|
Jaxyon posted:Biden unable to ignore the law when it continues his horrible trump-based border policy, but OK to ignore the law when it means loving over asylum seekers to continue his horrible trump-based border policy. I'm sure the law also required him to uh waive 26 different laws to expedite the building of the border wall that he totally does not want.
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 00:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 16:20 |
|
|
The problem with the Green party(and 3rd-parties in general) is that they never really try to win local races and prove that they can govern, they just gun straight for the presidency on a platform of "Being a Democrat is just a bad as being a Republican  " and wonder why no one wants to vote for them
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 00:22
|
|
|
Pobrecito posted:I'm sure the law also required him to uh waive 26 different laws to expedite the building of the border wall that he totally does not want. Yes, it appears so. The root material cited in the register notice begins at page 555 of the law: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-104publ208/pdf/PLAW-104publ208.pdf The "shall" at section (a) appears to obligate the waiver determinations at (c). As later modified, it's "all legal requirements". Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 00:27 on Oct 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 00:23
|
|
|
What would be the consequences if he decided not to follow through with all that?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 00:26
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Yes, it appears so. The root material cited in the register notice begins at page 555 of the law: (c) WAIVER.—The provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 are waived to the extent the Attorney General determines necessary to ensure expeditious construction of the barriers and roads under this section. ah yeah absolutely no room for an administration that didnt want the wall to happen to work with there...
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 00:28
|
|
|
Pobrecito posted:(c) WAIVER.—The provisions of the Endangered Species Act Yeah I just directed you to that exact language, as GJB did earlier. The "shall" at (a) appears to control. Fister Roboto posted:What would be the consequences if he decided not to follow through with all that? They get sued, immediately, and risk a circuit court finding that not only do they have to build it, the range of walls they're building is too narrow. Again, take a step back here. Why do you think they're doing this? Why do you think they spent so much time trying to delay it and send the funds elsewhere and ask Congress to rescind the funds? Why do you think they are very publicly saying "we are legally required to do this, it is stupid"? Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 00:35 on Oct 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 00:31
|
|
|
Pobrecito posted:(c) WAIVER.—The provisions of the Endangered Species Act They should just post a sign every mile saying 'do not cross this fence' and leave everything else alone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 00:32
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:What would be the consequences if he decided not to follow through with all that? Plus bad look politically to be ignoring duly passed laws if there isn't actually much legal ambiguity
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 00:32
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Again, take a step back here. Why do you think they're doing this? Why do you think they spent so much time trying to delay it and send the funds elsewhere and ask Congress to rescind the funds? Why do you think they are very publicly saying "we are legally required to do this"? I think they’re doing this because blue state governors are making noise and it was either this or try to be brave and lead in a way that sets the tone for the inevitability that immigration at the southern border is going to increase. More points if he admitted this is in large part because of climate change and also to a not insignificant degree, more than a hundred years of US foreign policy. This is a political choice, and I’m fine if the quote from him vowing “not another foot” is hung around his neck like “no new taxes”. This is a profound failure to act with courage and foresight.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 00:36
|
|
|
That sounds like it would be a good way to delay it even further.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 00:36
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:That sounds like it would be a good way to delay it even further. As was already explained, it would be a way to increase the amount of border wall that is actually built and reduce the actual capacity of the agency to exercise discretion.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 00:43
|
|
|
Well that's unfortunate. On the other hand, in 2020 he did promise that "not another foot" of the wall would be built. https://www.npr.org/2020/08/05/899266045/biden-would-end-border-wall-construction-but-wont-tear-down-trump-s-additions quote:Presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden says if elected, he would not tear down the parts of the barrier along the U.S. Southern border built during the Trump administration — but he would cease construction. Regardless of why, it doesn't look good on him that he's not able to uphold this promise.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 01:09
|
|
|
Xombie posted:If you argue this, you have to explain how it works. An independent can't be in either the Republican or Democratic debates. They don't have immediate ballot access like the Greens. There is no way that they're inherently taken seriously outside anyone who already takes them seriously. Ok, well let's take a look at this. So, you're ineligible for the Red/Blue primary debates. In the case of Republicans, you're running on pretty much everything they hate. Cornell on a Republican stage would probably just be 2 hours of the Republican candidates trying not to be the first to say the N word while trying to splice a rope into a noose. And in the case of the Democrats, there likely isn't even going to be a primary for West to be ineligible for. Unless Biden drops dead, he's pretty much been crowned as the nominee since he's the incumbent, so there probably won't even be any primary debates to be had. As far as Greens go, given how hard the Dems work to sue them off of every ballot they can find, he may just be hoping to slip under the radar by running independent, or as has been speculated before, maybe the Greens are pushing positions that he doesn't want to be attached to? I'm not remotely involved, obviously, so I wasn't there for whatever list of pros and cons he was writing up to make the decision.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 01:25
|
|
|
the_steve posted:And in the case of the Democrats, there likely isn't even going to be a primary for West to be ineligible for. Unless Biden drops dead, he's pretty much been crowned as the nominee since he's the incumbent, so there probably won't even be any primary debates to be had. The green party is on the ballot in more states than Cornel West will be. Also, the reason Democrats can sue to block green party ballot access is green party candidates failing to meet ballot access requirements (filing fees are a common one). That's unlikely to be any better for an independent candidate with no party. If you want a pro-West reason that he left the green party, I feel like the obvious one is that everyone in the green party is grifting and he noticed it. That answer would also explain why he left the people's party earlier.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 03:12
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Is this relevant to USpol? Idk I’m sorry and interests me, but I think it is bc lol a bunch of 18-25 dorks playing soldier for Pennie’s bc we liked the era apparently get better by far safety training than hollywood people making more per day than us in a two week check. From my knowledge, no. The person in charge of weapons on set is usually *very* hardcore about gun safety and the person on Baldwins movie was specifically a cost cutting move where they hired somebody with very little experience who didn't know what they were doing. And Baldwin was a producer on the movie who might have been responsible for that hire.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 04:38
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Yeah I just directed you to that exact language, as GJB did earlier. The "shall" at (a) appears to control. Why didn't the Democrats redirect the funds when they had the House? Was it not a priority? Did some Democrats want this funding?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 05:30
|
|
|
small butter posted:Why didn't the Democrats redirect the funds when they had the House? Was it not a priority? Did some Democrats want this funding? It's fairly difficult to trace the source of an absence of changes, but I can guess it was Manchin, who has run on immigration, celebrated similar funding tranches, and is demanding a public emergency declaration at the border to increase funding for things like barrier construction. It was unlikely to include Sinema, as she's generally opposed border wall funding. For reference, the funding tranche itself appears to be Title 2, Section 230(a)(1) in the 2019 consolidated appropriations act: https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hjres31/BILLS-116hjres31enr.pdf quote:(a) Of the total amount made available under ‘‘U.S. Customs and Border Protection—Procurement, Construction, and Improvements’’, $2,370,222,000 shall be available only as follows: (1) $1,375,000,000 is for the construction of primary pedestrian fencing, including levee pedestrian fencing, in the Rio Grande Valley Sector; Bear in mind the place to change this would be in another consolidated appropriations bill of some kind, which is extremely not straightforward to do. The members of the Senate with the most direct influence would be members of Finance and, I believe, HSGA's government operations and border management subcommittee - though their scope changed in this Congress, and I can't immediately tell that they had border funding in scope in the 117th. The Dem members of that subcommittee in the 118th are all on record opposing wall funding, which seems to have been a consistently held position for them. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 06:15 on Oct 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 06:00
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:If voting for them causes Trump to win isn't that by definition letting perfect being the enemy of good?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 07:37
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Would you let your kids play lightsaber if they were merely turned down burn lightsabers and not the full cut off limb version? This was a very cool and good post, but let's be honest here. People would definitely vote for the lightsabers party.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 12:36
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:This was a very cool and good post, but let's be honest here. People would definitely vote for the lightsabers party. The lightsabers party would win first, and at the very next opportunity the prosthetics party would be ascendant. This is The Way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 13:19
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1710275941727895769 This is the worst idea I've ever heard of, I can't wait.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 13:58
|
|
|
The couldn’t just have this “debate” on the floor of the House? The back-and-forth between Gaetz and the various McCarthy defenders was pretty fun the other day and didn’t involve anyone shouting over anyone else.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 14:03
|
|
|
It's 100% going to be pre-taped
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 14:09
|
|
|
smackfu posted:The couldn’t just have this “debate” on the floor of the House? They're smart enough to realize scripting and curating the circus should, in theory, be better for them than doing it all in public. Doing it all in public was semi-necessary in January because there were no house rules and nothing could get done until that vote happened. They have more leeway now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 14:11
|
|
|
A follow up to that story about the protester in Iowa who ran into Ramaswamy's car (apologies if this was already covered, didn't see anything in the last few pages): https://www.desmoinesregister.com/s...wa/71077205007/quote:The Ramaswamy campaign blamed the collision on protesters who they said were angry about Ramaswamy's remarks on aid for Ukraine, saying they yelled and swore at the presidential candidate before jumping into a vehicle, ramming the campaign car and speeding off. I'm sure Ramaswamy was handling this very calmly 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 14:17
|
|
|
It's never going to be the case that a major political party will just stop enforcing borders. Not even a socialist party would do so, historically after all most socialist governments were actually quite big on border walls and border security. The metric here isn't "are they enforcing the borders" but are they doing so humanely? It seems like under Biden this has seen significant improvement and with a larger majority perhaps even larger improvements can be seen. World Famous W posted:if only the handful of people yall think would vote for west causes trump to win, biden was hosed long before then I'm not sure what you're responding to, I'm responding to someone saying that they would be okay with West's platform overall and would be willing to vote for them because "perfect shouldn't be the enemy of good" (paraphrasing) and I'm just pointing out that in principle this seems like a contradiction in terms, because by in pricinple theoretically being willing to split the vote, they are accepting some risk that they are indeed risking good enough in an effort to get soemthing that is more perfect.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 14:27
|
|
|
Kalit posted:A follow up to that story about the protester in Iowa who ran into Ramaswamy's car (apologies if this was already covered, didn't see anything in the last few pages): https://www.desmoinesregister.com/s...wa/71077205007/ Sounds like Jay's Deli is a deepcover front for Antifa. Order a Fatty Matty and you'll find yourself brainwashed into backing into Vivek's Vehicle.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 14:37
|
|
|
smackfu posted:The couldn’t just have this “debate” on the floor of the House? If this were about convincing House members, there would be no reason to have it publicly viewable at all - they'd want to hash this poo poo out privately in the backrooms if at all possible. This is 100% aimed at measuring each candidate's appeal to the base, which is a real bad sign in a lot of ways. It means that the caucus is nowhere near agreeing on anyone, it means this is going to be the biggest clownshow Speaker election in history, and it also suggests that the GOP isn't going to prioritize compromise, moderation, or the ability to work across the aisle. With a government shutdown lurking just next month, having a televised Speaker debate is plainly and obviously an absolutely terrible idea. But they're doing it anyway, let's loving goooooooooo
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 15:23
|
|
|
Hard to gauge how much stuff like this factors into peoples' misapprehension about the state of the economy ,but it ain't helping Jobs go up? That's bad. Jobs go down? That's bad too. Jobs stay the same? You better believe that's bad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 15:26
|
|
|
zoux posted:Hard to gauge how much stuff like this factors into peoples' misapprehension about the state of the economy ,but it ain't helping Job counts must move forwards, not backwards, upwards, not forwards! and always twirling twirling twirling towards freedom
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 15:50
|
|
|
So some of mixed signals you're getting is that there's broadly two camps. The Fed's goal is to hit a magical soft landing, where inflation comes back to normal levels in a reasonable time frame but the labor market doesn't shrivel up. Jobs Go Up is bad for the camp that believes a soft landing is impossible and we should just suck it up and go for a hard landing where we induce a recession to collapse demand. If demand stays high, we'll have high inflation for years and years which would have attendant bad effects on capital and prices. Jobs Go Down is bad for the camp that thinks a soft landing is doable, because it means we've overshot demand reduction a little. I'm in soft landing camp and think the Fed has been too aggressive with anti-inflationary measures since the issue is mostly supply side. But unfortunately people from last century get a lot of ink to write opeds with. Inflation is somewhat autoregressive, in that last period's inflation contributes to current inflation because of expectations, so it is going to be a long downward slope and the important thing is not to freak out. Morrow fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Oct 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 15:53
|
|
|
Iowa has officially given up its fight against the new Democratic primary schedule and is applying to be a Super Tuesday state now. New Hampshire is still fighting to the death to maintain its status as the first primary. Iowa is NOT changing their caucus date for the Republicans. This will make Iowa a weird state that has its presidential primaries on two different dates. Under the new DNC rules the first 4 or 5 primaries can change every year. They are also weighted by different characteristics (competitiveness in general election, geography, racial diversity, union membership, ballot access laws, and size), so Iowa is unlikely to ever return to the first 4 or 5. That also means that the first states for the 2024 primary might not be the first 4 for the 2028 primary season. It's unclear when the situation with NH will be resolved, but if they insist on being first, then they will lose their delegates. New DNC rules also heavily punish states if they go with a traditional caucus, so the Iowa caucuses will allow mail-in voting with candidate preference lists for the first time in 2024 as well. https://twitter.com/ec_schneider/status/1710298779142758703 quote:ST. LOUIS — Iowa is surrendering. The state will now be a Super Tuesday state for Democrats. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 16:03 on Oct 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 16:01
|
|
|
zoux posted:Hard to gauge how much stuff like this factors into peoples' misapprehension about the state of the economy ,but it ain't helping I would love to know what jobs these are. Myself and hordes of other white collar workers certainly aren't feeling a job market flush with available jobs after all of the layoffs over the past year. Reminds me more of the job market after the great recession. Every job posting gets 700-1000+ applicants, if they're even real job postings to begin with. The economy blows rear end.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 16:58
|
|
|
Mustang posted:I would love to know what jobs these are. Myself and hordes of other white collar workers certainly aren't feeling a job market flush with available jobs after all of the layoffs over the past year. Reminds me more of the job market after the great recession. Every job posting gets 700-1000+ applicants, if they're even real job postings to begin with. From the WaPo article about the jobs report: Economy adds 336,000 jobs in September, in a stunning gain https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/10/06/september-jobs-report-unemployment/ quote:Payrolls ballooned in a variety of service-related industries in September, with the strongest gains in leisure and hospitality, government, health care, professional and technical services, and social assistance. ummel fucked around with this message at 17:06 on Oct 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 17:03
|
|
|
Mustang posted:I would love to know what jobs these are. Myself and hordes of other white collar workers certainly aren't feeling a job market flush with available jobs after all of the layoffs over the past year. Reminds me more of the job market after the great recession. Every job posting gets 700-1000+ applicants, if they're even real job postings to begin with. It's not white collar jobs. The "information" sector is actually losing jobs. The biggest sectors were: 1) Leisure and Hospitality 2) Government 3) Private Education and Health Services. Construction, retail, and manufacturing are also up. The worst sectors to be in right now (in terms of finding an open job) are mining/logging and information due to Joe Biden's war on fossil fuels, mid-level managers, and analysts. https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/employment-by-industry-monthly-changes.htm
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 17:05
|
|
|
zoux posted:
Can't be seen to be in the tank for Joe Biden, so more jobs is actually bad because that would mean you are praising Joe Biden. If you lose jobs, that's Joe Biden's fault and the economic downturn is on its way. Stay the same, Joe Biden isn't growing the economy. See, fair and balanced.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 17:09
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:Can't be seen to be in the tank for Joe Biden, so more jobs is actually bad because that would mean you are praising Joe Biden. If you lose jobs, that's Joe Biden's fault and the economic downturn is on its way. Stay the same, Joe Biden isn't growing the economy. Pure-strain liberal media reporting here, didn't even once mention Hilary's emails, pizzagate, or Hunter Biden. Why are you in the tank for the coastal elites, Mooseontheloose? Why do you America? America is going down the drain folks, and the only way to stop it is to contribute to Mitch McConnell's Horcruxes for America campaign!
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 17:30
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Iowa has officially given up its fight against the new Democratic primary schedule and is applying to be a Super Tuesday state now. Was Iowa the state with bizarre caucus rules and messed up their counts so many times in 2020? If so, good
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 17:46
|
|
|
Sexual Aluminum posted:Was Iowa the state with bizarre caucus rules and messed up their counts so many times in 2020? If so, good Caucus rules are all bizarre, it's a weird and anti-democratic descendant of the old smoke-filled-room system that predated proper primary elections. Iowa's most famous for it since they're traditionally the start of the primary season.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 17:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 16:20 |
|
|
Sexual Aluminum posted:Was Iowa the state with bizarre caucus rules and messed up their counts so many times in 2020? If so, good Yes. It was such an embarrassing shitshow it prodded the DNC to overhaul the entire system
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 17:55
|
|
