|
Nucleic Acids posted:Okay, that’s what you’ve said you’ve seen, but it is not supported in the actual polling on the issue. Isn't it? While polling has shown that a large portion of young people think there should be a ceasefire and generally disapprove of how Biden has handled Gaza, it has also generally shown that young people are not going to be deciding their 2024 vote based primarily on Biden's handling of Gaza. I'll let this timely article from the Atlantic make the rest of the argument for me: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/05/biden-young-voters-gaza-israel/678377/ quote:America’s young voters are fired up about the war in Gaza—aren’t they? Campus protests and the controversies around them have dominated media attention for weeks. So has the possibility that youth anger about the war will cost President Joe Biden the election. “Joe Biden Is Losing Young Voters Over Israel,” a USA Today headline declared last month. The New York Times columnist Thomas B. Edsall recently argued that nothing would help Biden more with young voters than negotiating a cease-fire in Gaza. Yeah, if you ask the young folks "do you want a permanent ceasefire in Gaza?", they'll overwhelmingly answer "Yes". For example, when the Harvard Youth Poll asked them just that, look how they responded. But if you ask them "what political issues are most important to you?", they mostly give answers like "inflation" and "housing costs", same as everyone else. And just like everyone else, they generally rank the war in Gaza as one of their least important issues. From that very same poll: That suggests that while young people generally oppose Israel's campaign in Gaza, it's not going to be a significant factor in which candidate they choose, and they're going to be making their 2024 vote based primarily on other issues. Now, is the 2024 election going to be close enough that the small percentage of people primarily concerned about Gaza could potentially decide the election? Sure, I guess, maybe. But any of the fourteen other issues that were more important to young voters than that could have an even larger impact on the election than that. Especially since many of those issues are important to the broader electorate as well, not just to young people specifically.
|
# ? May 16, 2024 15:47 |
|
|
# ? Jun 3, 2024 11:27 |
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:A bunch of pro-Biden ads locally focus on abortion, which fair, but if he could cut some ads tooting all the consumer protection stuff that got passed recently that would be even better What consumer-protection legislation "got passed" recently? I can't think of a piece of legislation that's passed Congress this year other than more money for Ukraine & Israel (which included the Tiktok bullshit). I know there've been some agency rules changes under his administration, like tightening the airline-delay payouts, but I think what most consumers desire is protection from the cost of living exploding, and our current system isn't set up to do much about it.
|
# ? May 16, 2024 15:54 |
|
zoux posted:
Thomas has been bought off and is in the pocket of Big Consumer
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:03 |
|
I found a legislation tracker that lets me sort by "became law" and I stand corrected: plenty of bills have passed this year & been signed, although most of them don't involve consumer protection. Eg, this month to date these became law: * Setting Consumer Standards for Lithium-Ion Batteries Act * To direct the Consumer Product Safety Commission to establish a pilot program to explore the use of artificial intelligence in support of the mission of the Commission and to direct the Secretary of Commerce and the Federal Trade Commission to study and report on the use of blockchain technology and tokens, respectively * Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2024, Part II
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:07 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:And just like everyone else, they generally rank the war in Gaza as one of their least important issues. From that very same poll: This is the best issue importance poll format I've seen so far, the rest tend to just ask about the most important issue but this actually shows much deeper rank order data that a simple winner takes all style won't reveal.
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:10 |
|
Pier is pushed ashore. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjk4kr47mlvo Looks like it happened overnight when the weather finally broke https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/gaza-strip-pier-project-is-completed-u-s-military-says
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:15 |
|
AFancyQuestionMark posted:Aren't you that guy that keeps making up various outlandish details about his life? apologies for posting about posters but it is relevant due to sharing anecdotes: yes.
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:20 |
The Biden administration is blocking the release of the tapes of his interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur. This is the interview that led Hur to declare that a jury would most likely find Biden to be a confused old man with memory problems. Biden himself said that was absurd, so you’d think he’d want the tapes to be released to prove that he doesn’t sound like a confused old man.
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:26 |
|
Willa Rogers posted:What consumer-protection legislation "got passed" recently? I can't think of a piece of legislation that's passed Congress this year other than more money for Ukraine & Israel (which included the Tiktok bullshit). Airlines, breaking the 6% realtors, I think there was something with internet speed I guess these are executive actions and not laws, but w/e, you know what I mean
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:29 |
|
I can see that for the fact that unless every second of those videos is perfect you're just handing soundbites to be chopped up for opposition ads as we go into prime ad season.
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:33 |
|
Gripweed posted:The Biden administration is blocking the release of the tapes of his interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur. This is the interview that led Hur to declare that a jury would most likely find Biden to be a confused old man with memory problems. What's the purported upside of releasing it?
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:33 |
|
The internet speed thing was an FCC action
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:34 |
Eric Cantonese posted:What's the purported upside of releasing it? Proving that he didn’t sound like a confused old man? That’s the upside of releasing it, the downside of not releasing it is that everyone will assume that Biden really did sound like a confused old man.
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:40 |
|
Gripweed posted:The Biden administration is blocking the release of the tapes of his interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur. This is the interview that led Hur to declare that a jury would most likely find Biden to be a confused old man with memory problems. Ladies and gentlemen, the best presidential candidate the Democrats have to offer. It just struck me how if Trump gets reelected, there is this string of no doubt well-intentioned people among the Democrats that will have directly contributed to this country’s demise despite the fact that they should have known better: Hillary, Badger-Ginsburg, Biden. A string of truly pathetic characters that lead to a tragic outcome.
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:43 |
|
Didn't they already release a transcript? I guess releasing the video would address any questions about whether it was edited, is anyone credible asking those questions?
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:43 |
|
haveblue posted:Didn't they already release a transcript? Per CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/16/politics/house-panels-contempt-garland-biden-audio/index.html quote:President Joe Biden moved to assert executive privilege over recordings of his interview with special counsel Robert Hur as House Republicans press ahead with contempt proceedings against Attorney General Merrick Garland over his refusal to turn over the files, a major escalation in a dispute over the recordings between the House GOP and the executive branch.
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:50 |
|
Gripweed posted:The Biden administration is blocking the release of the tapes of his interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur. This is the interview that led Hur to declare that a jury would most likely find Biden to be a confused old man with memory problems. The Biden administration is blocking the release of the tapes to the House impeachment inquiry against him. That's an important detail you left out! This is not a request for releasing the tapes publicly, it's a request for releasing the tapes to the leaders of an active and rather blatant political hit job against Biden. It's entirely reasonable for the Biden administration to be asking why the gently caress an impeachment inquiry needs something like that, especially when they already have the transcripts. I don't think Jim Jordan is going to use the tapes to make Biden look good! It's also not really news. The DoJ has been refusing Republican demands for the tapes for weeks, with Garland and other DoJ figures claiming that they're concerned that witnesses will be less likely to cooperate in legitimate investigations if the DoJ makes a habit of handing their interviews to political kangaroo courts afterward. The only new thing today is that Biden has, at Garland's request, invoked executive privilege to block Republican moves to hold Garland in contempt of Congress.
|
# ? May 16, 2024 16:59 |
Main Paineframe posted:The Biden administration is blocking the release of the tapes to the House impeachment inquiry against him. That's an important detail you left out! Doesn’t that make it way worse to not release the tapes? Main Paineframe posted:It's also not really news. The DoJ has been refusing Republican demands for the tapes for weeks, with Garland and other DoJ figures claiming that they're concerned that witnesses will be less likely to cooperate in legitimate investigations if the DoJ makes a habit of handing their interviews to political kangaroo courts afterward. The only new thing today is that Biden has, at Garland's request, invoked executive privilege to block Republican moves to hold Garland in contempt of Congress. That also seems bad to me, the executive branch refusing to release information to Congress because they think Congress is being mean to them. Very Trumpy Gripweed fucked around with this message at 17:08 on May 16, 2024 |
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:05 |
|
haveblue posted:Didn't they already release a transcript? I think its the same rational as not allowing the Access Hollywood tape in the Trump trial but allowing that transcript. Watching a video hits harder than just reading a transcript.
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:06 |
Gripweed posted:Doesn’t that make it way worse to not release the tapes? Not really? It's just giving soundbites to a bankrupt proceeding. Don't talk to cops / Republicans are cops
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:07 |
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Not really? It's just giving soundbites to a bankrupt proceeding. The president is the #1 cop!
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:09 |
|
Gripweed posted:Doesn’t that make it way worse to not release the tapes? Are you claiming that the people on the impeachment committee will act in good faith with those tapes?
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:10 |
Madkal posted:Are you claiming that the people on the impeachment committee will act in good faith with those tapes? I don’t think that matters.
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:12 |
|
Robert Menendez shooting for the (NC) John Edwards Douche of the Year award (or for an Oscar for best actor):quote:Nadine Menendez, the wife of Senator Robert Menendez, is being treated for breast cancer and will undergo a mastectomy, her husband revealed on Thursday. https://archive.ph/u6pfW#selection-625.0-687.54
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:13 |
|
Gripweed posted:The president is the #1 cop! What is it you think that the Republicans are going to do with these recordings and why do you think it is valuable that they obtain them?
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:16 |
|
Gripweed posted:Proving that he didn’t sound like a confused old man? That’s the upside of releasing it, the downside of not releasing it is that everyone will assume that Biden really did sound like a confused old man. You're assuming that this is a good faith request and that Republicans won't selectively pick from it and even edit it to show whatever they want. I don't think that's realistic, and so I really don't see an upside to releasing the recordings.
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:17 |
Mustang posted:What is it you think that the Republicans are going to do with these recordings and why do you think it is valuable that they obtain them? DeadlyMuffin posted:You're assuming that this is a good faith request and that Republicans won't selectively pick from it and even edit it to show whatever they want. The default on these kinds of things should be to release the records. If Congress asks for something, the President should hand it over unless he has a drat good reason not to. And “Congress is mean to me” isn’t a good reason. “Releasing this information may benefit my political opponents” is a terrible reason.
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:20 |
|
Gripweed posted:Doesn’t that make it way worse to not release the tapes? Feels like you're trying to play gotchas here and making somewhat elaborate reasons why "this is bad for Biden". The House committee is on a fishing expedition and are more likely to use the tapes to cut up soundbites than anything legitimate. Other than that, it's not something the public cares about and doesn't "look bad for Biden" unless you're looking for ways to raise that position e: I mean "because I think this is how it should be" is certainly an answer but not a really important one?
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:20 |
Levitate posted:Feels like you're trying to play gotchas here and making somewhat elaborate reasons why "this is bad for Biden". Bidens age and fitness for office has been a huge issue this election. That is something the public absolutely cares about. That’s why soundbites from the tapes could be damaging.
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:23 |
|
Gripweed posted:Bidens age and fitness for office has been a huge issue this election. That is something the public absolutely cares about. That’s why soundbites from the tapes could be damaging. That has nothing to do with their impeachment inquiry though.
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:29 |
Gripweed posted:The default on these kinds of things should be to release the records. If Congress asks for something, the President should hand it over unless he has a drat good reason not to. And “Congress is mean to me” isn’t a good reason. “Releasing this information may benefit my political opponents” is a terrible reason. "Don't talk to cops" is a drat good reason. The Republicans are going on a bullshit fishing expedition. It is absurd to demand that Biden feed the fish for them. You might as well be angry that Biden isn't rolling over and exposing his soft belly meat. They have the transcript and that addresses all legitimate potential concerns. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 17:35 on May 16, 2024 |
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:32 |
|
Gripweed posted:The default on these kinds of things should be to release the records. If Congress asks for something, the President should hand it over unless he has a drat good reason not to. And “Congress is mean to me” isn’t a good reason. “Releasing this information may benefit my political opponents” is a terrible reason. That the President should release records just cause Congress asks even if they have no legitimate reason sure is a take I guess.
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:34 |
|
Gripweed posted:The default on these kinds of things should be to release the records. If Congress asks for something, the President should hand it over unless he has a drat good reason not to. And “Congress is mean to me” isn’t a good reason. “Releasing this information may benefit my political opponents” is a terrible reason. The full transcript has already been released, there is no additional information to be obtained unless you have some reason to believe the transcript is inaccurate
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:35 |
Hieronymous Alloy posted:"Don't talk to cops" is a drat good reason. The Republicans are going on a bullshit fishing expedition. It is absurd to demand that Biden feed the fish for them. He’s the President of the United States! He’s literally the main cop. Papercut posted:The full transcript has already been released, there is no additional information to be obtained unless you have some reason to believe the transcript is inaccurate If the transcript has been released then what’s the justification for calling executive privilege on the tapes?
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:38 |
Gripweed posted:He’s the President of the United States! He’s literally the main cop. As we are currently seeing demonstrated in significant detail in the national media, presidents are perfectly capable of being defendants in criminal proceedings. Being a cop yourself is no reason to start talking to cops. You could make a more refined public interest argument but I think that's refuted by the availability of the transcript and the obvious extreme bad faith of republican actors right now.
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:42 |
|
Gripweed posted:He’s the President of the United States! He’s literally the main cop. The inquiry isn't about whether or not he's too old for the office so even if the tape did prove that without them chopping it up, it's irrelevant because that's not what they're investigating. You can't use the auspices of an inquiry to get any information you want.
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:43 |
Hieronymous Alloy posted:As we are currently seeing demonstrated in significant detail in the national media, presidents are perfectly capable of being defendants in criminal proceedings. Being a cop yourself is no reason to start talking to cops. If the transcript is already out then it means there is no legitimate executive privilege claim over the tapes. Of the Biden administration thinks that releasing the tapes could end up being damaging to the president’s reelection chances, that is also not a legitimate read not to release the tapes. And if simply hearing the president speak is damaging to he reelection chances, then there’s a significant public interest in hearing those tapes.
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:47 |
|
Gripweed posted:The default on these kinds of things should be to release the records. If Congress asks for something, the President should hand it over unless he has a drat good reason not to. And “Congress is mean to me” isn’t a good reason. “Releasing this information may benefit my political opponents” is a terrible reason. The courts have generally held the opposite: that the power of Congress to subpoena records from the executive branch is not absolute, and needs to be limited to insulate the inner workings of the executive branch from excessive Congressional interference to some extent. The subpoena power should be used for legitimate legislative purposes, and thus executive privilege exists as a method for the president to push back against things that seem like political fishing expeditions, attempts at trial-by-media, and other things along those lines. This is why, for example, all nine Supreme Court justices agreed in 2020 that the House could not subpoena Trump's tax returns. Chief Justice Roberts recognized in the majority 7-2 opinion Trump v Mazars that Congressional subpoenas "stem from a rival political branch that has an ongoing relationship with the president and incentives to use subpoenas for institutional advantage" and thus raise serious separation-of-powers concerns that require them to be limited. Meanwhile, the two dissenters went even further and complained that the majority was too permissive toward subpoenas and should have limited them even further, with Thomas going so far as to write that "Congress’ legislative powers do not authorize it to engage in a nationwide inquisition with whatever resources it chooses to appropriate for itself". Gripweed posted:Bidens age and fitness for office has been a huge issue this election. That is something the public absolutely cares about. That’s why soundbites from the tapes could be damaging. That's exactly why Biden is able to assert executive privilege here. Again, Congressional subpoenas to the executive branch are required to be for a legitimate legislative purpose. If the goal of the subpoena is harvest information for its political effect, rather than for the actual legislative work of Congress, then Biden does in fact have a right to block the subpoena. Two other important aspects of the Trump v Mazars ruling is that Congress' subpoena has to be narrow as possible to meet their legislative purpose, and that Congress has to consider whether it could get the information it needs from some other source that doesn't require subpoenaing the executive. Since they already have the transcript, they'd have an uphill battle on these two aspects as well.
|
# ? May 16, 2024 17:51 |
|
Yeah I have no idea why it is necessary to have the audio when we have the transcript. I would agree with Trump making the same request to quash the release of the audio.
|
# ? May 16, 2024 18:11 |
|
|
# ? Jun 3, 2024 11:27 |
|
It would be fun if the Dems could railroad something through the House while a bunch of reps are at Trump trial
|
# ? May 16, 2024 18:33 |