|
Ice Phisherman posted:Don't forget DC. It has a population larger than Wyoming and has no representation in congress past a fig leaf non-voting member. i agree but there's historical precedence for DC being not a state. Puerto Rico's existence is a historical anomaly
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2019 21:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 04:07 |
|
|
yeah US territories are weird. In the 2000s republicans passed bills letting sweatshops with 'guest workers' and zero protections run in like...Guam? and still get the MADE IN USA label.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2019 22:46
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:yeah US territories are weird. In the 2000s republicans passed bills letting sweatshops with 'guest workers' and zero protections run in like...Guam? and still get the MADE IN USA label. Saipan I think
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2019 22:57
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:Democrats would have to maintain a majority in the House + win a simple majority in the Senate (I think they need 52 or 53 seats since some Blue Dog Dem senators already said they'd vote against changing the filibuster) + get the presidency + immediately eliminate or modify the filibuster to what it was decades ago so everything couldn't be stopped up in the Senate by a single Repub and THEN the Dems would have to do stuff (at a minimum) like get the Fairness Doctrine reinstated. We need this so bad... I'd rather we just fire fox news into the sun, but honestly, just making it so news in America isn't hyper-partisan would go a long loving way in returning our politics to sanity. theflyingorc posted:The fairness doctrine would be absolutely horrible and only give credence to insane right wing theories on the regular news uh...  , gently caress CNN and NBC already do it too. I mean... it would make people listen to that poo poo on regular news where it will be challenged, instead of now where they just lie to people for years until no one questions the lies. people ITT just loving HATE the fairness doctrine because it'll what? Put Chris Christie on Meet the Press? We'll have to listen to fuckin' Eric Erikson on MSNBC? We'll have to watch Jake loving Tapper? Guys, corporate centrist broadcast media is ALREADY giving right-wing bullshit a platform. The problem is Fox News and Talk Radio exist and it's all 40% of the country even listens to. Chilichimp fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Dec 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2019 20:31
|
|
|
Venomous posted:For an example of how this works in practice, look at the BBC, which is pretty much Conservative Party state media now uh, that's not at all how this would work. Think more like Australia... where they have climate panels on TV with 5 exports and 1 climate denier and they all take turns dismantling his stupid junk science and conspiracy theories. Chilichimp fucked around with this message at 20:49 on Dec 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2019 20:38
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:uh... You realize that this would make them find "both sides" on every issue, right? Now they're legally required to have a climate change denier every time we discuss climate change, weeeeeeeeeee
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2019 20:46
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:You realize that this would make them find "both sides" on every issue, right?  edit: like are you guys just scared that we'll reinstitute the fairness doctrine and then suddenly everyone will just be like "oh noooooooo... now I believe the DUMB poo poo!" instead of the opposite, where stupid ideas gets challenged by competent experts, and it forces people to confront their cognitive dissonance? Again, most of us are living a centrist media dominated news world where we get to see this disingenuous right wing bullshit and laugh at how inept they are. The other side is just in an echo chamber with liars, hucksters, and propagandists like Jesse loving Waters. That "news" is fascist propaganda, and the point is to turn people against "the left", and that just cannot continue. edit2: this is the drat impeachment thread. the stakes right now are simple. The republican base hasn't budged an INCH on the impeachment proceedings... because they get their information from people who are just playing republican soundbytes, and argue in bad faith that the democrats have nothing. It's editorial from the moment they enter the meeting room. They never once allow facts to get in the way of their narrative. People in right-wing media have openly posited that if Nixon had Fox News, he wouldn't have been impeached, and we're seeing that play out in real time today. Chilichimp fucked around with this message at 21:12 on Dec 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2019 20:50
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:You realize that this would make them find "both sides" on every issue, right? Dont they just let deniers go on the air and spout bullshit to be unrefuted now? I know lots of news people let the right wing go on tv and lie without being called on it. Chuck todd for example loves to let the right wing lie and bullshit about things. Having someone there to say "all of that was bullshit" might improve things.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2019 20:56
|
|
|
Meatball posted:Dont they just let deniers go on the air and spout bullshit to be unrefuted now? I know lots of news people let the right wing go on tv and lie without being called on it. Chuck todd for example loves to let the right wing lie and bullshit about things. Having someone there to say "all of that was bullshit" might improve things. That's not how it would work at all. Chuck Todd would just turn to a Democrat and say, "Your Republican colleague says the sky is pink. What is the Democrats' position?" Every news show would end up as Crossfire. The end you seek would not result from the policy you are pursuing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2019 23:02
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:That's not how it would work at all. Chuck Todd would just turn to a Democrat and say, "Your Republican colleague says the sky is pink. What is the Democrats' position?" Yeah like, who wants a show with both Rahm Emanuel and Chris Christie on at the same time? If we brought back the fairness doctrine, thats what we’d end up with!
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2019 23:42
|
|
|
THE PRESIDENT DOESN'T GET REPRESENTATION IN THE IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS! WITCH HUNT! https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1201298020790345730?s=19
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 01:36
|
|
|
BigBallChunkyTime posted:THE PRESIDENT DOESN'T GET REPRESENTATION IN THE IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS! WITCH HUNT! "Despite the rare opportunity to present evidence to the grand jury, the defendant declines, just because he's so innocent." Edit: Edited in wrong thread. Otteration fucked around with this message at 02:01 on Dec 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 01:57
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:uh, that's not at all how this would work. Much of Fox News programming is exactly that except balanced the other way. The Five, Outnumbered, any panel show or segment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 02:21
|
|
|
Flesh Forge posted:Much of Fox News programming is exactly that except balanced the other way. The Five, Outnumbered, any panel show or segment. Judge Andrew Napolitano occasionally describing how the law works to the dimwits on "The Five" doesn't count.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 04:51
|
|
|
https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/02/politics/house-republican-response-impeachment-inquiry/index.html what the hell is this dumb bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 23:44
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/02/politics/house-republican-response-impeachment-inquiry/index.html Oh really now? quote:"Ultimately, President Zelensky took decisive action demonstrating his commitment to promoting reform ...
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 23:50
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/02/politics/house-republican-response-impeachment-inquiry/index.html I haven't read it, but I would guess fiction.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 23:53
|
|
|
PhantomOfTheCopier posted:Oh really now? it seems to me the issue is the GOP doesnt have a real defense and they can't use any real tactics to really help themselves. like early on, you saw a few of them try to say trump hosed up and the bad thing wasnt that bad, but monster mash and his grave yard smash buried that defense. basicaly they only defense they can use is "trump was perfect and..... whatever".
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 23:54
|
|
|
Spun Dog posted:I haven't read it, but I would guess fiction. i mean yeah, i just meant what the gently caress were they even trying to do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 23:55
|
|
|
It seems like it would have been smarter to hold onto this until it was sent to the Senate. This allows time for Democrats to tear into it during further hearings in the Judiciary committee Edit: quote:"The evidence presented does not prove any of these Democrat allegations and none of the Democrats' witnesses testified to having evidence of bribery, extortion, or any high crime or misdemeanor," according to a copy of the report reviewed by CNN. If we ignore the evidence, then there is no evidence QED
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 00:05
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:It seems like it would have been smarter to hold onto this until it was sent to the Senate. This allows time for Democrats to tear into it during further hearings in the Judiciary committee like i have said. they can't acknowledge it because trump would get mad and turn the base against them. it would be so loving easy for the gop to say, "well trump hosed up big but this isnt impeachment level, maybe centure instead or something" but nope.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 00:08
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:Judge Andrew Napolitano occasionally describing how the law works to the dimwits on "The Five" doesn't count. I mean the Juan guy who's a regular token blackman/loony lefty 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 00:50
|
|
|
We all thought if Trump shot someone on 5th avenue in broad daylight, the Republicans would say "yeah he did it but we don't care." We were wrong - they will say "this is all an insane liberal conspiracy and there is no evidence it happened."
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 01:29
|
|
|
KillHour posted:We all thought if Trump shot someone on 5th avenue in broad daylight, the Republicans would say "yeah he did it but we don't care." We were wrong - they will say "this is all an insane liberal conspiracy and there is no evidence it happened." "everyone does it"
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 01:38
|
|
|
(Shits all over the place, repeatedly) "Awww how cute!" I never knew Republicans liked babies, but here we are. I also can't quite believe that people aren't going to see through their deception and vote them out, but maybe if they scream loud enough the subpoenae will be scaled back and the Senate will never get to draw out all the real transcripts that corroborate the 23 people that need to be chucked in prison. I can imagine what will happen if the impeachment doesn't succeed in the house.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 01:41
|
|
|
PhantomOfTheCopier posted:(Shits all over the place, repeatedly) idk. i feel like this poo poo will probably hurt the GOP more in 2020 than think it will. especially after last years and this years elections. catering to only to the core base while pissing on everyone else doesnt help them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 02:26
|
|
|
Yep. Sanders or Warren beats Trump by 20 million votes
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 02:32
|
|
|
oxsnard posted:Yep. Sanders or Warren beats Trump by 20 million votes this. also, hell even stupid shits like biden probably beat trump by a ton too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 02:40
|
|
|
They're definitely showing their true colors. The White House is all over the place, still, complaining about not being able to attend Wednesday while saying they won't attend in any case. Meanwhile,https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/02/judiciary-witnesses-impeachment-trump-074799 posted:“There’s nothing the American people want to hear less than a bunch of overly educated law professors give their advice” about impeachment, Jordan Sekulow, an attorney for the president, said on his father’s talk radio show. At the same time, quote:Also Monday, Trump’s personal legal team mocked the Democrats for turning to constitutional experts rather than first-hand witnesses who could identify impeachment-worthy behavior by the president Aside: How many US Presidents were elected with no prior political experience? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 05:11
|
|
|
PhantomOfTheCopier posted:They're definitely showing their true colors. The White House is all over the place, still, complaining about not being able to attend Wednesday while saying they won't attend in any case. Meanwhile, Other than Trump: Eisenhower, Grant, Taft, Hoover, Taylor Lincoln had very little. At the other end, Buchanan was a savvy career politician whom Trump will finally displace as Worst President Ever. Political experience in and of itself doesn't seem to be a particularly good predictor of presidential success.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 05:21
|
|
|
Washington???
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 05:35
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:Washington??? He held a number of elected positions in Virginia. No national politics, of course, because there was no nation yet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 05:50
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Other than Trump: Taft had been Secretary of War, among other things, before becoming President, or are we strictly talking about running for an elected office instead of being appointed?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 05:51
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:Taft had been Secretary of War, among other things, before becoming President, or are we strictly talking about running for an elected office instead of being appointed? I was going on "running for elected office." All of them on the list had some sort of executive experience in government-related positions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 06:08
|
|
|
When it's all said and done, will Trump go down as the worst president in history? Buchanan seems nearly impossible to top, so I think Trump would have to win a second term in order to beat him out. I'd imagine that a second Trump term would essentially head us down a path of no return, perhaps even to a new civil war and/or destabilization of government as we know it. One term Trump could take the victory if it turns out he actually is an active Russian double agent instead of a useful idiot and opportunist. That alone could cement his legacy
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 06:12
|
|
|
Maybe not the worst in terms of the effects of his policies, but definitely the worst at being a president. Unless you count post-stroke Wilson.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 06:14
|
|
|
You know you got a poo poo lawyer when he calls the lawyers on the other side "overly educated."
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 06:15
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Maybe not the worst in terms of the effects of his policies, but definitely the worst at being a president. Unless you count post-stroke Wilson. Eh, it’s hard to say on the policies because we won’t really know for years. Buchanan was terrible because his reaction to slavery was to gently caress up abolitionists to try and keep Kansas a slave state, then to turn a blind eye when Southerners started embezzling federal munitions to prep for civil war. If Trump’s tariffs, rate cuts, and tax cuts lead to a massive depression where the government doesn’t have the resources to fix things, or if his general demeanor towards allies lead to a breakdown of the post-Cold War order in terrible ways (NATO disbanding, South Korea becoming a Chinese client state and reverting back to a dictatorship, Saudi/Iranian/Israeli wars, etc.) then I could absolutely see Trump being worse than Buchanan. But it really is a terribly low bar to slump under.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 06:32
|
|
|
I think the reason that Trump is so uniquely awful is that his horribleness is literally broadcast across the world as it happens. It's often not even through news intermediaries. His Twitter feed is like if FDR had fireside chats twice a day while he was taking a poo poo and just screamed incoherent nonsense and bigotry into the radio mic. Buchanan existed in a world that was much more fragmented, and not just politically. Communications, meetings and deployment of federal resources took weeks or months.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 06:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 04:07 |
|
|
If Trump will go down as worse than Buchanan, we’ll only know after the upcoming election; when he refuses to step down (if he loses) and causes a(nother) constitutional crisis, he’ll have it in the bag.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 13:15
|
|
