|
Byzantine posted:
You said the dems refused to do it, using 4 percent of the senate dems as represeative for the whole party
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 01:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 01:06 |
|
|
rkd_ posted:Biden says he is examining power to shut US border on his own Un-adults in enclosed polyhedrons
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 01:25
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:You said the dems refused to do it, using 4 percent of the senate dems as represeative for the whole party If you credit them as a party for things they get done, it seems fair and logical to fault them as a party for what they don’t get done.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 02:29
|
|
|
selec posted:If you credit them as a party for things they get done, it seems fair and logical to fault them as a party for what they don’t get done. That's a pretty basic logical fallacy actually. If P, Q doesn't lead to mean if p, not q. RBA Starblade fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Apr 10, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 02:44
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:Right, the base and the politicians both want to ban all abortions but the politicians know that doing that would hurt them in elections. When Roe was in effect they could say "I believe abortion is murder, but we can't do a total ban until Roe is overturned" and the base would put up with it. Now that they don't have that option, they still try to compromise because endorsing a total abortion ban would kill them in the general election, but the base sees that, thinks they're uniparty RINOs, and elects some out of state groyper who lied about his military service in the primary. This is the correct read on the situation. Based on lots of first-hand anecdotal evidence I would say Republicans, as a whole, absolutely genuinely do want to ban abortion. The only real catch is that Republican politicians -- true believers or not -- care much more about staying in power. It's less that they're hypocritical about abortion itself, specifically, and more that they're spineless and don't want to face the consequences.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 03:21
|
|
|
It doesn't require a cabal of shadowy illuminati conspirators to see our two party system makes us coalesce from the top down to lots of poo poo that doesn't serve our materials needs or meet our moral mark. And all we have is to vote for one of the two parties, or not vote. Sorry for crossing the line back into vibes anecdotes, but whether it's purposefully orchestrated or not, we are channeled into these slots. I'm a rural laborer who gets accused of being a republican, and just today I was speaking with a wealthy liberal who balked at hearing I went to vote uncommitted (in a democratic primary) because "what about Trump!??!". Because he's a threat to democracy! It must be very precious to you! I don't know every average American, but I've seen the polls and the hand wringing in this very thread. Our American political understanding culture and participation is so far from materially representing us that... well that we'll openly say things like "we just have to wait for these people to die". And to say "Americans are just that overwhelmingly dumb selfish racist ignorant" (or even a human nature argument) may be accurate, but is little comfort, or at least little excuse to look at people through the lense of democrat/republican. We are all the problem under this, but it's so easy to be captured by being the actual good guy because THOSE PEOPLE are the problem. Banish the words republican and Democrat from your mind and then talk to people. You might get somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 03:39
|
|
|
I think it's wrong to say that Donald J. Trump and his type wants to ban abortion. He only wants power & money. Abortion bans don't affect the rich and their daughters and mistresses, so politicians are able to say things that they personally don't really support.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 03:45
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:I think it's wrong to say that Donald J. Trump and his type wants to ban abortion. He only wants power & money. Abortion bans don't affect the rich and their daughters and mistresses, so politicians are able to say things that they personally don't really support. Though like all other cases where people said "Trump's not a right-wing culture warrior on this topic" it doesn't really matter since he's actively cultivated voters who demand it and surrounded himself with subordinates who demand it, so he'll either do it to get cheers at rallies or else will rubber stamp the people who are actually doing the work while he focuses on whatever caught his interest today.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 03:59
|
|
|
selec posted:If you credit them as a party for things they get done, it seems fair and logical to fault them as a party for what they don’t get done. That's completely wrong. I wouldn't credit the party for getting something done if 4% of the party voted for it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 04:41
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:That's completely wrong. I wouldn't credit the party for getting something done if 4% of the party voted for it. Part of running a competent party is leadership that can whip a tough vote. They just didn’t have it in them, collectively, to get it done. I think we just have a different sense of what we expect from one of two options to run this poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 05:01
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:You said the dems refused to do it, using 4 percent of the senate dems as represeative for the whole party Yeah, it's a synecdoche, like saying "The Republicans failed to elect a Speaker of the House".
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 05:25
|
|
|
selec posted:Part of running a competent party is leadership that can whip a tough vote. They just didn’t have it in them, collectively, to get it done. I think we just have a different sense of what we expect from one of two options to run this poo poo. The dems failing to convince 2 insane senators isn't the same as the democrats refusing to remove the filibuster
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 05:37
|
|
|
BRJurgis posted:It doesn't require a cabal of shadowy illuminati conspirators to see our two party system makes us coalesce from the top down to lots of poo poo that doesn't serve our materials needs or meet our moral mark. And all we have is to vote for one of the two parties, or not vote. You seem to be using a whole lot of words to say "both sides are the same" which is like your average frat bros view of the 2 parties. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 05:44
|
|
|
Byzantine posted:Yeah, it's a synecdoche, like saying "The Republicans failed to elect a Speaker of the House". Those two things are analogous (Manchin and the freedom caucus group that voted against McCarthy are both party members whose personal incentives went against what the rest of the party wanted), but if you said "The Republicans refused to elect a Speaker of the House" instead of changing the wording and hoping nobody noticed, it would also be wrong.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 05:54
|
|
|
There is also the distinction between electing a loving speaker and overturning the loving filibuster.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 06:04
|
|
|
selec posted:Part of running a competent party is leadership that can whip a tough vote. They just didn’t have it in them, collectively, to get it done. If you expect a Westminster-style whip, you're going to be perennially disappointed. There's not actually a ton of pressure you can put on members of your caucus in the U.S.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 06:13
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:Those two things are analogous (Manchin and the freedom caucus group that voted against McCarthy are both party members whose personal incentives went against what the rest of the party wanted), but if you said "The Republicans refused to elect a Speaker of the House" instead of changing the wording and hoping nobody noticed, it would also be wrong. The difference in wording is because the Republicans managed to elect a Speaker eventually, while the Dems gave up on removing the filibuster. No shame in it, sometimes things are impossible and you have to give up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 06:42
|
|
|
tagesschau posted:If you expect a Westminster-style whip, you're going to be perennially disappointed. There's not actually a ton of pressure you can put on members of your caucus in the U.S. I think the changes in fundraising from less dependence on party support to the ability of Tea Party/Freedom Caucus types to rely on winning their primary over the objection of party 'leaders' has contributed a lot to this. Manchin was immune to most pressure, likewise the Freedom Caucus - they're going to get re-elected regardless of toeing the line.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 07:30
|
|
|
tagesschau posted:If you expect a Westminster-style whip, you're going to be perennially disappointed. There's not actually a ton of pressure you can put on members of your caucus in the U.S. And for all that, both parties are far more cohesive and reliable in their votes than they were at any other point in history. Democratic administrations of the past had large segments of their own party in open rebellion against their legislative priorities. Including, almost especially, the most successful ones. If one was to accept that Biden and Democratic leadership are bad at keeping the party in line, FDR and LBJ were absolute dogshit losers who bumbled into every law they passed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 08:05
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:I think it's wrong to say that Donald J. Trump and his type wants to ban abortion. He only wants power & money. Abortion bans don't affect the rich and their daughters and mistresses, so politicians are able to say things that they personally don't really support. I'll slightly amend it by saying they aren't concerned about abortion bans beyond electability. Like, they aren't suddenly saying "Uh-oh, we didn't actually want to ban abortion because we actually believe it should still be legal in some cases". Most of them would, at the very least, be perfectly fine with a ban if it didn't cost them votes. I will say Trump could be an outlier here because he does seem to have the absolute worst, least consistent, least genuine views on everything imaginable. For most other Rs it's "go ahead and ban it as long as we don't lose any power".
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 10:40
|
|
|
CNN trying to ring the economy is going to collapse any second bell: With inflation stalling, the long-predicted storm clouds in the economy may actually be formingquote:New York
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 13:06
|
|
|
It's hard to believe that people don't respect the science of economics with analyses based on vague gesturing at "geopolitical conflicts."
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 13:12
|
|
|
Another Boeing whistleblower has come forward and made his name public, this time about the 787. https://www.npr.org/2024/04/09/1243770423/boeing-whistleblower-787-faa-investigation quote:WASHINGTON — Federal regulators are investigating a whistleblower's claims about flaws in the assembly of Boeing's 787 Dreamliner.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 14:08
|
|
|
Ah yes Chase CEO saying doom is coming and that the US should increase its military ways for their benefit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 14:25
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:Another Boeing whistleblower has come forward and made his name public, this time about the 787. So when is his depression-induced spontaneous suicide scheduled?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 14:30
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Florida keeps on Floriding Lmao good lord " He was swirving so I pulled him over " " I thought I smelled weed" " I got a lil scared 🥺" The biggest loving bunch of pussies
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 15:55
|
|
|
bird food bathtub posted:So when is his depression-induced spontaneous suicide scheduled? There is no evidence that the other guy didn't commit suicide. Stop buying into conspiracy theories
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:10
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:There is no evidence that the other guy didn't commit suicide. Stop buying into conspiracy theories I mean, there's the part where he told people he definitely wasn't going to kill himself shortly before his death. But outside of that, no.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:12
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:CNN trying to ring the economy is going to collapse any second bell: With inflation stalling, the long-predicted storm clouds in the economy may actually be forming ah so this is the pivot back from some of the recent econ news thats actually mildly positive, lol at econ news/reporting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:12
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:There is no evidence that the other guy didn't commit suicide. Stop buying into conspiracy theories EDIT: Beaten, and with a better source.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:19
|
|
|
Boeing's come up in conversation irl a few times now and nobody I or whoever I've been discussing it with knows believes that it's anything but the world's least subtle assassination, with what the friend said.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:27
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:Boeing's come up in conversation irl a few times now and nobody I or whoever I've been discussing it with knows believes that it's anything but the world's least subtle assassination, with what the friend said. I'm not saying it's definitely anything, because I'm just an idiot on the internet and it'd be dumb as hell for me to confidently say what definitely happened somewhere I've never even been. But I will say that if this guy did legit kill himself, Boeing was very unlucky for that to have happened at the most suspicious time possible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:31
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:Boeing's come up in conversation irl a few times now and nobody I or whoever I've been discussing it with knows believes that it's anything but the world's least subtle assassination, with what the friend said. I guess for me, that's kind of why I don't think it was an assassination. He already gave his statements, the cat was completely out of the bag, and Boeing has every loving eye laser focused on them plus a bunch of people who were already providing information in this expanding investigation. The opportunity to merc a dude was probably 4 or 5 years ago, and doing it now absolutely doesn't do jack poo poo. If it was a murder, my suspicion is it was performed by someone specifically in Boeing, probably some petite bourgeois QA manager who feels he's going to be blamed by the company and isn't thinking rationally.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:35
|
|
|
Now, I'm just some guy on the computer, this is not my strongest area of expertise, but I think the reaction about the inflation numbers today is less about the number itself, which really isn't that bad, and more about the fact that a lot of market participants have spent the last several months talking themselves into believing that the Federal Reserve will cut rates multiple times this year, since inflation has been defeated after all. In my opinion, the rate cuts thing is a little bit of a wishcast, because they really really really want those cuts. Today's numbers kind of snap them out of that fantasy, and while the Fed is unlikely to further hike (again, the number itself was fine, it was like 0.1% higher than expected), they also don't have a reason to immediately cut rates either, and so the market throws a hissy fit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:35
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:I'm not saying it's definitely anything, because I'm just an idiot on the internet and it'd be dumb as hell for me to confidently say what definitely happened somewhere I've never even been. How so? Is our government going to regulate them more harshly as a result of his death? single-mode fiber posted:Now, I'm just some guy on the computer, this is not my strongest area of expertise, but I think the reaction about the inflation numbers today is less about the number itself, which really isn't that bad, and more about the fact that a lot of market participants have spent the last several months talking themselves into believing that the Federal Reserve will cut rates multiple times this year, since inflation has been defeated after all. In my opinion, the rate cuts thing is a little bit of a wishcast, because they really really really want those cuts. Today's numbers kind of snap them out of that fantasy, and while the Fed is unlikely to further hike (again, the number itself was fine, it was like 0.1% higher than expected), they also don't have a reason to immediately cut rates either, and so the market throws a hissy fit. The Fed were the ones who came out and predicted multiple rate cuts last year. koolkal fucked around with this message at 16:42 on Apr 10, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:36
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:I mean, there's the part where he told people he definitely wasn't going to kill himself shortly before his death.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:36
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/NoLieWithBTC/status/1778051012760125538 Matt Gaetz, cmon down
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:38
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:I mean, there's the part where he told people he definitely wasn't going to kill himself shortly before his death. It's honestly more suspicious that he told people that. John McAfee did the same thing and then definitely committed suicide when the law closed in on him. McAfee just wanted it to look like the Illuminati silenced him for good or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:42
|
|
|
My "I am definitely not going to kill myself" T-shirt has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my shirt
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 01:06 |
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:I mean, there's the part where he told people he definitely wasn't going to kill himself shortly before his death. He allegedly told one family friend in a statement that can't be verified to even exist. And even if he did say that, people who say they won't commit suicide still can. Meanwhile his family seems to accept that it was suicide and that the stress had aged him and affected his health. https://fortune.com/2024/03/28/boeing-737-whistleblower-john-barnett-death-family-lawsuit/ Xiahou Dun posted:Boeing was very unlucky for that to have happened at the most suspicious time possible. Years after the whistle blowing during depositions for an appeal of a decision over lost wages and before the Boeing team was set to cross examine him is not the most suspicious time possible. This is a Seth Rich level conspiracy theory Fart Amplifier fucked around with this message at 16:52 on Apr 10, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:46
|
|