|
Fried Chicken posted:California has legalized assisted suicide, becoming the 5th state to do so That's cool. Reading the comments of governor Jerry Brown on the law is sort of touching. I don't know anything about the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Can someone enlighten me?
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 16:22 |
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:They have the majority of state legislatures (31 R, 11 D, 8 split), the majority of governorships (31 R, 18 D, 1 I), the house, the senate, and the SCOTUS. I've never thought that the Republicans control the SCOTUS. Maybe I'm just ignorant.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
foobardog posted:You have Scalia and Alito who are pretty much openly partisan, Roberts who is partisan but knows to play the game, and Thomas who is weird but pretty reliable in going with the conservative part of the court. Kennedy is the general tie-breaker, but with the exception of social issues, is pretty strongly in favor of conservative interpretations. Jackson Taus posted:Scalia, Thomas, and Alito are hard-core conservatives. The two "swing votes" of Anthony Kennedy and John Roberts lean pretty far to the right normally. Anything positive that's come from the Court has come from one of those two switching sides - gay marriage (both cases) was Kennedy and the ACA was Roberts. Well yeah, but I'm not saying SCOTUS isn't conservative, I'm saying that it's not Republican. Just listing the more conservative members while leaving out Sotomayor, Kagan, Breyer, and Ginsburg does nothing to convince me that they're in the Republican's pocket. A 'Republican' SCOTUS would not have permitted gay marriage or the ACA, in my opinion. I think the court is split enough to not be (strongly at least) Republic or Democrat, with conservative economic opinions and moderate/liberal social opinions that often dissatisfy both parties.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
foobardog posted:e: In an even simpler way, 5 of the justices were nominated by Republican Presidents. None of them have strayed too far from the right. I don't know what this forum thinks about FiveThirtyEight, but I've recently read an interesting article by them claiming that Justices become more liberal as they age. Oliver Roeder posted:A typical justice nominated by a Republican president starts out at age 50 as an Antonin Scalia and retires at age 80 as an Anthony Kennedy. A justice nominated by a Democrat, however, is a lifelong Stephen Breyer. edit: evilweasel posted:It is republican-controlled. When we discuss how the Senate is Republican-controlled, we don't bother to list the Democrats. Because they're in the minority. Well, alright. I'll chalk this up to me learning something new.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
Boon posted:I may have missed it in the 500 or so posts since last, but where is everyone watching the debate (will CNN have it for free?) I believe CNN will be livestreaming it for free on their website, 8:30 PM ET
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Sapphic. So it's lesbian when they touch?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 17:13
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:You can believe that all you want, dude said "he must be punished". At the most that means he'd push for a somewhat lighter sentence, he's still going to be in jail for quite a bit. No future commutation is implied. The thing is, when you're a sanderista you can just say "I can see Bernie commuting him" and there you go, Snowden will be free forever in Bernie's America!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 17:19
|
|
|
Does the general public even give a poo poo about Snowden? That is to say, do we live in a political climate where one candidate's attitudes toward his actions can sway voters by any meaningful amount?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:So do you want him freed or in jail, you can't attack from both positions. Thanks, but I'm fine just pointing out how naive it is to expect Sanders to hypothetically commute a guy that he says "must be punished". I don't find much merit in gut feelings.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:So many people are still posting as if the republican party is made of actual people with opinions and positions other than "gently caress you Mr. President, we're not going to do anything you want until there's an (R) next to your name". I don't see why you'd want someone who doesn't give a poo poo about anything other than her own electability in that position over someone who actually wants to change things. You know, I honestly don't know whether change in America will be enacted by brute-forcing past Republicans or by engaging in Machiavellian levels of deceit and obfuscation - but considering the majority Republicans have in just about every political system in America currently -except- for the POTUS, I have my doubts that Sanders could enact anything meaningful in 2016. I could be wrong, but nothing so far has convinced me otherwise. Republicans own the House, the Senate, the SCOTUS... Democrats can't just beat them in a shouting match, because they have many more (and much louder) voices. Can Sanders navigate such a climate? Chelb fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Oct 14, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:Vote them out. That's literally the only option your country has if it wants to move in a positive direction. If you can't manage that then it doesn't matter who's in the oval office. Bernie Sanders is not the man to convince Republicans to stop voting Republican. I don't think anyone is, except for maybe Trump. In a country with rampant and severe gerrymandering and a highly partisan political ethic, "voting Republicans out" will take at least a decade, and I imagine will rely on factors beyond any President's control. Stuff like migrations shifting demographics, political crises, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
zoux posted:I think Hillary is a lot more cutthroat and will be more willing to use executive power (as detailed in those articles I linked that no on read) than Obama is, and certainly more than Bernie. I think she'll be better at massaging the system and sneaking a few policies by, or ramming them through. I basically agree.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Its too soon for real polling to be out post-debate. When do polls usually come out post-debate? A few days?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Spaceman Future! posted:if you want to analyse the impact in any meaningful way give it a few weeks, anything you see in the next few days is going to be reactionary at best. zoux posted:Caution: I also thought Barack Obama would be a transformative figure that would usher in a modern era of progressivism. A hell of a lot of people thought the same, to be fair, so at least you weren't uniquely wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
zoux posted:Debate drew 15m last night which is five million more than watched the Democratic debate in 2008. The CNN GOP debate drew 23 million, but you'd expect it to draw more. I hope the 2016 elections are less dominated by apathy. Increased voter turnout would be nice. though with the way things have been going I don't think I'll have to worry about that
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Electric Bugaloo posted:Not to be glib, but people literally said all of this about Barack Obama in 2007. And now that we know what a Republican congress looks like with such a president, I think people are less afraid of backing "difficult" candidates as well. I don't know why people think repeating that Obama made it is at all relevant. Sanders is not Obama, and he is not in the situation Obama was in in 2007. I mean, I could probably compare something about Sanders to Ron Paul or Nader if I really wanted to. It wouldn't mean anything. Chelb fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Oct 14, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:You mean her appeal to old people. Old people as in baby boomers. You got anything to back that up?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:Also she polls way higher with old people That's what I'm asking for, yes. Something that isn't an extrapolation would be nice.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:I'll believe that when they quit building more sports stadiums and hosting NCAA tournaments. Working for 10 hours a week with a whole lot of free poo poo attached to it sounds pretty reasonable to me, and I'm not a filthy bougie.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
I just want there to be some resolution. poo poo or get off the pot, Trump. Take over the presidency in an armed coup or make another Celebrity Apprentice or something.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
zoux posted:To be fair, literally every pundit in the country thought all that stuff. This primary cycle has confounded the conventional wisdom on presidential politics. Yeah, it's hard to predict something when it turns out to not follow logic or reason. Rygar201 posted:Yeah, no. Do you really think Bernie is so repulsive to the party that handily won 08 and 12 that they'll just "No thanks, Ill stay home let that Trump fellow steer the ol' ship of state for a bit." I definitely think Bernie would have to fight harder to win than Hillary would. After a certain point it's just a matter of public perception.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
If the Repubs keep massively loving up as they seem to be doing now and lose the election by a landslide (I'm thinking Trump vs Hillary here), could there be a greater than expected loss of senate/house seats on their end? Or are voters and gerrymandering still too entrenched on the local level? You'd think that some would theoretically be disgusted enough by Trump to at least consider voting independent, but maybe I'm just an idiot.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Democrats have to win the national House vote by something ludicrous like +8 or more to get control of the House. It is possible for them to take back the Senate if they sweep the potentially vulnerable states but it's likely they make gains, but not enough. They have to win all Republican seats in blue states, then knock off Ohio and/or Florida. Doable, but requires each race to go their way. I guess I'll be rooting for a blue Senate then. At least when I'm inevitably disappointed, I won't be that disappointed.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
Those could be meaningless words, but man would Julain Castro as VP be great
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 02:48
|
|
|
zoux posted:They thought the same thing about Wendy Davis. As much as I like her, she's a white lady who's defining moment is about abortion, something majority-Catholic Hispanics are not too hot about. If Castro avoids or downplays issues like that he could absolutely be a stronger force. Though whipping Texas dems into shape wouldn't hurt either.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
zoux posted:Go look up polling among Hispanic women about abortion. "Pew Hispanic 2012 posted:Support for abortion rights also vary by age, but not by gender. Younger Latinos are more likely than older Latinos to say abortion should be legal. A majority (53%) of Latinos ages 18 to 29 support abortion rights. By contrast, majorities of Latinos ages 30 to 49 (51%), ages 50 to 64 (58%) and ages 65 and older (63%) say abortion should be illegal in “all cases” or “most cases.” Meanwhile, half (50%) of Hispanic men and half (52%) of Hispanic women say abortion should mainly be illegal. " Pew, 2014 posted:Looking at all Americans, regardless of their voter registration status, whites (54%) are more likely than blacks (47%) and Hispanics (44%) to think abortion should be legal. Among all Hispanics, 51% think abortion should be illegal in all or most cases, including 20% who think abortion should never be allowed. You can't rely on female votes to win an election anyway. Abortion as an issue is a very hot-button topic among Hispanics (never mind the US as a whole), and staking out a strong position on such a polarizing issue is not very good politics if you want to win the most votes. edit: oops, hosed up a few urls Chelb fucked around with this message at 05:33 on Oct 16, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 05:26
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Another thing to consider is that Hispanic voting trends are very different from state to state. That's probably true. I can't seem to find polls about Hispanic views on Abortion in Texas specifically though. My Google skills have failed me.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 05:46
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:So uh, the gunship crew was concerned that bombing the MSF might be a war crime, but did so anyways. I wonder how much more info needs to come out for somebody to be arrested for a paltry amount of time.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:It doesn't matter. According to Russia Today, the Hebrew-speaking Illuminati is behind her campaign. I knew it! Colonel Cancer posted:Weren't people saying that Bernie supporters were racist MRAs for at least the past 50 pages or so? Bernie supporters are good. They are also bad. tbqh I like Bernie a lot and regardless of the outcome of the following year I hope he has another decade or two ahead of him saying the things he says.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
zoux posted:Polling orgs are starting to put out their official post debate polls. That's a lot more like it. Those 82% Bernie online polls were ridiculous.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
radical meme posted:I swear to God, the NYTimes hates the Clintons more than any other right wing rag sheet, more than any talking head on radio. Years ago, Bill must have butt hosed some matriarch of the Ochs-Sulzberger family and left without even a goodnight kiss because they are more bitter and spiteful than all the right wing media groups combined. Did she do anything to piss of the NYT in particular or is it a general "we hate clinton" kind of thing?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
Mitt Romney posted:If he can just bait Bush into saying "yeah but he kept us safe after that", that would be pretty damaging to Bush. Does he really need to at this point? I feel like it might be more lucrative to try and go after Rubio.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 04:56
|
|
|
McAlister posted:Clinton has spent her entire political life with gentle rhetoric and hard-left actions limited only by the scope of the politically possible. Her biggest fails have been misjudging where the line is and going to far left. Like when she tried to get universal health care passed in 1993. I've forgotten about that. It def. puts a spin on when people say that Clinton isn't far enough to the left - whenever she's tried to be in any concrete way, she's been beaten down for it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:This actually sort of my fear. The county has moved left in a lot of ways and she could still stay stuck in the 90s due to a sort of political Stockholm syndrome. I guess the hope/plan is that Bernie through his level of support manages to convince Hillary that times have changed. Chelb fucked around with this message at 04:22 on Oct 18, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2015 04:20
|
|
|
Hulk Krogan posted:He's claiming Hitler only wanted to deport the Jews until those wicked Palestinians convinced him he should kill them all instead. You know, out of all the crazy, scummy stuff I expect Bibi to do and say, I was a bit surprised by this one. Can't wait until we find out from him that Palestinians also caused the Black Death, faked the moon landing, and are the source of the global warming crisis.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
Never have I seen a neck so.... neck-y.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
I am going to be very interested in the popular vote disparities come 2016 if Trump or Carson becomes the GOP nominee.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:Don't forget that God's Not Dead ends with the liberal atheist college professor Hercules getting hit by a car on his way to a Christian rock concert and a minister baptizing him instead of anyone calling an ambulance. And then the Duck Dynasty guy addresses the audience and tells them to all text God's Not Dead to everyone in their phone.  And people ask me why I don't watch many movies anymore.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:God's Not Dead is in no way representative of the typical movie (thankfully). Don't worry, I saw Mad Max: Fury Road like any respectable movie-watcher. radical meme posted:BLM is less organized and way less useful than OWS ever was. This is the worst idea ever and the only result that would come out of it is an endless loop of ads that would be run against Hillary in the general election. Yeah, I agree; I don't know how presenting demands to presidential candidates is at all a good way to affect meaningful change. I guess it's a more glamorous target.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 16:22 |
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:No. The only way Democrats take the House is if Hillary (or Bernie) wins by like 10+ points or something and they get a few lucky breaks. You're almost certainly right, but goddamn, the GOP's been so loving bonkers lately that I have trouble knowing what could happen and what couldn't anymore. The US could be invaded by martians tomorrow and I'd find it plausible at this point.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 17:39
|
|