|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIwMIrj5Ulo&t=253s
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2019 06:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 07:31 |
|
|
Yep. Pretty much.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2019 06:55
|
|
|
I think people are forgetting one thing which is that if everyone did the vote blueing and it caused trump to lose then it would make supporters really, really, really mad and that would be worth it
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2019 08:45
|
|
|
texas today approved a constitutional amendment forbidding a state income tax, which requires a 2/3 majority to overturn, which will never happen
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2019 09:08
|
|
|
so they want to bankrupt their state government like kansas?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2019 10:10
|
|
|
Percelus posted:so they want to bankrupt their state government like kansas? texas already lacks a state income tax. this just makes it so that to pass one requires more than 66% of votes rather than more than 50%
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2019 10:20
|
|
|
Finicums Wake posted:texas already lacks a state income tax. this just makes it so that to pass one requires more than 66% of votes rather than more than 50% it requires 66% of votes in the house, not 66% of popular vote, and since the texas house is by design composed only of rich people who can take six months off their normal lives every other year to make $40k, those reps will never vote to increase their own taxes, no matter how popular it is among the citizens.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2019 10:28
|
|
|
20k/year plus their per-diem while in session is way, way more than i make right now lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2019 10:39
|
|
|
ScrubLeague posted:it requires 66% of votes in the house, not 66% of popular vote, and since the texas house is by design composed only of rich people who can take six months off their normal lives every other year to make $40k, those reps will never vote to increase their own taxes, no matter how popular it is among the citizens. lmao
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2019 10:45
|
|
|
bernie or bust is a promise. i won't vote for anyone any more compromised than bernie. this is a change from previous years, and i don't think i am alone in adopting this mentality for 2020.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2019 15:28
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:20k/year plus their per-diem while in session is way, way more than i make right now lol texas underpays their legislators so that only rich people can run in the first place (it's more work than just the shortass session to actually become one) while at the same time hobbling their legislative ability to that small window every two years for running such a hugeass state lol by comparison, california legislators draw $107k and work most of the year (it changes, usually ~10 months), also the per diem amounts to around another $55k. and that's probably still too low
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2019 19:19
|
|
|
ScrubLeague posted:texas today approved a constitutional amendment forbidding a state income tax, which requires a 2/3 majority to overturn, which will never happen gently caress!! At least I voted against it but drat, thay sucks 
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2019 23:55
|
|
|
if a succdem wins the nom will writing in rem lezar count as voting blue?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 02:17
|
|
|
i thought we already had two threads in this subforum dedicated to trashing shitlibs, but i guess dickeye's posting-induced egotism can't be tamedScrubLeague posted:texas today approved a constitutional amendment forbidding a state income tax, which requires a 2/3 majority to overturn, which will never happen
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 03:19
|
|
|
Anarchist Mae posted:I forgot how stupid people here can be. Even Bernie is malicious. The entire loving system is malicious. wrong as gently caress you little quisling.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 07:24
|
|
|
ate poo poo on live tv posted:wrong as gently caress you little quisling. Oh shut up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 07:31
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:i thought we already had two threads in this subforum dedicated to trashing shitlibs, but i guess dickeye's posting-induced egotism can't be tamed There was an argument about Vote Blue in the guillotine thread and the op kept getting salty and locking it so I made a thread to spin off the argument, gently caress me I guess
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 11:44
|
|
|
Toxic Mental posted:I think people are forgetting one thing which is that if everyone did the vote blueing and it caused trump to lose then it would make supporters really, really, really mad and that would be worth it This is probably sarcastic, but its honestly where I'm at. I want to vote Bernie, and i even live in an important primary state, so my primary vote might even matter. However, even if he doesnt win the primary, i'll vote blue, not because i think it will actually fix anything, but because i'll be voting for who gets really upset on, and after, election night: libs and non-radicalized leftists (most of my friends and family), or boomer chuds. I'd even vote for Harris, even though i think shes worse than Biden, simply because i think seeing her be president would drive a significant number of chuds into rage strokes. So thats my position: if bernie doesnt win the primary, vote blue so the Trump lovers have just as bad a time as the rest of us do as we spend the next 4 years circling the drain.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 15:02
|
|
|
i know you're all dying to know what zizek thinks about thisa strangely wise racoon who popped out of a nearby dumpster posted:With a few exceptions, it is not worth bothering to vote. We ordinary voters do not decide about things that really matter. So what should we do? Recall the plot of Juan Jose Saramago's wonderful novel Seeing, in which voters of an unnamed democratic country resembling Portugal refuse to vote and cast invalid ballots, throwing the entire political establishment into panic: the mere withdrawal from a legitimising ritual makes the state power appear like the familiar cartoon cat, suspended in the air above the precipice. I remember the last years of the Communist rule in Slovenia: there was no government so eager to earn its legitimacy, precisely because the Communists' power was not democratically legitimate. https://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/2007/sep/30/featuresreview.review11 hot take: the trash racoon is correct
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 15:22
|
|
|
lol Let me back up my lovely point with a fictional novel as my source thanks slaj
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 15:36
|
|
|
Toxic Mental posted:lol Let me back up my lovely point with a fictional novel as my source thanks slaj i'm going to go with "the author was a nobel prize winner who was super well known in europe and also a vocal communist" because i
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 15:46
|
|
|
he doesnt seem to say much about what to do there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 17:43
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:he doesnt seem to say much about what to do there. If everyone just doesn’t vote, then we break the system! Ignore that this would require convincing huge swathes of the population to take part in what is essentially a prisoner’s dilemma, and hope that republicans don’t just take this as an opportunity to ensure their candidate wins practically unopposed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 18:05
|
|
|
presumably the exceptional circumstances would include a candidate like bernie, so I'd sort of interpret him as saying don't vote unless there's a meaningful candidate to vote for (or some other specific reason) because any vote is an affirmation of the system and that itself has to be worth it i only quoted part of what he said though, he also talks about there being value to a movement for abstinence from voting as an affirmative position against a lack of meaningful democracy
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2019 23:01
|
|
|
There are already millions of nonvoters, file under "tried it, doesn't work". The disenfranchised stay home, the enfranchised continue to vote for neoliberals, people just shrug and go "ok" at whoever they vote for. I guess this would eventually trigger a crisis of democratic legitimacy, but that world sounds more like the future if we lose than the future if we win.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 02:35
|
|
|
1982 Subaru Brat posted:There are already millions of nonvoters, file under "tried it, doesn't work". we are literally in this crisis, right now
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 03:49
|
|
|
the electoral college has overturned the will of the people in 40% of the elections since 2000 lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 04:30
|
|
|
did it, though? pretty sure more people didnt vote than did in literally all of those. in which case a tool of the powerful hosed with the choice of the powerful and mildly powerful. cant say I care much about that
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 06:07
|
|
|
fair, electoral systems certainly can affect turnout, but I don't think it's a contradiction of my point
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 07:43
|
|
|
turnout for the texas constitutional amendment election was less than 13%
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 07:50
|
|
|
because it's a lovely system used by the legislature to rubber-stamp policies, even the loving gold depository tax break passed prop 5 was legit good at least
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 07:53
|
|
|
Prop 1 getting axed is nominally good too, so mostly un-vetted judges can't serve in multiple jurisdictions, even though we've certainly got a huge shortage of state and municipal judges. It's just wild to me that for a state that claims to hate the government so much, we're so willing at every turn to give them as much power as possible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 09:18
|
|
|
ScrubLeague posted:Prop 1 getting axed is nominally good too, so mostly un-vetted judges can't serve in multiple jurisdictions, even though we've certainly got a huge shortage of state and municipal judges. that is what hating the government has always meant
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 16:09
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:did it, though? pretty sure more people didnt vote than did in literally all of those. in which case a tool of the powerful hosed with the choice of the powerful and mildly powerful. cant say I care much about that Nah, presidential elections have been over 50% of the voting age population since 2000. In the last 50 years, 1996 was the low point at 49%, (also looks to be the low point, period, thanks Gen X) 2008 was the high at 58%. Used to be quite a bit higher in the 50's and 60's, but the 00's and 10's are up a few points over the 70's thru 90's.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2019 16:58
|
|
|
If it's Warren or Buttigieg then sure, vote Socialist or whatever. But if it's Biden you better loving vote for him. A Biden presidency would be the ultimate wedge jammed into the Democratic Party. To have a senile conservative white man occupy the spot of top Dem would drive millions of wavering liberals into doubt and, eventually, opposition to this demon cracker nation in a way Trump never could. Trump is seen as an anomaly; Biden would crack-ping anyone remotely progressive into abandoning the existing state of things in favor genuine emancipation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2019 07:27
|
|
|
source your quotes
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2019 08:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 07:31 |
|
|
more people shouldvote 1 o nn this thread
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 04:30
|
|