|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:A new NPR Marist poll has some eye openers Checking the composition of the sample... quote:This survey of 1,209 adults That leaves 327 voters who didn't specify an affiliation. The survey has more Democratic-leaning voters, but also thinks the Democratic party is the greatest threat to democracy? The only way that makes sense is if the vast majority of "no specified affiliation" are hard right-wingers. EDIT: The age breakdown of registered voters might be a clue: 18 to 29 - 16% 30 to 44 - 23% 45 to 59 - 27% 60 or older - 34% 61% of those polled are 45 or older. Stabbey_the_Clown fucked around with this message at 16:50 on Nov 1, 2021 |
#
¿
Nov 1, 2021 16:06
|
|
energy for sure
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 21:32 |
|
|
How are u posted:So, capitalists will never institute social spending, except for the times that they have in response to social pressure? You say "social pressure, as if that extends only to things like bad coverage in the media. They used the word "revolution". A revolution is "social pressure" great enough to be destabilizing to society at large. Protests and bad media stories on their own have proven insufficient to get the capitalists to institute more social spending greater than tossing out a few more crumbs. Vorik posted:I hear you, but again what does any of that matter? The important thing is what the result of this investment is going to be. More jobs, more green energy, fixing our crumbling infrastructure, expanding access to high speed internet, investing in transportation, etc. You've repeated yourself but haven't answered the question. The Infrastructure bill, on its own, is actually bad for greenhouse gas emissions. Most of the parts which were good for green energy are in the BBB bill.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2021 20:27
|
|
|
is pepsi ok posted:Why would you compare the scale of the bill to literally nothing instead of the multitude of crises we are facing? A lot of the time - especially for the climate crisis - celebrating slight incremental progress feels like celebrating that the rocket you're heading to space on will now have a whopping 35% of the fuel needed to get there (up from 15%!). It's not "nothing", but it's not enough to stop the ship smashing into the ground.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2021 23:01
|
|
|
Vorik posted:What are you talking about man? The BIF addresses infrastructure and it's the bill that just passed, the BBB which is the next bill being passed is the one that's broader in spending. The ARP is the one that already passed and had $1.9T in spending. These are all part of Biden's agenda and the BBB is the one that's getting passed next. Hi! In case you're new to the thread, you might have missed that the entire reason why BIF and BBB are two bills and not one was due to conservative Democrats wanting to split out all the yucky social spending they didn't like from all the stuff they wanted. You may also have missed that despite the progressives giving a lot of concessions, the conservative democrats seemed to be acting in bad faith, looking for an excuse to kill the BBB without outright saying they wanted to kill it. It also seems like you missed that with the BIF passing, the conservative Democrats get what they want (and the conservative Democrats in the Senate were not even part of the "Vote by Nov. 15th" agreement). Because there is no more BIF hostage for progressives to take to get a vote on BBB, most people think that BBB is dead or further crippled, because it seems the conservative Democrats have wanted that all along. I hope this helps!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2021 01:53
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:"Procedural reasons" prevented Trump from doing a lot of heinous bullshit, so it cuts both ways. That only applies if there is an enforcement mechanism to stop people doing breaking the procedural reasons or punish them if they do so, and if enforcement actually happens. The Republican cult was and is perfectly fine with evil happening when it's done by a Republican and has no interest in using the enforcement mechanisms to stop Republicans from doing evil. The end result is that evil gets done much faster than good. The Mattybee posted:People who think the rule of law is important? People who think that it would, in fact, be extremely bad if Republicans came into power with literally no controls in government? Trump broke a lot of rules and laws while in office. He was protected and cheered on by those who were obligated by oaths to be the guardians of those laws and see them enforced. Trump was voted out, tried to have a coup based on a blatant lie of election fraud, and the cult members still in office are punishing colleagues who refuse to support the coup-starting-lie. None of them are likely to be punished at all. The law seems to be completely toothless, which makes the "rule of law" argument weak. Esran posted:It seems like Republicans ignore both laws and procedural norms when they are in power, while Democrats are terribly tied down by those same procedural restrictions. The rule of law is only valuable as long as those laws produce good outcomes, and are enforced somewhat equally on everyone. If the Republicans ignores the rules when they want something done, and the Democrats refuse to punish them for rulebreaking, why does it have value that the Democrats choose to be bound by those rules, when it leads them to doing bad things? This, exactly. **** Additionally, laws care an order of magnitude more about protecting capital than they do about protecting against the effects of climate change, so using the rule of law as the guidepost means protecting the rights of big corporations to murder the planet in exchange for a few more pieces of ink-stained paper. That does not mean outright discarding the rule of law is the right thing to do. It just means that following the "rule of law" is hardly a golden bullet which will save the United States, and there's no guarantee that the rule of law will persist even in its current weaker form if the Republicans gain control of the White House again. There is no good fix for the United States. The problems were built in from the start and baked into the Constitution and the political climate won't allow for fixing the changes with a constitutional convention. Stabbey_the_Clown fucked around with this message at 20:13 on Nov 13, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2021 20:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 21:32 |
|
|
HonorableTB posted:The Guardian has, uh, endorsed blowing up fossil fuel infrastructure. You love to see it Continuing with the status quo with regards to climate action is going to radically change human civilization within decades (which is a euphemism for "millions of people will die and tens of millions of people will become refugees"). People who are comfortable with the status quo don't change the system unless something happens to make them reconsider. They're not going to become uncomfortable with the status quo until enough pressure is put on to make them uncomfortable. Peaceful sit-ins in front of a few offices are not going to be enough pressure. Looking at it from that perspective, it's a logical conclusion to reach.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2021 03:21
|
|