|
Hakkesshu posted:As a non-American, I genuinely don't understand how Manchin and Sinema are allowed to keep their jobs. How can that not shatter any remaining faith you had in the democrats? Even if the dems had the office for the next 20 years who's to say there won't be 8 other Sinemas and Manchins running around preventing them from ever doing anything? People voted for them, is your country run differently?  (Are there places where seats are 100% assigned to party? We have a hybrid, where you vote for party with preferential seating vote, but once the people are in the parliament, then it is their seat, not party's)
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 10:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 14:35 |
|
|
We have party coalitions here specifically to reflect the wide range of voters and to allow the fringe parties to have influence on the majorities. It's not perfect, but it typically stops stupid bottlenecks like these from happening.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 11:09
|
|
|
Xarn posted:People voted for them, is your country run differently? most other countries have more than a 2 party system that allows for these freaks and perverts to get kinda shuffled into their own weird side of things and the central party doesn't have to tell people we just have to keep electing Manchin because woof imagine how bad a REPUBLICAN would be in that seat, I mean he may do something insane like stymie abortion rights or spend months slowly killing basic things like infrastructure bills and child tax credits that were massively popular and the loss of them directly led to a cratering of approval for the dems as a party. Pilfered Pallbearers posted:This is a dumb line of argument and you loving know it. if we had fifty we could have a big nation wide pizza party! Who cares when the dem leadership is actively campaigning, right now, for multiple anti-choice dems and Pelosi is on the record saying they're welcome in the party? The party platform is functionally that abortion rights aren't 'deal breakers', why should we be obligated to vote for them if they matter to us? We have people like Manchin because dem leadership actively nurtures and protects them vs dragging them into a back room and (figuratively) beating them with a folding chair until they vote like actual useful party members. Basically to answer both posts at once, in most countries with actual representative parties party leadership would have told Manchin 'vote for this loving bill or we're going to start looking into how your moron daughter made so much money on insulin, or check out how your multiple coal mines did for you while you were scuttling infrastructure talks' and not had these cutesy little 'lol I guess Manchin's the REAL president huh' jokes and just jerked him off. sexpig by night fucked around with this message at 13:00 on May 12, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 12:56
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/GBBranstetter/status/1524439394383544322 here's what the guys we voted for have been doing, making purely cruel changes to a bill they knew would always fail. They keep saying poo poo like 'well this gets them ON RECORD voting against abortion rights' but A) who gives a poo poo we all already knew about republican views on that poo poo, and B) regarding Manchin's no, so what? Is the leadership going to stop supporting him now that he's ON RECORD? Are they going to support a primary challenger for him? He is ON RECORD now after all. Of course not, because again, Pelosi has literally said anti abortion people are welcome in the party, Joe Biden spent most of his political life strongly against abortion (including amazing quotes like 'I don't think it's only the woman's choice, no'), so what's the point of putting these people ON RECORD if they're fully in line with democratic party views anyway?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 13:10
|
|
|
Pilfered Pallbearers posted:Sorry but you’re wrong. Something something definition of insanity something something keep doing the same thing expecting different results.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 13:13
|
|
|
It seems like American political parties are way more nebulous than in normal countries. Like, you can just say you're in a party and they can't stop you or kick you out? And if you want to run for a particular office as that party's candidate, you can just have a bunch of people (who may or may not also have to say they're members of that party) vote for you to be the candidate, and if the rest of the party doesn't like it that's too bad for them? And if you manage to get elected then you can do whatever the gently caress you like and no one can kick you out of the party or make you toe the line? Am I wrong about this?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 13:45
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:most other countries have more than a 2 party system that allows for these freaks and perverts to get kinda shuffled into their own weird side of things and the central party doesn't have to tell people we just have to keep electing Manchin because woof imagine how bad a REPUBLICAN would be in that seat, I mean he may do something insane like stymie abortion rights or spend months slowly killing basic things like infrastructure bills and child tax credits that were massively popular and the loss of them directly led to a cratering of approval for the dems as a party. Buddy, my country is currently ruled by a 5 party coalition. The only reason that various single issue freaks don't have a lot of power is that the 5 parties together are ~108/200 votes, if they had few less than we would have the exactly same issue. In fact we've had this issue two (?) cycles back, where the ruling 2 party coalition had literally 101 votes. sexpig by night posted:Basically to answer both posts at once, in most countries with actual representative parties party leadership would have told Manchin 'vote for this loving bill or we're going to start looking into how your moron daughter made so much money on insulin, or check out how your multiple coal mines did for you while you were scuttling infrastructure talks' and not had these cutesy little 'lol I guess Manchin's the REAL president huh' jokes and just jerked him off. I like how your good imagined scenario isn't that we have non-corrupt politicians, but that instead they get pressured by the party leadership for their own ends
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 13:47
|
|
|
The problem isn't just with how parties function it's with the Senate as a body itself.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 13:58
|
|
|
Xarn posted:Buddy, my country is currently ruled by a 5 party coalition. The only reason that various single issue freaks don't have a lot of power is that the 5 parties together are ~108/200 votes, if they had few less than we would have the exactly same issue. In fact we've had this issue two (?) cycles back, where the ruling 2 party coalition had literally 101 votes. if you can find some non-corrupt politicians by all means go hog wild but yea I'll be satisficed with a party leadership that uses pressure for good ends rather than what they currently use it for. Like, when was the last time dem leadership used their influence at all? When Pelosi made AOC cry and undo a symbolic non-vote for the loving Iron Dome funding? Tiggum posted:It seems like American political parties are way more nebulous than in normal countries. Like, you can just say you're in a party and they can't stop you or kick you out? And if you want to run for a particular office as that party's candidate, you can just have a bunch of people (who may or may not also have to say they're members of that party) vote for you to be the candidate, and if the rest of the party doesn't like it that's too bad for them? And if you manage to get elected then you can do whatever the gently caress you like and no one can kick you out of the party or make you toe the line? Am I wrong about this? Functionally no. I think by the rules as written you can be kicked out but the worst you see is stuff like having committee seats/chairmanship revoked by the party, I can't remember anyone in either party who was actually removed from the party, a few people got forced to resign/kicked out of office and functionally disavowed but they were still in the party. There's mechanisms for elections, the congressional funding orgs and all, in the past the dems tried to say they'd refuse to use the democratic congressional committee's resources to help candidates who are primarying sitting members but I think they backed off that in some degree when people went 'wait so functionally you're just opposed to the concept of a primary?' and they had to scramble a bit. But yea, the parties are both ~big tents~ yet somehow the republicans manage to deliver for their base consistently in a unified way even with nominally 'weaker' members like Romney and Collins and all.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 14:11
|
|
|
Madison Cawthorne spilled the beans about coke orgies and now the entire right wing media and political machine is trying to turn one of the most openly fascist die hard trump lovers in congress into a big gay secret lib but we can't tell Manchin to get in loving line if he wants to keep the gravy train going.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 14:14
|
|
|
The biggest issue with the Democrats is leadership. The entire party is ran by broke brained, old idiots who are the same idiots who were running it in 2000. They learned the wrong lessons from Clinton in 1992 and keep walking right into the same rake over and over thinking this time it won’t hit them in the face. They haven’t learned a single lesson nor have their picked up on trends in the voters. For example, openly socialist candidates with no money or support were quite competitive in the recent primary elections in deep red areas. Perhaps if one was smart you would use that information and invest in building and supporting those candidates which might make Democrats competitive in areas where they effectively have ceeded completely to the GOP. The other major issue is that the Democrats leadership and party in general has little organization, especially compared to the GOP. In many states even if you are an elected official getting ahold of your local or national party is basically impossible. Compare this to the GOP where they have regular communication both on the state and national level. They push out their talking points quickly to keep everyone on message. They hear the concerns on the ground so they can pick up on trends quickly and capitalize on them. You compare this to the Democrats and you’d be hard pressed for them to know what is happening in Chicago or New York City, let alone Covington, KY or Newton, KS. They have no idea how to message, let alone have a message that they can boost. 2022 is going to be a blood bath. If you live in a Red State I’d look at getting out now while the getting is good, especially if you are a person of color or LBGQT. Abortion is just the tip of the iceberg here.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 14:40
|
|
|
Everybody is like “just get out” like people wouldn’t have done that already if it were an option. And don’t sit too high and mighty in your blue states: McConnell already said a national ban is coming so you all get an extra couple months, at most...
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 15:03
|
|
|
Toxic Fart Syndrome posted:And don’t sit too high and mighty in your blue states: McConnell already said a national ban is coming so you all get an extra couple months, at most... Couple of years, not months. They can't get the WH until then.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 16:58
|
|
|
Humans have a tendency to put off doing things until its too late. And you don't need the white house if you have a supermajority!
|
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 17:02
|
|
|
rujasu posted:Couple of years, not months. They can't get the WH until then. oh, that's fine then
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 18:11
|
|
|
How does this fit into the 'just keep voting' math, anyway? https://twitter.com/nataliewsj/status/1524773334382264320 This district has been blue for 20 loving years, he's not some Manchin 'aw gee but what if a republican wins and does the exact same stuff but with the wrong team jersey on???' situation, and yet the democratic leadership, even literally as they talk about 'protecting' RvW, is actively defending a loving criminal who's anti-abortion.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 18:18
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:How does this fit into the 'just keep voting' math, anyway? It was the same in Illinois with Lipinski until Newman finally took him out. Magically she got hit with a ethics investigation soon after taking office. They are all ghouls that take care of each other and give lip service to helping the public.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 18:25
|
|
|
Hakkesshu posted:As a non-American, I genuinely don't understand how Manchin and Sinema are allowed to keep their jobs. How can that not shatter any remaining faith you had in the democrats? Even if the dems had the office for the next 20 years who's to say there won't be 8 other Sinemas and Manchins running around preventing them from ever doing anything? Sinema got voted into office, and we're stuck with her in the senate until her next election comes around (and she's massively unpopular with her constituents, so it's unlikely for her to get re-elected). Aside from that, there's no reason she wouldn't serve out the rest of her term unless she dies or quits or gets arrested. Manchin is a weirder thing, because he's been around for a while. He actually uses his position of "the disagreeable democrat" to get a lot of porkbarrel for his state, but the specifics of why he gets to keep his office has more to do with the peculiarities of West Virginia politics, which is...weird. The state is weirdly wrapped up in the coal mining industry, and historically the democrats have had a foothold in the state since 1870 (notably, long before the great swapperoo between parties over civil rights) because at the time the democrats were the more pro-union party, and West Virginia had some very violent conflicts between mine owners and striking miners, and ultimately the miners managed to win and gain the support of the public. Except a lot of time has passed since then, and both the parties have shifted since then and the state has shifted. The miners of the state tend to be anti-environmentalism because they want to keep their jobs, but more importantly, even though mining still is considered socially important to the state, it has been shrinking in importance economically, and the miners themselves have symbolic importance, but much less actual political importance, and the state is overall conservative. Which is why Black Lung is making a comeback. The old successes of unions are steadily being rolled back. So basically Manchin and a lot of his supporters are remnants of the democratic party from decades ago and are much more conservative, and West Virginia is basically a red state by now. The state has voted for republican presidents since 2000. Its house representatives are republican, its other senator is republican, its state legislature is republican, and its governor actually was a democrat once but switched parties to republican. Manchin is a democrat by inertia and as a gimmick to squeeze the party for bribes, and the only way around him is to get more dem senators from other states. Tiggum posted:It seems like American political parties are way more nebulous than in normal countries. Like, you can just say you're in a party and they can't stop you or kick you out? And if you want to run for a particular office as that party's candidate, you can just have a bunch of people (who may or may not also have to say they're members of that party) vote for you to be the candidate, and if the rest of the party doesn't like it that's too bad for them? And if you manage to get elected then you can do whatever the gently caress you like and no one can kick you out of the party or make you toe the line? Am I wrong about this? The only real mechanism for the party to "kick people out" is by challenging them in primaries. There's party "whips" whose jobs are to go around and try every trick they know to make people vote the right way, but ultimately the politician is the one with the power to decide how they vote. But the parties also need to be big umbrellas because we basically have a two-party system in this country and have to cover 330 million people across an entire continent. I think the Dems have actually been the more coherent party, because if you look over across the aisle at the Republicans, they're much more of a mess. I remember the republican primaries being much more of a free-for-all than the democratic ones, and during the whole Trump administration, they had even more difficulty getting things done because the party has spent the last ten years just dedicating itself to opposition and can't get anything done. They failed at most of their legislative goals, so Trump had to rule through executive orders he barely even knew how to do and which could be easily be reversed.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 19:17
|
|
|
Djarum posted:2022 is going to be a blood bath. If you live in a Red State I’d look at getting out now while the getting is good, especially if you are a person of color or LBGQT. Abortion is just the tip of the iceberg here.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 19:26
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:if you can find some non-corrupt politicians by all means go hog wild but yea I'll be satisficed with a party leadership that uses pressure for good ends rather than what they currently use it for. Like, when was the last time dem leadership used their influence at all? March 1 2020
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 22:15
|
|
|
You know you're in for a wild ride when they note before the episode begins that the taping occurred before the tragedies on the same weekend
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 15:54
|
|
|
Aces High posted:You know you're in for a wild ride when they note before the episode begins that the taping occurred before the tragedies on the same weekend I feel like this notice is coming with increasing frequency...
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 18:56
|
|
|
At this point you could probably stick that notice in front of every episode, and be right more than half the time.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 19:15
|
|
|
What's the deal with one of the brothers being circumcised, or is this just some random thing John made up?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 21:31
|
|
|
Aces High posted:You know you're in for a wild ride when they note before the episode begins that the taping occurred before the tragedies on the same weekend Was it just referring to the supermarket shooting or did I miss something?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2022 23:42
|
|
|
1glitch0 posted:Was it just referring to the supermarket shooting or did I miss something? Pretty sure it was about the Tops shooting. I'm sure he'll have exciting things to say about the 911 operator that hung up on the person calling for help because they were whispering
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2022 23:52
|
|
|
Finally, Subway has found a way to one-up Quiznos in loving over Franchises. Your bread still sucks, Subway.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2022 08:58
|
|
|
I miss Quiznos  Honestly I just miss toasted subs
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2022 19:00
|
|
|
Weird that a bible-quoting zealot like Mastriano gets handed a sword and proudly exclaims "Where's Goliath?", you know, whom famously was slain by the blade, not the sling and stone like the liberals want to make you believe.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2022 22:01
|
|
|
That K drama ending was amazing
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 00:37
|
|
|
Ninurta posted:Finally, Subway has found a way to one-up Quiznos in loving over Franchises. I wouldn't go that far. I mean, compared to places like McDonald's, they're extra-lovely. But, Quiznos was objectively worse by a country mile. Might still be, too, but I don't know for sure about that. Subway screws their franchisees. Quiznos literally drove the vast majority of theirs out-of-business.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 02:28
|
|
|
I can identify with a company actively looking to self destruct tbh.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 03:42
|
|
|
This week's web exclusive: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEa3sK1iZxc
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2022 05:02
|
|
|
This season's web exclusives have been on fire, John is singularly energized when he gets to use his long-form segment format to rant about irrelevant nonsense.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2022 05:05
|
|
|
I regularly get way, way more entertainment from the web exclusives than the actual show
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2022 05:08
|
|
|
He claims that his other writers are away for those. Maybe he personally is just better than them.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2022 07:01
|
|
|
Despite it being a "satire show", "I'm not a journalist" (though I guess that's more Colber' than Oliver?) etc., there seems to be a vibe that they have to be 'serious' on the actual show, and the web exclusives are for being silly. I mean the people featured this week were heinous, but it was a webisode about rocks, furries and a crazy JGB lady.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2022 08:13
|
|
|
Yea, the show itself has some great bits like the duck stamp poo poo and all but honestly Oliver works way better when he's talking about absurd news rather than trying to put out serious topics and kinda shrugging and going 'uh, yea, sucks huh?' Like, I get he probably feels he'd be wasting his platform just being a silly news roundup and I understand that but gently caress did I laugh way harder at 'Rocks' than I did at any of his regular shows this month.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2022 13:01
|
|
|
Just make the show 45 minutes long and shove the silly web bits in at this point we're all hosed anyways.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2022 17:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 14:35 |
|
|
The bit is silly, but at the same time it's kinda hosed up how America has an eugenic stonehenge.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2022 18:23
|
|
