|
Mind_Taker posted:No one is saying Trump is winning in the polls. People are making a judgment that Biden is going to lose based on his weakness as a candidate: he raped at least one woman, he’s ceding the media spotlight to Trump, he’s senile, he actively hates the younger generation, and his past actions as a politician have made millions and millions of people’s lives worse. I do think it is entirely possible that Biden will still win on the back of Coronapression but that Biden's short-term marginal benefits will be outweighed by the long term harm he causes. And if Biden does win, his corruption and evil policies will be defended by "ah but the Republicans wanted to do more evil, so actually that makes the lesser evil good."
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:40 |
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:I don't know what you believe these policy gulfs between Biden and Trump to be. Biden has maintained near silence over policy. He hasn't promised to close the concentration camps. He hasn't proposed any significant climate change inititiative. So what do you think, policy-wise, the difference will be? And do you have actual evidence for those differences? while i can't be bothered atm to listen to his podcast or his appearances to hear what he's emphasizing in person, his nominal platform includes quote:End prolonged detention and reinvest in a case management program. The Trump Administration has sought to circumvent the Flores agreement and hold children in detention indefinitely. But proven alternatives to detention and non-profit case management programs, which support migrants as they navigate their legal obligations, are the best way to ensure that they attend all required immigration appointments. These programs also enable migrants to live in dignity and safety while awaiting their court hearings–facilitating things like doctor visits, social services, and school enrollment for children. Evidence shows that these programs are highly effective and are far less expensive and punitive than detaining families. Biden will codify protections to safeguard children to make sure their treatment is consistent with their best interest and invest in community-based case management programs, including those supported by faith-based organizations such as Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services, to move migrants into safe environments as quickly as possible. and quote:Ensure the U.S. achieves a 100% clean energy economy and reaches net-zero emissions no later than 2050. On day one, Biden will sign a series of new executive orders with unprecedented reach that go well beyond the Obama-Biden Administration platform and put us on the right track. And, he will demand that Congress enacts legislation in the first year of his presidency that: 1) establishes an enforcement mechanism that includes milestone targets no later than the end of his first term in 2025, 2) makes a historic investment in clean energy and climate research and innovation, 3) incentivizes the rapid deployment of clean energy innovations across the economy, especially in communities most impacted by climate change. with nice words about the Green New Deal, although as with M4A, I'm not actually 100% sure he knows what it entails as usual, the concern is mostly not that Biden's platform is bad, it's that he won't do it Victory Position posted:I believe it's time for an academic exercise. "donald trump will win because he handled the coronavirus crisis well" is certainly a take
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:23
|
|
|
moths posted:Your Bernie Sanders quote? That's your "explanation?" oh no, you can't wiggle out of it that easily. you've been arguing ad nauseum that bernie should be president. does bernie even know what his own positions are? does he even know what trump's positions are? does he even know what biden's positions are? they're his positions! we all know the answer is yes, yes, and yes. you don't need to agree with every one of bernie's positions. but claiming he himself has no understanding of those positions? well, that's another thing. that's different from the tactical consideration of how much negative campaigning to do. that's bernie's description of his positions and the relative difference between them, trump, and biden. that's not a tactical decision, that's you either claiming he lied to everyone, is just plain senile as all loving hell, or needing to admit actually bernie may have some inkling what his positions are, the positions of the current president are, and the positions of a guy he worked with for years are., if we wanted a rigorous comparison we could compare positions all day, and that's always going to go in my favor. but that would presume we have a reality-based debate, which we're obviously not going to have on your end. you tried to pretend part of my post didn't exist! this is a thread where "joe biden was fourth after SC" was an article of faith! it's something we don't need to debate, because anyone who can post on this forum can read and has, presumably, opened a news site or two in their day. there's no way to reason yourself into a "both the same" position if you don't desperately, desperately need yourself to wind up there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:23
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:while i can't be bothered atm to listen to his podcast or his appearances to hear what he's emphasizing in person, his nominal platform includes It depends on what he means by "proven alternatives." Because during the Obama presidency, the "proven alternative" they used to follow the Flores agreement (which at first they argued didn't apply to children detained with their families) was to expedite deportation proceedings to such a breakneck pace that they argued (successfully, I might add) in court that 3 year olds could represent themselves in immigration hearings.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:26
|
|
|
Let me see if I got this right. NY cancelled the pres. primary to try to keep Bernie from getting the votes he would get there just in case Biden has to drop out? Thereby weakening Bernie's chances even more? Because he still had a good chance to win that primary, right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:29
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:let's do enviromental. so first, the bolded section is a pre-emptive "except that one. that one doesn't count." biden's climate change initiative is likely not significant enough. this is in contrast to trump's climate change initiatives: to deliberately make it worse, even where it makes no sense to do so and even the regulated industry is saying "nah we're good" for example, the car MPG rollback (and attempts to strip CA of its ability to raise those requirements). biden's plan to reduce fracking (which was probably not good enough) may just plain be moot as the entire industry is likely dead and are all going bankrupt right now. They both result in a ruined climate. So they are effectively identical. GreyjoyBastard posted:End prolonged detention and reinvest in a case management program. The Trump Administration has sought to circumvent the Flores agreement and hold children in detention indefinitely. But proven alternatives to detention and non-profit case management programs, which support migrants as they navigate their legal obligations, are the best way to ensure that they attend all required immigration appointments. These programs also enable migrants to live in dignity and safety while awaiting their court hearings–facilitating things like doctor visits, social services, and school enrollment for children. Evidence shows that these programs are highly effective and are far less expensive and punitive than detaining families. Biden will codify protections to safeguard children to make sure their treatment is consistent with their best interest and invest in community-based case management programs, including those supported by faith-based organizations such as Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services, to move migrants into safe environments as quickly as possible. This is kind of ridiculous. There isn't a single tangible commitment. He could hire one new judge and technically abide by this statement. The bolded segment is so incredibly Republican even I'm a little shocked. GreyjoyBastard posted:Ensure the U.S. achieves a 100% clean energy economy and reaches net-zero emissions no later than 2050. 1. That's WAY too late. 2. It's an obvious lie, because he can't ensure any goal is accomplished after he is loving dead.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:29
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:let's do enviromental. so first, the bolded section is a pre-emptive "except that one. that one doesn't count." biden's climate change initiative is likely not significant enough. this is in contrast to trump's climate change initiatives: to deliberately make it worse, even where it makes no sense to do so and even the regulated industry is saying "nah we're good" for example, the car MPG rollback (and attempts to strip CA of its ability to raise those requirements). biden's plan to reduce fracking (which was probably not good enough) may just plain be moot as the entire industry is likely dead and are all going bankrupt right now. what you're missing in all of this is that the end result of both is a dead planet. period. so yes, maybe trump will result in a deader planet slightly faster but i doubt surviving ancestors will give a poo poo which rapist bumblefuck idiot you voted for in 2020 because neither of them is going to help. just because one of them is a literal captain planet villain doesn't absolve the other one of his "science informed" plan that fails to meet the general scientific consensus of what the gently caress needs to be done on even the most basic level. e: biden's climate plan is the insipid kind of liberal nonsense that lets them pat each other on the back for doing "something" and then ignore the problem as addressed and accounted for. incrementalism doesnt work even when you have the liberty of time, let alone when we're on the literal threshold of hell. Solanumai fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Apr 27, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:30
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:"donald trump will win because he handled the coronavirus crisis well" is certainly a take the argument is that trump can point to giving some form of concrete help to americans during a crisis while biden and obama can point to........ that infrastructure program????????
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:31
|
|
|
Waltzing Along posted:Let me see if I got this right. NY cancelled the pres. primary to try to keep Bernie from getting the votes he would get there just in case Biden has to drop out? Thereby weakening Bernie's chances even more? Because he still had a good chance to win that primary, right? It's not "in case Biden has to drop out." At this point it wouldn't be Bernie even if he did. There's two arguments as to why they are doing it, and since they are not mutually exclusive, it is likely they are both true. 1- By removing the presidential primary from the ballot, Bernie supporters won't vote down ballot, and that helps Cuomo lackeys. 2- By removing the presidential primary from the ballot, Biden gets 100% of the NY delegates. Even though Bernie lost, his delegates can still get seats in the several different DNC committees (platform, rules, etc). To get a seat on those committees you need 25% of all delegates. Which is why Bernie suspended his campaign and insisted he'd still be on the ballot on the remaining primaries. So this NY announcement comes on the heels of CA, CO and other state democratic parties saying that suspending a campaign is the same as withdrawing, so that Bernie gets no statewide delegates from those states. The rule itself hasn't changed, and this interpretation of suspending=withdrawing is new. In 08 Hillary was able to keep her delegates for the convention by suspending instead of withdrawing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:34
|
|
|
Why should I trust Oil & Gas executives when they promise to have a plan for the climate? Because they work for Biden? Or because they did their corruption under the Obama administration before getting their millions in payoff? Which is it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:36
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:My dude, seriously? 2050? 3. Democrats put in long rollout times like this into bills because it gives lobbyists time to undermine and dismantle them before they take effect.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:36
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:It depends on what he means by "proven alternatives." while i get what you're saying, he actually managed to provide a link to a study here (which didn't show up in the puretext quoting, lol whoops) that presumably covers the sort of thing they're referencing ...oh hey, i've met the author, small world https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1875&context=facscholar extremely simplified tldr: she argues pretty compellingly and in ways that might get through to, well, the Biden administration, for letting families live freely in the US and hooking them up with case managers, lawyers, 'holistic support', and a supportive community Mind_Taker posted:Sure, I also think he has a good chance of winning for the reasons you stated. But so would literally any Democrat in that case (except maybe Bloomberg?) and it would have nothing to do with Biden being a good candidate. if anything the fucker's going to squander the chance for a blowout and then squander the chance to use that blowout to get real actual change made 
Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 20:40 on Apr 27, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:36
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I do think it is entirely possible that Biden will still win on the back of Coronapression but that Biden's short-term marginal benefits will be outweighed by the long term harm he causes. Sure, I also think he has a good chance of winning if the economy is still in the shitter. But so would literally any Democrat in that case (except maybe Bloomberg?) and it would have nothing to do with Biden being a good candidate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1254855628872278017
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:40
|
|
|
i got owned posted:Starting to think this democracy thing might be overrated Unironically, this is the real lesson that this fiasco teaches. Just as we blame the mouth breathing chuds for supporting Trump, we can blame the idiots that choose Biden in the primary. It wasn't the DNC. It's wasn't a conspiracy. It was people. Stupid, moronic people. And they will always be with us.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:41
|
|
|
Someone is going to ask him about it at a town hall, and he's going to tell that person to vote for someone else. I do love it when he tells people to vote for someone else.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:43
|
|
|
Ither posted:Unironically, this is the real lesson that this fiasco teaches. They had help. What's on TV/Facebook really drives a lot of these people. I don't think it's fair to just say they're outright stupid - they just don't care about this poo poo and I hardly blame them because it's endlessly loving aggravating.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:45
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:3- With regards to healthcare, that is an easy one where he could have signalled something. Medicaid expansion was the best part of the ACA. Granted, he can't force states that rejected expansion to do anything. But he could have proposed an expansion of medicaid eligibility. Instead, his one proposal to deal with Corona is opening the ACA exchanges for those who were not technically fired. on the no-expansion states, biden's plan is the following (which is built on his platform of implementing a public option): quote:Giving Americans a new choice, a public health insurance option like Medicare. If your insurance company isn’t doing right by you, you should have another, better choice. Whether you’re covered through your employer, buying your insurance on your own, or going without coverage altogether, the Biden Plan will give you the choice to purchase a public health insurance option like Medicare. As in Medicare, the Biden public option will reduce costs for patients by negotiating lower prices from hospitals and other health care providers. It also will better coordinate among all of a patient’s doctors to improve the efficacy and quality of their care, and cover primary care without any co-payments. And it will bring relief to small businesses struggling to afford coverage for their employees. https://joebiden.com/healthcare/ i am certainly open to the second half being technically flawed (in fact, I did not know this part of his platform existed until I went searching) but it seems to address the no-expansion states in a comprehensive way: you get a free public option like medicare. the one thing that jumps out at me is it appears to give those awful red states a free ride, while the states that expanded keep paying part of the share, but i assume that's fixable. joepinetree posted:1- The two main things making the life of immigrants a living hell are: IIRIRA, a 1996 law that restricted judicial review for immigration cases, instituted 10 year bans, and expanded the list of reasons why LEGAL immigrants may be deported; and Obama making Secure Communities mandatory nationwide. Neither policy would have ever passed under a republican, but they became policy because of democrats. One area where Biden could start was to maybe accept that these were mistakes that need to be reversed. Instead, his first ad calls Trump too soft on Chinese immigration, despite the science pointing to Europe as the source of the outbreak in the US. This is a signal that he would indeed push for more regressive immigration policy, and given the general positive attitude towards his ad by democrats, it would likely pass. Saying nothing would have been better. Admitting previous mistakes more so. But he did the opposite and signaled pretty strongly that he would use anti-Chinese hysteria to his benefit. IIRIRA is a technical issue i'm not all that familiar with and really can't discuss well. Secure Communities was discontinued by the Obama Administration in 2014 and restarted by Trump (and if I recall correctly, the expansion was part of the Obama Administration's ultimately failed gambit that if they delivered "border security" republicans would deliver immigration reform, which has since been comprehensively debunked). i certainly don't see an explicit promise to revoke it, but i don't think you can discuss the Obama Administration implementing it without also mentioning they ended it. His immigration platform generally is pretty pro-immigration, though not as much so as it should be. But it includes a ton of very positive stuff and it is pro-immigration rather than anti-immigration. the argument that Biden called Trump soft on chinese immigration is simply not true.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:45
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:oh no, you can't wiggle out of it that easily. you've been arguing ad nauseum that bernie should be president. I think you have me confused with someone else, unless your "you" is collective here. But your answer to "Why is Biden better than Trump?" distills down to "Bernie said so," which isn't even an answer, much less a Well Reasoned Opinion. And like, if you suddenly respect Sanders so much why don't you care about the ratfucking he got?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:46
|
|
i got owned posted:Starting to think this democracy thing might be overrated I would like an order of New Democracy, please.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:48
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:It's not "in case Biden has to drop out." At this point it wouldn't be Bernie even if he did. Ironic that the Democratic party is in fact anti-democratic. Why anyone would continue to vote for this dogshit party because it's the "lesser evil" after today is beyond me. I will only fill in the circle for avowed socialists going forward, and any race that doesn't have one is getting left blank.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:50
|
|
|
Shere posted:what you're missing in all of this is that the end result of both is a dead planet. period. so yes, maybe trump will result in a deader planet slightly faster but i doubt surviving ancestors will give a poo poo which rapist bumblefuck idiot you voted for in 2020 because neither of them is going to help. just because one of them is a literal captain planet villain doesn't absolve the other one of his "science informed" plan that fails to meet the general scientific consensus of what the gently caress needs to be done on even the most basic level. yeah no. see, this is why this is not a position people in this thread have reasoned themselves into and it is not a position that they can be reasoned out of. there is no comparison between biden's and trump's enviromental policies. that is very clear, and once pointed out the response is "well so what, its not good enough" it's not. but you get closer to fixing it,. there is zero, nada, nil chance of fixing anything while trump is in charge. he will make it worse just for the sake of making it worse. you know that. you know that's not the case with biden, and that even if biden's plan is not good enough (it's not) it improves things and keeps you moving in a direction where it can be improved. but you don't want to believe that, so you don't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:51
|
|
|
A4R8 posted:I would like an order of New Democracy, please. you fool, that's just a con to release Democracy Classic in a few years
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:51
|
|
|
I'm just following Biden's instructions to not vote for him if I want people's material conditions to improve.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:54
|
|
|
Ither posted:Unironically, this is the real lesson that this fiasco teaches. Except by and large the people didn't really get a fair chance to vote now did they? Even when they fought for their right to vote, then waited in lines for 6+ hours, and/or risked death they just as often they'd have their votes overridden by either an undemocratic rule or undemocratic ruling. When the media is as willing to lie about the threats of climate change, or the state of income inequality, I don't blame the people for not knowing that actually the "Paris accord" doesn't exist and Biden actually meant the "Paris agreement" and its actually worthless (thanks Obama). Our expert systems have failed us because they've fallen into the trap of denying reality for political expedience.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:54
|
|
|
Wow, this Public Option idea seems so familiar. I can't put my finger on it, but I remember someone else promising to get us a public option. And then we elected them, and nothing happened. Who was that? Who was that guy? Oh, right. Joe loving Biden.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:55
|
|
|
moths posted:I think you have me confused with someone else, unless your "you" is collective here. my answer to "why is biden better than trump" is that it's so loving obvious anyone who reads a newspaper knows it instinctively, unless they have extremely motivated reasoning - reasoning i discussed at length. we both know you didn't reason yourself into that position and no discussion of platforms is going to get you out of it. so that would be hours of work that would be wasted. instead, i'm simply going with pointing out the most obvious ludicrious result you would need: that bernie himself doesn't know what his positions are. you can't even figure out a response to that! you're just trying to paraphrase and dismiss it because there isn't a response: either bernie doesn't know his positions, or he does. if he doesn't know his positions, why were you voting for him; if he does (he does) then hmm, it turns out trump and biden are not the same. the "ratfucking!!!" is something i already debunked of people who somehow were unable to figure out how many delegates biden had after south carolina
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:59
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:yeah no. see, this is why this is not a position people in this thread have reasoned themselves into and it is not a position that they can be reasoned out of. there is no comparison between biden's and trump's enviromental policies. that is very clear, and once pointed out the response is "well so what, its not good enough" Why should anyone believe that about Joe? He's made things intentionally worse for his own benefit tons of times. Or is it actually better that you can't declare bankruptcy from student loans? His "fix" is literally just undoing the thing he made worse for his benefit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 20:59
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Wow, this Public Option idea seems so familiar. I can't put my finger on it, but I remember someone else promising to get us a public option. And then we elected them, and nothing happened. Who was that? Who was that guy? "Joe Biden is not proposing good things" and "Joe Biden will not do the good things he is proposing" are different statements. The first one is false, albeit understandable to hold if you have approximately my daily diet of news and don't Check His Website, and we should try to inhabit an at least truth-adjacent reality. The second one I agree with to some extent. A lesser extent than a lot of posters, which is why my position in the interminable November argument is different.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 21:01
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:When the media is as willing to lie about the threats of climate change, or the state of income inequality, I don't blame the people for not knowing that actually the "Paris accord" doesn't exist and Biden actually meant the "Paris agreement" and its actually worthless (thanks Obama). Our expert systems have failed us because they've fallen into the trap of denying reality for political expedience. that's a new one obama was worthless because he didn't make the paris agreement legally enforceable, which would have meant he would need 2/3rds of the (republican-controlled) senate to vote to approve it, and instead worked around republicans to get a pretty good agreement that is not exactly a-tier analysis
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 21:01
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:yeah no. see, this is why this is not a position people in this thread have reasoned themselves into and it is not a position that they can be reasoned out of. there is no comparison between biden's and trump's enviromental policies. that is very clear, and once pointed out the response is "well so what, its not good enough" 4 years of half measures is not "closer" to fixing climate change because this is binary at this point: either we're doing something to reverse trajectory or we're doomed. that's it. nothing Biden is proposing is even close to reversing trajectory. there's no deferring it any longer. we can't increment ourselves out of a boiling planet. e: and the comedy of it is that the Green New Deal exists and seems to be pretty good and would be a really nice olive branch to the left to go "yes, i like this thing"
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 21:03
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MattBors/status/1254858502171799554 Fantastic stuff, you couldn't script it better
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 21:06
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:yeah no. see, this is why this is not a position people in this thread have reasoned themselves into and it is not a position that they can be reasoned out of. there is no comparison between biden's and trump's enviromental policies. that is very clear, and once pointed out the response is "well so what, its not good enough" This analysis fails to understand the basic mechanics of climate change. As I've repeatedly posted in this thread, even the IPCC agrees that the scale and speed of changes required are unlike anything in human history. Climate change is not the same category of problem as say homelessness. This isn't like where we can get a few people more people homes each year and slowly tackle the problem (even if needlessly slowly). Climate change requires completely transforming our society and economy. At the scale of change required, Biden's pro-Oil & Gas policies still leave this country functionally without a climate change policy. A metaphor I've used before is we are in a dingy heading out to sea, paddling as fast as we can towards an oncoming hurricane. If we don't turn back soon we will surely die. Trump is our leader and is actively bucketing water into the boat from the sea. Biden wants to replace him on a plan of phasing out bucketing water into the boat over the next few hours as the solution to the hurricane. Both say turning back to shore is scientifically impossible. You're correct that Trump will kill us marginally faster than Biden, but the scale of the problem is so massive that it renders the slight delay in our nation destroying itself under Biden functionally the same. And Biden's climate denialist tendencies will force the rest of the party rightward on climate with him. Thus restricting future chances at policies that have now have to be even more radical (and thus get more resistance from the Biden wing) thanks to Biden's delays. If the GND was too radical for 2020, every climate policy from now on that is realistic must be more radical. Good luck getting that past Biden's Oil & Gas filled DNC. Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 21:10 on Apr 27, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 21:08
|
|
|
Waltzing Along posted:Let me see if I got this right. NY cancelled the pres. primary to try to keep Bernie from getting the votes he would get there just in case Biden has to drop out? Thereby weakening Bernie's chances even more? Because he still had a good chance to win that primary, right? It's because if Bernie has a certain number of delegates he can influence the DNC platform, if he does not then he has absolutely 0 input
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 21:09
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/CillizzaCNN/status/1254858686561828865
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 21:11
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:it's not. but you get closer to fixing it,. there is zero, nada, nil chance of fixing anything while trump is in charge. he will make it worse just for the sake of making it worse. you know that. you know that's not the case with biden, and that even if biden's plan is not good enough (it's not) it improves things and keeps you moving in a direction where it can be improved. but you don't want to believe that, so you don't. This is a delusion. There is no incremental solution to climate change. We've been following the primary and we've seen how aggressive and confrontational he is with climate activists whenever they try to push his policies left. He even loving tells them to vote for someone else. I currently don't see any pathway for something like a GND through Biden.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 21:13
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:on the no-expansion states, biden's plan is the following (which is built on his platform of implementing a public option): Secure Communites was replaced with Priority Enforcement Program that had minor changes and in the words of ICE agents themselves claimed there was no difference: https://www.nilc.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Assumption-of-Risk-2018-03.pdf quote:In a 2014 memo, DHS terminated the Secure Communities program and replaced it with the Priority Enforcement Program (PEP) as its primary enforcement program for working with state and local jails to identify removable individuals in custody.28 DHS stated in PEP’s establishing memo that the program was intended to “address the increasing number of federal court decisions that held that detainer-based detention by state and local law enforcement agencies violates the Fourth Amendment.”29 The adminis-tration’s stated goal for PEP was to remedy serious problems with Secure Communities and restore trust with law enforcement and immigrant communities. But PEP failed to meet this goal. And for the "simply not true" bullshit, Biden's ad literally says that Trump "rolled over for the Chinese" and it literally says "Trump let in 40000 travelers from China into America." This is literally from a Biden campaign memo:  The 40,000 refers to the people who were exempt from the travel ban, who are US citizens, greencard holders and their families.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 21:14
|
|
|
Shere posted:4 years of half measures is not "closer" to fixing climate change because this is binary at this point: either we're doing something to reverse trajectory or we're doomed. that's it. nothing Biden is proposing is even close to reversing trajectory. there's no deferring it any longer. we can't increment ourselves out of a boiling planet. you don't actually believe this, or you'd be desperate to get trump out of office in 2020. like it's not worth having the discussion when we both know that you don't actually believe the thing you're saying. if you believed it was absolutely vital to get very strong environmental action done in the next four years or the planet dies, and that matters to you, you would not be going "eh gently caress it i don't care anymore im going home" the funny thing is that it is very true we need action - stronger than biden has pledged to date! but if four years of half-measures are not good enough, you know what is definitively not good enough? four years of negative measures. if biden wins in 2020 he can change his mind. doesn't even need to be likely! but there's a chance of getting something done, and there is none under trump. it does matter, which is why it's vital to get republicans out of power! if biden doesn't do a good job in the first two years, we can try to pressure him with a better congress. again, i'm not bothering to actually argue what i think biden will do, because that's pointless in this thread. i'm pointing out what you say motivates you, what you say you believe, and your actions are fundamentally in conflict. you have first reached the conclusion that you are not going to vote for biden, and from there you are concocting rationalizations, however obviously at odds with reality.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 21:15
|
|
|
Joe Biden loving sucks and so does the entire Democratic Party and they are going to lose in 2020 which is going to be monumentally depressing. It's okay though because we're all going to die eventually.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 21:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:40 |
|
|
The options are climate change gets radically addressed, it gets worse with regulatory rollback etc, or it gets worse by lovely half-baked policy that lets people think it's being addressed
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2020 21:17
|
|