's worth noting that, while this is a pretty sweet salary, it does have to cover quite a lot of expenses, because the congressperson needs somewhere to live in DC and also needs to maintain a residence in their state. DC real estate ain't cheap, so unless you're otherwise wealthy or have a partner who makes good money doing something else, that $174,000 isn't quite the huge salary it sounds like. (Maybe the pro move is just to rent a studio apartment in the absolute cheapest part of your state and never actually live there or something.) congressmen get fantastic benefits though which goes a way towards mitigating that, since the rich are all about socialism(when it solely benefits them)
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:31
|
|
|
Crow Jane posted:Personally, I'm frantically typing up a GoFundMe for my new business training bald eagles to operate guillotines Crows would learn faster and have the balls to actually do it!
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:31
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:Yes, you can absolutely guillotine yourself. It has a cord for a reason.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:31
|
|
|
Ague Proof posted:Doesn't it only matter who the caucus picks as a plurality and Republicans have no say? I thought that was how it works in the Senate. The speaker of the house is decided by a majority vote. It's possible for someone to get in based on some kind of agreement between various democrats and republicans if they can't swing their caucus
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:32
|
|
|
Ravendas posted:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1428408/Suicide-by-DIY-guillotine-and-an-ingenious-timing-device.html Tbh I don't have the workspace, and my only religion is the sliver of hope for an eternal transhumanist future in luxury gay space communism, so this isn't happening. Respect to that guy tho
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:32
|
|
|
Harrow posted:It's worth noting that, while this is a pretty sweet salary, it does have to cover quite a lot of expenses, because the congressperson needs somewhere to live in DC and also needs to maintain a residence in their state. DC real estate ain't cheap, so unless you're otherwise wealthy or have a partner who makes good money doing something else, that $174,000 isn't quite the huge salary it sounds like. (Maybe the pro move is just to rent a studio apartment in the absolute cheapest part of your state and never actually live there or something.) Mark Sanford quite famously spent his first term in the House sleeping on a cot in his office.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:congressmen get fantastic benefits though which goes a way towards mitigating that, since the rich are all about socialism(when it solely benefits them) They actually cut their health benefits pretty significantly in 2010 and you don't qualify for a fully-vested pension unless you serve 25 years. Congressional healthcare is essentially equal to a regular state employee's healthcare now. It's definitely far better than the average person, but it isn't in the top 5% like it was before. Technically, you have infinite vacation days because you are never required to actually show up to work unless they threaten to expel you for not showing up. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 21:35 on Nov 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:congressmen get fantastic benefits though which goes a way towards mitigating that, since the rich are all about socialism(when it solely benefits them) Oh for sure. I'm not really sure what the solution is for not-wealthy congresspeople. Maybe something like a need-based housing stipend would help. It probably wouldn't need to be used much, but it wouldn't hurt if it was there. The other thing that would really help would be drastically shortening how long political campaigns last. Like if you're not a wealthy person, it's a huge ask to take the amount of time off work you'd probably need to in order to effectively run for congress in a really competitive district. And then if you lose, you're pretty boned. Cutting down on these loving interminable campaigns would help a lot, I expect.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
The Long History of Law Enforcement's Support For White Nationalismquote:In a recent New York Times Magazine cover story entitled “U.S. Law Enforcement Failed to See the Threat of White Nationalism. Now They Don’t Know How to Stop It,” journalist Janet Reitman wrote about what she described as the “failure” of the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and state and municipal law enforcement agencies to identify and combat far right violence due to “broken” practices which created “an atmosphere of apparent indifference” to white supremacists. https://splinternews.com/the-long-history-of-law-enforcements-support-for-white-1830333632
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
Rick Scott comes out at some point next week "We wanted to make you think the Democrats were trying to steal the election in Florida but it was me, Rick Scott, all along!" 
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:34
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:tim ryan tried to depose her last time And a not-insignificant amount of the Democratic caucus voted for Tim Ryan 2 years ago. I think the vote was 134-63 or something like that. So if Tim Ryan runs again he would seemingly have around 60 votes as a starting point, with a ton of Freshmen reps with no loyalty to Pelosi. I think at the very least it'll be an interesting vote in a few weeks. And Tim Ryan has said he wants a new leader regardless of whether it is him or not, so I wouldn't rule out him throwing his weight behind someone who he believes could get more votes than him. (But it will probably be him)
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:34
|
|
|
In more serious posting, I don't think we're likely to see anyone other than Pelosi. It's a bit like how it was when Ryan got elected, no one is eager to be the new Boogeyman. I'd like to be wrong or see Pelosi be more like McConnell.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:35
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:eh, the past week or two all our best trolls have been getting really sloppy with the facts and imho that's inherently boring. That's the whole game, be sincere sometimes and lie through their teeth other times, and it requires a disproportionate amount of effort to keep on top of things and refute the bad faith points. On balance it's loving obnoxious and mods should stop loving around and just permanently ban them from the thread if not D&D entirely
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:35
|
|
|
Ague Proof posted:He found a friend. He did not. If you follow the link in his avatar its quite obvious from the context that rather than literally denying the holocaust, he was making a ham-handed analogy. He made the point badly, but what he was trying to say is obvious enough that when I see statements like this I have to assume you know they are wrong. This makes you look hypocritical, as making disingenuous arguments is typically the reason given for disliking Leon Trotsky 2012.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:35
|
|
|
I think Pelosi is a fine choice for speaker for now. Strip away policy for a minute (and honestly, I think that the Dem policy in the house the next couple years are going to hew closer to progressives than the last time she was in power), and she's wildly effective at managing the caucus and keeping Dems in line. Both in and out of power, defections from party votes were very, very rare, and the Dems in the house acted as a big unified block most of the time. I also think, though, that she needs to start working to get a successor up for 2020 and beyond. Getting a member of the younger wave of Dem reps into the leadership so that they can get a feel for managing the caucus is the best way to ensure that we don't have someone stepping on their dick, Schumer-style, once she's retired.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
Mahoning posted:And a not-insignificant amount of the Democratic caucus voted for Tim Ryan 2 years ago. I think the vote was 134-63 or something like that. So if Tim Ryan runs again he would seemingly have around 60 votes as a starting point, with a ton of Freshmen reps with no loyalty to Pelosi. There's 37 new freshman reps, so the vote starts out at 134-110 even if all of those freshman reps go for him (and my understanding is a lot of the anti-pelosi candidates did not win, because those were mostly long-shot races in pro-trump areas).
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:this is another dumb, obviously factually wrong claim from people who are saying dumb things. the core reason that Democrats have gone on record to say that they don't intend to impeach trump immediately (which is what they've actually said, not that "even if they could") is that even if they passed a bill of impeachment the senate would not convict. they've consistently weaseled out of taking any kind of opposition besides vague whining
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
Bummer, a real threat to Pelosi from the ring pretty much means there is no chance she gets replaced with someone better. The left wing will support her rather than allow some idiot like Tim Ryan to be speaker.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
feed this poo poo into my eyeballs
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:01 |
|
|
foobardog posted:In more serious posting, I don't think we're likely to see anyone other than Pelosi. It's a bit like how it was when Ryan got elected, no one is eager to be the new Boogeyman. I'd like to be wrong or see Pelosi be more like McConnell. Pelosi sucks and has immediately started banging the bipartisan drum, assuring everyone she's useless ahead of time, but she's probably a shoe-in yeah On the bright side, she probably won't be as completely counterproductive as Charles "give my enemies everything they want in exchange for nothing" Schumer, though that's a low bar
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 21:37
|
|