Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend
Lobby General Discussion topic #13312589

Subject: "Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Exposes The Dark Side Of Politics (swipe)" Previous topic | Next topic
walihorse
Member since Aug 03rd 2006
15445 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 11:18 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
"Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Exposes The Dark Side Of Politics (swipe)"


  

          

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-campaign-finance_us_5c5d246be4b03afe8d6637ff

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Exposes The Dark Side Of Politics In 5 Incredible Minutes
The freshman lawmaker reveals how easy it is for pols to get rich at your expense.
headshot
By Ed Mazza
X

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) exposed some of the biggest flaws and loopholes in campaign finance laws this week ― and she did it in just five minutes.

During a hearing, the freshman lawmaker created a game in which she pretended to be “a really, really bad guy” who wants to abuse the system as much as possible. Then, in a series of questions, she exposed the world of payoffs, dark money, PACs and more. She even revealed how it was perfectly legal for a lawmaker to invest in an industry, then write laws to benefit that industry and increase the value of the investment.

And as lax as the laws are for members of Congress, there are even fewer restrictions for a president.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Say what you will about her, I fully support what she is doing. She may fizzle out in the future, hell she may even turn out to be terrible, but for the now, right now, I support her trying to get things out in the open. I really hope this gets more exposure and citizens united gets done away with.

Honestly, I can't say I wouldn't do the same if I was an elected official. Nothing other than ones own moral code prevents could someone from taking advantage IMO.



If a fat guy falls in the woods and there is no one around to see it, do the trees laugh?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top


Topic Outline
Subject Author Message Date ID
agreed
Feb 08th 2019
1
I still don't know what he looks like. I was more familiar with the othe...
Feb 08th 2019
4
I know, of NYC's 16 congressional districts the only members who've
Feb 08th 2019
9
RE: agreed
Feb 08th 2019
5
She's doing what she went there to do, and i appreciate it.
Feb 08th 2019
10
AOC should be embraced and celebrated by the party.
Feb 08th 2019
2
she has a -4% net favorability rating.
Feb 08th 2019
6
      She's challenging the entire status-quo - so there will be turbulence
Feb 08th 2019
13
      Is Bernie a Democrat?
Feb 08th 2019
24
      Do we really need to have the "Bernie isn't a Dem" discussion again?
Feb 08th 2019
25
      We don't. My point is basically that, though he caucuses with them, he.....
Feb 08th 2019
27
      He ran as a Democrat and most of his supporters vote D
Feb 08th 2019
26
      RE: She's challenging the entire status-quo - so there will be turbulenc...
Feb 08th 2019
34
      Reeq, he has a point man
Feb 08th 2019
37
      her seat is safe, she has the base/youth
Feb 08th 2019
20
      There's never going to be someone who convinces people
Feb 08th 2019
30
           and it is especially absurd to put blame on a congresswoman
Feb 08th 2019
31
           I disagree with this.
Feb 08th 2019
40
                Some voted for Obama in 08
Feb 09th 2019
42
                For sure true. But you can and need to do both.
Feb 09th 2019
48
                Fair points. 2016-now messed me up
Feb 09th 2019
44
                Yep. We're saying the same things here.
Feb 09th 2019
49
                it can be done but not by being more republican
Feb 10th 2019
60
                     Of course.
Feb 10th 2019
61
      damn bruh you know you are a soaking wet blanket, right?
Feb 08th 2019
28
           idk. he’s usually on point with the facts tho...
Feb 08th 2019
36
                oh factually he is absolutely right here
Feb 10th 2019
59
citizens united would take a constitutional amendment to overturn.
Feb 08th 2019
3
Can you expand on this
Feb 08th 2019
7
pretty much the only way yes, and the SCOTUS is the main consequence
Feb 08th 2019
29
      SCOTUS can overturn their own decision.
Feb 08th 2019
33
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Releases Green New Deal Outline
Feb 08th 2019
8
I thought they changed the law so they couldn’t invest in Wall St?
Feb 08th 2019
11
man...people HAAAAAAAAATE this woman.
Feb 08th 2019
12
When you say "people" you mean conservatives
Feb 08th 2019
14
older dems trying to shade on that 'wait your turn' too.
Feb 08th 2019
17
No - there are plenty establishment Dems that can't stand her
Feb 08th 2019
18
lol Hillary wasn't done in by conservatives bro
Feb 08th 2019
22
yeah, if you want to see 'dumb' check the Facebook hearings
Feb 08th 2019
15
This is why she needs to stick around. The Right is OBSESSED with her
Feb 08th 2019
16
RE: man...people HAAAAAAAAATE this woman.
Feb 08th 2019
39
One of the most succinct civics lessons I have seen in public.
Feb 08th 2019
19
I like her... but it definitely has a Tebow in the NFL feel sometimes
Feb 08th 2019
21
she is a normal person and will definitely have a misstep
Feb 09th 2019
45
Yes, I do like someone who can push the party tot he left and speaks
Feb 08th 2019
23
Right. And some people really underestimate
Feb 08th 2019
32
I love that woman!
Feb 08th 2019
35
NO
Feb 08th 2019
38
Green New Deal would account for 34% of government spending
Feb 09th 2019
41
This is a strange reply
Feb 09th 2019
43
well done. *applause*
Feb 09th 2019
46
Thanks. People also act like money spent by gov
Feb 09th 2019
47
      Haha yea - that's pretty much Repugs' entire platform.
Feb 09th 2019
51
Beat me to it.
Feb 09th 2019
50
Yeah man
Feb 09th 2019
57
Links:
Feb 09th 2019
52
      Wait, her GND plan includes M4A, UBI, and free tuition?!
Feb 09th 2019
53
      She's also proposing a 70% marginal tax rate
Feb 09th 2019
54
      Again, a lazy critique that ignores context
Feb 09th 2019
56
           It's silly to base our proposals on wishful thinking, though.
Feb 10th 2019
58
                few things
Feb 11th 2019
65
Realistically that won’t all pass but I like the strategy. Start BIG
Feb 09th 2019
55
I think they hate her because she's the answer to Trump
Feb 10th 2019
62
I sort of disagree
Feb 11th 2019
63
lefty Sarah Palin
Feb 11th 2019
64
That doesn't even make sense
Feb 11th 2019
66
theyre both women that wear glasses sometimes, duh
Feb 11th 2019
67
Sarah Palin wishes she was that smart.
Feb 11th 2019
68
What about AOC do you see as similar to Palin?
Feb 11th 2019
69
This is that sexist/racist bullshit. And it ain't just this guy.
Feb 11th 2019
70
The Green New Deal will be D policy
Feb 11th 2019
72
you tried
Feb 11th 2019
71
      No he didn’t. Lol
Feb 11th 2019
73
Kamala Harris & Elizabeth Warren need to follow AOC to learn how to
Feb 13th 2019
74
Republicans are trolling the Green New Deal. (swipe)
Feb 14th 2019
75
I think every single Dem Sanator votes for this
Feb 14th 2019
76
Yeah I think the Instagram progressives have walked us into a ditch.
Feb 14th 2019
77
mitch's smug turtle smile is so annoying
Feb 14th 2019
79
Ain’t no way that shit gets passed BUT
Feb 14th 2019
78
It's literally an idea...like the article posted above states
Feb 14th 2019
80

Dr Claw
Member since Jun 25th 2003
129333 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 11:22 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
1. "agreed"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

>Say what you will about her, I fully support what she is
>doing. She may fizzle out in the future, hell she may even
>turn out to be terrible, but for the now, right now, I support
>her trying to get things out in the open. I really hope this
>gets more exposure and citizens united gets done away with.

and it basically exposes how much of a nothingburger her predecessor was. he was basically "an Democrat"

Yes, I'm mad. Let's move on.

Jays | Cavs | Eagles | Sabres | Tarheels

PSN: Dr_Claw_77 | XBL: Dr Claw 077 | FB: drclaw077 | T: @drclaw77 | http://thepeoplesvault.wordpress.com
Does he ACCEPT? http://i.imgur.com/TBMrAkD.jpg

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Teknontheou
Charter member
31981 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 11:37 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
4. "I still don't know what he looks like. I was more familiar with the othe..."
In response to Reply # 1


  

          

NYC/Tri-State congresspeople than him (Hakim, Nadler, etc.)

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Cam
Charter member
12739 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 12:47 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
9. "I know, of NYC's 16 congressional districts the only members who've"
In response to Reply # 4


  

          

been there since the 90's are Meeks, Maloney and Nadler.

Odd to me was how, for 2013s redistricting, everyone on my side of the street moved to the 8th district, while everyone across the street stayed in the 7th.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Vex_id
Charter member
63020 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 11:37 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
5. "RE: agreed"
In response to Reply # 1


  

          

>>Say what you will about her, I fully support what she is
>>doing. She may fizzle out in the future, hell she may even
>>turn out to be terrible, but for the now, right now, I
>support
>>her trying to get things out in the open. I really hope this
>>gets more exposure and citizens united gets done away with.
>
>and it basically exposes how much of a nothingburger her
>predecessor was. he was basically "an Democrat"

Sadly - Crowley was being positioned by the party to become the next Speaker of the House. That's how obtuse the Dem leadership is to where the party needs to go.

-->

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
GOMEZ
Member since Feb 13th 2003
4923 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 01:04 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
10. "She's doing what she went there to do, and i appreciate it."
In response to Reply # 1


  

          

I hope she has a long and productive career, even if the odds sometimes feel stacked against that. She's a great reminder that we don't always have to start every discussion with a compromise, and even if the party as a whole doesn't always appreciate it, she's pushing the convo in the right direction.


https://www.instagram.com/sbmission365/

In a generation of swine, the one-eyed pig is king.
-Hunter S. Thompson

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Vex_id
Charter member
63020 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 11:36 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
2. "AOC should be embraced and celebrated by the party."
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

That she's not is indicative of deep problems within the party infrastructure.

Say what you will about Bernie Sanders - but he godfathered a new movement of progressive champions getting involved in politics - and AOC is a product of that movement and is just the beginning of the evolution of American politics that will be ushered in as the next generation assumes leadership.

-->

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Reeq
Member since Mar 11th 2013
5807 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 11:53 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
6. "she has a -4% net favorability rating."
In response to Reply # 2


  

          

https://morningconsult.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/190117_AOC_sidebar.png

independents hold a 35/23 (-12%) unfavorable/favorable view.

thats not good for a freshman. if she were in a competitive seat...she would be seen as extremely vulnerable.

shes more well known than some of the main dem prez candidates. but maybe not in a good way.

as more people have become aware of her...the less favorable she trends.

ive been trying to make this point about her for a while on here. *we* may like her and everything she does/says. but the way she goes about it has ramifications for her and her party.

i personally think she is dope and i love her passion.

but this is exactly how bright young politicians get washed away in a hurry.

------

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Vex_id
Charter member
63020 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 01:16 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
13. "She's challenging the entire status-quo - so there will be turbulence"
In response to Reply # 6
Fri Feb-08-19 01:17 PM by Vex_id

  

          

but it's interesting when and where we apply these unfavorable/favorable statistics. For instance, Sanders has consistently held the highest approval ratings in the Senate and is constantly at the top in terms of favorable ratings - but I didn't see you citing that in his defense. In fact, I saw just the opposite.

Such ratings are even more important for him because he's a presidential candidate - whereas AOC is a freshman in the House holding a futurist view of where she believes the party to go. She's also wildly popular in her congressional district and has become almost a celebrity.

Further, millennials are now the largest voting bloc and as they become increasingly active in the political process - I would expect her ratings to climb.

But yes - she's not a popular candidate with Independents and party loyalists - but that isn't a reason to not support and celebrate her as she's pushing the envelope and not bound by party dogma.

This speaks to the point I was trying to communicate to you in a different thread. That is: at some point as a party you have to have a forward-thinking view to where the party is moving in the future, as opposed to being frozen in the current status-quo. Politics will change dramatically over the next decade - and the Democratic party has the largest potentiality to be on the cusp of that evolution by enlarging its tent. It'd be political malpractice to not understand the very clear signs that AOC is a future superstar of the party (and in many ways is already a superstar in the party, without the help of the Pelosi/Schumer wing).




-->

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
Creole
Charter member
14594 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 03:41 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
24. "Is Bernie a Democrat?"
In response to Reply # 13
Fri Feb-08-19 03:43 PM by Creole

  

          

If not, there's no need to refer to him as part of the party nor when supporting favorability stats for Dems.

If so, then you may have a point about how the numbers can be looked at in different ways. That holds true for everything though.

--- praying for peace, love, and power

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
Vex_id
Charter member
63020 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 03:47 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
25. "Do we really need to have the "Bernie isn't a Dem" discussion again?"
In response to Reply # 24


  

          

Bernie is a Progressive who caucuses with the Democrats essentially 100% of the time. He's running as a Democrat and has the highest approval rating of any Senator (his supporters are largely both Progressive and Democrat).

Surely we don't need to revisit this.


-->

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
Creole
Charter member
14594 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 03:54 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
27. "We don't. My point is basically that, though he caucuses with them, he....."
In response to Reply # 25
Fri Feb-08-19 03:56 PM by Creole

  

          

ain't them. He's not a part of the Dem leadership nor is part of the old guard in the Dem Party.

"For instance, Sanders has consistently held the highest approval ratings in the Senate and is constantly at the top in terms of favorable ratings - but I didn't see you citing that in his defense. In fact, I saw just the opposite."

--- praying for peace, love, and power

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
GOMEZ
Member since Feb 13th 2003
4923 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 03:49 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
26. "He ran as a Democrat and most of his supporters vote D"
In response to Reply # 24


  

          

https://www.instagram.com/sbmission365/

In a generation of swine, the one-eyed pig is king.
-Hunter S. Thompson

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
isaaaa
Member since May 10th 2007
29977 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 06:40 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
34. "RE: She's challenging the entire status-quo - so there will be turbulenc..."
In response to Reply # 13


  

          

>but it's interesting when and where we apply these
>unfavorable/favorable statistics. For instance, Sanders has
>consistently held the highest approval ratings in the Senate
>and is constantly at the top in terms of favorable ratings -
>but I didn't see you citing that in his defense. In fact, I
>saw just the opposite.

Damn....BIG FACTS, BIG STACKS!


Anti-gentrification, cheap alcohol & trying to look pretty in our twilight posting years (c) Big Reg
http://Tupreme.com

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
Stadiq
Member since Dec 21st 2005
3028 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 08:44 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
37. "Reeq, he has a point man"
In response to Reply # 13
Fri Feb-08-19 08:50 PM by Stadiq

          

>but it's interesting when and where we apply these
>unfavorable/favorable statistics. For instance, Sanders has
>consistently held the highest approval ratings in the Senate
>and is constantly at the top in terms of favorable ratings -
>but I didn't see you citing that in his defense. In fact, I
>saw just the opposite.

This is on point. Reeq is a good dude, just seems very
pro-establishment at times- at least when it comes to
how he interprets polls.

**Reeq, you do seem to cherry pick polls man.

You never responded to me in that other thread either.

I honestly forget which thread, but you essentially posted
a bunch of pro-Biden polls as evidence that he should
run cuz he would be the best candidate.

In every poll, Bernie was second. So, based on the
faith you put into those polls for Biden, you
should be very much in favor of Bernie running.

In fact, if Biden doesn’t run, Bernie should be your
top choice.

Have you changed your mind on Bernie based on
how he’s polling?

And to Vexs point, are you more in favor of Bernie running
considering how popular he is?

Gotta be consistent at least.

****

>
>Such ratings are even more important for him because he's a
>presidential candidate - whereas AOC is a freshman in the
>House holding a futurist view of where she believes the party
>to go. She's also wildly popular in her congressional
>district and has become almost a celebrity.
>
>Further, millennials are now the largest voting bloc and as
>they become increasingly active in the political process - I
>would expect her ratings to climb.
>
>But yes - she's not a popular candidate with Independents and
>party loyalists - but that isn't a reason to not support and
>celebrate her as she's pushing the envelope and not bound by
>party dogma.
>
>This speaks to the point I was trying to communicate to you in
>a different thread. That is: at some point as a party you
>have to have a forward-thinking view to where the party is
>moving in the future, as opposed to being frozen in the
>current status-quo. Politics will change dramatically over
>the next decade - and the Democratic party has the largest
>potentiality to be on the cusp of that evolution by enlarging
>its tent. It'd be political malpractice to not understand the
>very clear signs that AOC is a future superstar of the party
>(and in many ways is already a superstar in the party, without
>the help of the Pelosi/Schumer wing).
>
>
>
>
>-->

All good points too.

Plus, she outperformed the polls in her primary/
that’s what made her a star in the first place.

She got non-voters (therefore, not polled) out to
vote.

This should be the Dem strategy literally everywhere.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Stadiq
Member since Dec 21st 2005
3028 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 02:36 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
20. "her seat is safe, she has the base/youth"
In response to Reply # 6
Fri Feb-08-19 02:43 PM by Stadiq

          

engaged.


What are the net approvals of people other folks in congress? What was Paul Ryan's net approvals, even when he was new?


In other words, who gives a f*ck?


So she will make conservatives....hate Dems...more? K.


The mythical reasonable, moderate independent/republican won't have the "reason" to understand she doesn't speak for every Dem?

She personally only has to worry about her district.


If your point is she will "scare" independents away from the party, then those alleged reasonable independents must also be dumb as f*ck if they think every Dem thinks alike.


Aren't you one of the people who told me not to sweat national polls of people in congress?? lol

So when the majority of America hated Pelosi, there was nuance and it was understandable...but not for AOC?


She. Will. Get. More. Young people. To. Vote. Dem.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
Marauder21
Charter member
48433 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 04:02 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
30. "There's never going to be someone who convinces people"
In response to Reply # 20


  

          

who normally vote Republican to switch to Dems. People need to stop going for that fools gold.

------

12 play and 12 planets are enlighten for all the Aliens to Party and free those on the Sex Planet-maxxx

XBL: trkc21
Twitter: @tyrcasey

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
Stadiq
Member since Dec 21st 2005
3028 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 05:26 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
31. "and it is especially absurd to put blame on a congresswoman"
In response to Reply # 30


          


from the Bronx for that. Even to put a little bit of blame on her is ridiculous.


I got (rightfully, in fact) schooled on how you can't really look too much into Pelosi's national approval ratings.


But we are sweating AOCs now? Word?




  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
Brew
Member since Nov 23rd 2002
16570 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 11:17 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
40. "I disagree with this."
In response to Reply # 30


          

I agree with most of what you and Stadiq have been saying in this exchange but you can definitely turn voters. No matter how futile it seems, and no matter how minimal the success rate, it's important not to ignore the repug voter base entirely.

Plenty of lifetime repugs voted Obama in 2008 after the Bush debacle. And plenty of Obama voters voted Romney in 2012 for whatever bullshit reason(s). Etc. It's possible.

Not saying dems should expend a ton of resources on that portion of the electorate. But you can't ignore them entirely. I mean look at the twitter activity since the start of tax season, for example. Bet a bunch of the people bitching about their shitty tax returns were "normally" repug voters. And they vowed not to vote Trump in 2020.

It's possible. And w/gerrymandering, voter suppression and other repug cheating it's imperative that we solicit their votes no matter how painful it is.

----------------------------------------

"Fuck aliens." © WarriorPoet415

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
Marauder21
Charter member
48433 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 10:14 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
42. "Some voted for Obama in 08"
In response to Reply # 40


  

          

after what we assumed would be the worst presidency of our lives. But they went right back to the same 90's Clinton era shit immediately after. You can't count on them long term. It would be better to activate non-voters and turn them into loyal Democrats.

------

12 play and 12 planets are enlighten for all the Aliens to Party and free those on the Sex Planet-maxxx

XBL: trkc21
Twitter: @tyrcasey

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
Brew
Member since Nov 23rd 2002
16570 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 03:51 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
48. "For sure true. But you can and need to do both."
In response to Reply # 42


          

>after what we assumed would be the worst presidency of our
>lives. But they went right back to the same 90's Clinton era
>shit immediately after. You can't count on them long term. It
>would be better to activate non-voters and turn them into
>loyal Democrats.

The only way to sustain longterm success of moving the country back in the right direction is to solicit both the non-voters who just straight up didn't turn out for whatever reason, *and* the folks who sway w/the wind.

There are a ton of reasons Obama voters from 08 switched teams again but one of them is Dem messaging and strategy. Doesn't mean you can abandon them altogether. In fact I'd argue that abandonment of the midwest swing voters is a huuuuuuuuge reason Hillary lost in 2016. She just ignored them assuming the sureshot Dem votes would come, and that she'd get some of the repub swing votes solely based on the fact that Trump is a fucking clown. She lost both by not paying attention to them.

----------------------------------------

"Fuck aliens." © WarriorPoet415

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
Stadiq
Member since Dec 21st 2005
3028 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 01:03 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
44. "Fair points. 2016-now messed me up"
In response to Reply # 40


          


Hil was supposed to win over moderate rep.

Trumps GOP approval rate.

Etc.


It’s already been said, but I don’t think Dems should
chase those votes at the expense of their base and/or
non voters.

Make the case to vote Dem? Yes. But don’t change the
case in hopes folks will switch sides.

Feel me?

Either way, to insinuate that one congresswoman
is going to scare off “reasonable” independents
across the country from an entire party is pretty
ridiculous.

Why haven’t the far right but jobs in Congress scared
all reasonable independents away from the GOP?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
Brew
Member since Nov 23rd 2002
16570 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 03:53 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
49. "Yep. We're saying the same things here."
In response to Reply # 44


          

>It’s already been said, but I don’t think Dems should
>chase those votes at the expense of their base and/or
>non voters.
>
>Make the case to vote Dem? Yes. But don’t change the
>case in hopes folks will switch sides.
>
>Feel me?

^^^^ yes exactly.


>Either way, to insinuate that one congresswoman
>is going to scare off “reasonable” independents
>across the country from an entire party is pretty
>ridiculous.
>
>Why haven’t the far right but jobs in Congress scared
>all reasonable independents away from the GOP?

Great point/analogy. Agreed.

----------------------------------------

"Fuck aliens." © WarriorPoet415

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
ConcreteCharlie
Member since Nov 21st 2002
70232 posts
Sun Feb-10-19 07:52 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
60. "it can be done but not by being more republican"
In response to Reply # 40


  

          

you win people over by presenting sensible ideas and making them work. not by pandering or stifling you own identity

And you will know MY JACKET IS GOLD when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
Brew
Member since Nov 23rd 2002
16570 posts
Sun Feb-10-19 08:41 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
61. "Of course."
In response to Reply # 60


          

That would defeat the purpose lol

----------------------------------------

"Fuck aliens." © WarriorPoet415

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
ConcreteCharlie
Member since Nov 21st 2002
70232 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 03:59 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
28. "damn bruh you know you are a soaking wet blanket, right?"
In response to Reply # 6


  

          

not disagreeing with what you're saying at all but i do think there are different ways to view these facts. this sort of "hey, reality!" thing makes it sound like she should slow her roll. putting ideas out there and bearing the brunt of the discomfort they cause is how change happens. she doesn't have any larger, immediate ambitions, so i say let her cook.

And you will know MY JACKET IS GOLD when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
Trinity444
Charter member
39898 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 06:42 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
36. "idk. he’s usually on point with the facts tho..."
In response to Reply # 28


  

          

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
ConcreteCharlie
Member since Nov 21st 2002
70232 posts
Sun Feb-10-19 07:50 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
59. "oh factually he is absolutely right here"
In response to Reply # 36


  

          

And you will know MY JACKET IS GOLD when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Reeq
Member since Mar 11th 2013
5807 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 11:36 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
3. "citizens united would take a constitutional amendment to overturn."
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

>I really hope this
>gets more exposure and citizens united gets done away with.

one of the many examples of 'elections have consequences'.

------

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
walihorse
Member since Aug 03rd 2006
15445 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 11:58 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
7. "Can you expand on this"
In response to Reply # 3


  

          

are you saying elect the "right" people > appoint judges > the can overturn Citizens and the previous laws that allowed corporate money into campaigns?

If not done through an amendment, what if ethics laws were stricter? public officials aren't allowed to invest or vote on laws when they conflicting interests?

If a fat guy falls in the woods and there is no one around to see it, do the trees laugh?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
ConcreteCharlie
Member since Nov 21st 2002
70232 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 04:01 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
29. "pretty much the only way yes, and the SCOTUS is the main consequence"
In response to Reply # 3


  

          

of elections, especially for president.

i think it's going to take voters valuing a lack of PAC money--which is happening on some level already--to create a change. even then new standards always have new ways around them.

And you will know MY JACKET IS GOLD when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Vex_id
Charter member
63020 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 06:35 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
33. "SCOTUS can overturn their own decision."
In response to Reply # 29


  

          

It's happened before (see: Brown v. Board of Education which overturned its previous decision in Plessy v. Ferguson) - but it's a rarity. Constitutional amendment would be a much more proactive strategy.


-->

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

bentagain
Member since Mar 19th 2008
13714 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 12:44 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
8. "Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Releases Green New Deal Outline"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

https://www.npr.org/2019/02/07/691997301/rep-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-releases-green-new-deal-outline

Updated 4:30 p.m.

Whether it's a deadly cold snap or a hole under an Antarctic glacier or a terrifying new report, there seem to be constant reminders now of the dangers that climate change poses to humanity.

POLITICS
Ocasio-Cortez Talks About Ambitious Plan To Combat Climate Change
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., think they have a start to a solution. Thursday they are introducing a framework defining what they call a "Green New Deal" — what they foresee as a massive policy package that would remake the U.S. economy and, they hope, eliminate all U.S. carbon emissions.

That's a really big — potentially impossibly big — undertaking.

"Even the solutions that we have considered big and bold are nowhere near the scale of the actual problem that climate change presents to us," Ocasio-Cortez told NPR's Steve Inskeep in an interview that aired Thursday on Morning Edition.

She added: "It could be part of a larger solution, but no one has actually scoped out what that larger solution would entail. And so that's really what we're trying to accomplish with the Green New Deal."

What is the Green New Deal?

In very broad strokes, the Green New Deal legislation laid out by Ocasio-Cortez and Markey sets goals for some drastic measures to cut carbon emissions across the economy, from electricity generation to transportation to agriculture. In the process, it aims to create jobs and boost the economy.

Sign Up For The NPR Politics Newsletter
From the White House to your home — political news and analysis that matter, sent weekly.

E-mail address
What's your email?
By subscribing, you agree to NPR's terms of use and privacy policy.

2018 Was Earth's Fourth-Hottest Year On Record, Scientists Say
ENVIRONMENT
2018 Was Earth's Fourth-Hottest Year On Record, Scientists Say
In that vein, the proposal stresses that it aims to meet its ambitious goals while paying special attention to groups like the poor, disabled and minority communities that might be disproportionately affected by massive economic transitions like those the Green New Deal calls for.

Importantly, it's a nonbinding resolution, meaning that even if it were to pass (more on the challenges to that below), it wouldn't itself create any new programs. Instead, it would potentially affirm the sense of the House that these things should be done in the coming years.

Lawmakers pass nonbinding resolutions for things as simple as congratulating Super Bowl winners, as well as to send political messages — for example, telling the president they disapprove of his trade policies, as the Senate did in summer 2018.


What are the specifics of that framework?

The bill calls for a "10-year national mobilizations" toward accomplishing a series of goals that the resolution lays out.

(Note: Ocasio-Cortez's office released an updated version of the bill on Thursday. The earlier version, which we had included in a prior version of this story, is still available here.)

Among the most prominent, the deal calls for "meeting 100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources." The ultimate goal is to stop using fossil fuels entirely, Ocasio-Cortez's office told NPR, as well as to transition away from nuclear energy.

In addition, the framework, as described in the legislation as well as a blog post — containing an updated version of "FAQs" provided to NPR by Ocasio-Cortez's office — calls for a variety of other lofty goals:

"upgrading all existing buildings" in the country for energy efficiency;
working with farmers "to eliminate pollution and greenhouse gas emissions ... as much as is technologically feasible" (while supporting family farms and promoting "universal access to healthy food");
"Overhauling transportation systems" to reduce emissions — including expanding electric car manufacturing, building "charging stations everywhere," and expanding high-speed rail to "a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary";
A guaranteed job "with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations and retirement security" for every American;
"High-quality health care" for all Americans.
Report: Global Warming Could Melt At Least A Third Of Himalayan Glaciers
GOATS AND SODA
Report: Global Warming Could Melt At Least A Third Of Himalayan Glaciers
Which is to say: the Green New Deal framework combines big climate-change-related ideas with a wish list of progressive economic proposals that, taken together, would touch nearly every American and overhaul the economy.

Are those ideas doable?

Many in the climate science community, as well as Green New Deal proponents, agree that saving the world from disastrous effects of climate change requires aggressive action.

And some of the Green New Deal's goals are indeed aggressive. For example, Ocasio-Cortez told NPR that "in 10 years, we're trying to go carbon-neutral."

According to Jesse Jenkins, a postdoctoral environmental fellow at Harvard's Kennedy School, that may be an unreachable goal.

What You Need To Know About The Democratic Socialists Of America
POLITICS
What You Need To Know About The Democratic Socialists Of America
"Where we need to be targeting really is a net-zero carbon economy by about 2050, which itself is an enormous challenge and will require reductions in carbon emissions much faster than have been achieved historically," he said. "2030 might be a little bit early to be targeting."

Similarly, removing combustible engines from the roads or expanding high-speed rail to largely eliminate air travel would require nothing short of revolutionizing transportation.

Likewise, some of the more progressive economic policies — universal health care and a job guarantee, for example — while popular among some Democrats, would also be very difficult to implement and transition into.

Likely 2020 Democratic Candidates Want To Guarantee A Job To Every American
POLITICS
Likely 2020 Democratic Candidates Want To Guarantee A Job To Every American
On top of all that, implementing all of these policies could cost trillions upon trillions of dollars.

Altogether, the Green New Deal is a loose framework. It does not lay out guidance on how to implement these policies.

Rather, the idea is that Ocasio-Cortez and Markey will "begin work immediately on Green New Deal bills to put the nuts and bolts on the plan described in this resolution."

And again, all of this is hypothetical — it would be tough to implement and potentially extremely expensive ... if it passed.

So did the idea of a Green New Deal start with Ocasio-Cortez?

Not at all.

POLITICS
Congressional Democrats Say Climate Change Is A Priority As They Control The House
While the Green New Deal has in the last year or so grown central to progressive Democrats' policy conversations, the idea of a Green New Deal itself is well over a decade old. Environmentalists were talking about it as far back as 2003, when the term popped up in a San Francisco Chronicle article about an environmentalist conference.

It gained traction with a 2007 New York Times column from Thomas Friedman, where he used the phrase to describe the scope of energy investments he thought would be necessary to slow climate change on a large scale.

The phrase was also used around President Barack Obama's 2009 stimulus, which had around $90 billion worth of environmental initiatives.

While the idea gained some currency in Europe and also in the Green Party, it wasn't until after the 2016 election that it really gained broad popularity on the left in the U.S. (Vox's Dave Roberts has a more thorough history here).

This latest iteration is different both in the political energy that it has amassed and the grand scope it is taking. While it was a product of the progressive activist community, Ocasio-Cortez has been perhaps the most visible proponent of the plan and has helped it gain nationwide attention.

So will it pass?

That looks unlikely.

Yes, there's some energy for it on the left — some House Democrats have already said they will support the bill. However, there are indications House leadership isn't prioritizing the idea as much as those more liberal Democrats would like — Speaker Nancy Pelosi frustrated Green New Deal proponents by not giving them the kind of committee they wanted to put the policies together.

After the deal's Thursday release, she also cast the plan as simply one of any number of environmental proposals the House might consider.

"It will be one of several or maybe many suggestions that we receive," Pelosi told Politico. "The green dream or whatever they call it, nobody knows what it is, but they're for it right?"

Concern About Global Warming Among Americans Spikes, Report Says
ENVIRONMENT
Concern About Global Warming Among Americans Spikes, Report Says
In addition, it's easy to see how the bill could be dangerous for moderate House Democrats, many of whom come from swing districts and may be loath to touch such a progressive proposal.

Among Republicans — even those worried about climate change — the package, with its liberal economic ideas, will also likely be a nonstarter.

"Someone's going to have to prove to me how that can be accomplished because it looks to me like for the foreseeable future we're gonna be using a substantial amount of fossil fuels," said Rep. Francis Rooney, R-Fla., co-chair of the bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus, speaking to NPR before the Green New Deal's text was released.

For his part, Rooney is in favor of a carbon tax, a policy he helped propose with a bipartisan group of lawmakers in November. Information from Ocasio-Cortez's office says that the Green New Deal could include a carbon tax, but that it would be "a tiny part" of the total package of policies.

Meanwhile, there's little chance of a Green New Deal getting a vote in the Republican-controlled Senate.

If it's not going to pass and it's not even binding, why is it worth even talking about?

It's worth talking about because it already is a politically powerful idea among Democrats.

Which Democrats Are Running In 2020 — And Which Still Might
POLITICS
Which Democrats Are Running In 2020 — And Which Still Might
Already, presidential candidates are being asked whether they support the idea of a Green New Deal, meaning it's easy to see the issue becoming a litmus test for some voters in both the 2020 congressional elections and the presidential election.

To more liberal Democrats, the prospect of such an ambitious economic and environmental package at the center of the 2020 campaign may be particularly energizing.

"I think it's like a really weird instinct that the Democratic Party develops to not be exciting intentionally," said Sean McElwee, co-founder of the progressive think tank Data for Progress. "Most of politics is getting people excited enough to show up and vote for you. And I think that a Green New Deal and Medicare-for-all — these are ideas that are big enough to get people excited and show up to vote for you."

Massive Starfish Die-Off Is Tied To Global Warming
SCIENCE
Massive Starfish Die-Off Is Tied To Global Warming
For her part, Ocasio-Cortez says that a policy like the Green New Deal could get voters excited enough to pressure their Congress members to support it.

"I do think that when there's a wide spectrum of debate on an issue, that is where the public plays a role. That is where the public needs to call their member of Congress and say, 'This is something that I care about,' " she told NPR, adding, "Where I do have trust is in my colleagues' capacity to change and evolve and be adaptable and listen to their constituents."

That said, it's easy to see how a Green New Deal litmus test could backfire on that front, endangering some Democrats — particularly in swing districts.

But it's not just about national politics. The national-level energy for a Green New Deal could boost efforts in cities and states. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, for example, has been pushing a Green New Deal in his state.

Aside from the politics, there's the fact that climate change remains an impending threat — one for which the world has yet to come up with a fix.

"It's a big legislation because it's a huge problem! We're all going to die," said McElwee. "Every week it seems like the risks of climate change become more real, and the amount of devastation it is going to wreak upon humanity becomes larger, and that means we have to do bigger things."

https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=5731829-Ocasio-Cortez-Green-New-Deal-Resolution

---------------------------------------------------------------

If you can't understand it without an explanation

you can't understand it with an explanation

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

legsdiamond
Member since May 05th 2011
59303 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 01:12 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
11. "I thought they changed the law so they couldn’t invest in Wall St?"
In response to Reply # 0


          

Was that one of the Obama ideas that never made it thru?

shut up already, damn

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

double negative
Member since Dec 14th 2007
20603 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 01:14 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
12. "man...people HAAAAAAAAATE this woman. "
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

its insane how deep it goes

and you know what fellas? I'm thinking that maybe....just maybe, there are lot of people who feel threatened by politicians who are women. I'm not saying AOC does not say dumb shit that warrants criticism, I am saying that it seems like the internet /right wing media seems a whole lot extra about the hate if/when the person is a woman.

***********************************************************
https://soundcloud.com/swageyph/yph-die-with-me

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Hitokiri
Charter member
20143 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 01:20 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
14. "When you say "people" you mean conservatives"
In response to Reply # 12


  

          

--
"You can't beat white people. You can only knock them out."

"There is only one god and his name is death. And there is only one thing we say to death: not today."

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
GOMEZ
Member since Feb 13th 2003
4923 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 01:21 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
17. "older dems trying to shade on that 'wait your turn' too."
In response to Reply # 14


  

          

https://www.instagram.com/sbmission365/

In a generation of swine, the one-eyed pig is king.
-Hunter S. Thompson

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Vex_id
Charter member
63020 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 01:41 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
18. "No - there are plenty establishment Dems that can't stand her"
In response to Reply # 14


  

          

They will likely primary her.

-->

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
fontgangsta
Member since Sep 04th 2005
4714 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 02:48 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
22. "lol Hillary wasn't done in by conservatives bro"
In response to Reply # 14


  

          

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
GOMEZ
Member since Feb 13th 2003
4923 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 01:20 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
15. "yeah, if you want to see 'dumb' check the Facebook hearings"
In response to Reply # 12


  

          

most of those older, whiter, male-r members of congress should have their drivers licenses and credit cards taken away. AOC finding her footing and making people big mad.

She needs to button up her fact checking from time to time, but at least she knows how the internet works.




https://www.instagram.com/sbmission365/

In a generation of swine, the one-eyed pig is king.
-Hunter S. Thompson

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
mrhood75
Member since Dec 06th 2004
41614 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 01:21 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
16. "This is why she needs to stick around. The Right is OBSESSED with her"
In response to Reply # 12


  

          

She represents everything that they hate, both inside and outside the political realm. She's a smart, ambitious woman who doesn't give a fuck and treats the old boy's club with utter contempt.

Sometimes I think she puts a little too much on it, but I do like the energy, and I love that Republicans can't keep her name out of their mouths.

-----------------

www.albumism.com

It's the Hed Rush: http://hedrush.podomatic.com/
"We take rap serious, it's not a hobby to us."

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
walihorse
Member since Aug 03rd 2006
15445 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 10:20 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
39. "RE: man...people HAAAAAAAAATE this woman. "
In response to Reply # 12


  

          

My wife and I were just talking as she scrolled thru AOC's Instagram and she read some comments. I hadn't seen responses attacking her before. You're right the do.

If a fat guy falls in the woods and there is no one around to see it, do the trees laugh?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Castro
Charter member
48376 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 02:27 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
19. "One of the most succinct civics lessons I have seen in public."
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

------------------
One Hundred.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

legsdiamond
Member since May 05th 2011
59303 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 02:46 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
21. "I like her... but it definitely has a Tebow in the NFL feel sometimes"
In response to Reply # 0


          

She is hot right now and I hope she doesn’t have a major misstep.

shut up already, damn

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Damali
Member since Sep 12th 2002
33436 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 01:53 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
45. "she is a normal person and will definitely have a misstep"
In response to Reply # 21


          

as normal people are prone to do

in fact, she's already had missteps, owned up to them and learned from them..and kept doing and growing

again, typical normal person behavior.

its sad that we live in a political climate where mistakes are simply not allowed (if you're on the 'left')...whereas Repubs fuck up all the time and are allowed

therefore i refuse to be held to the standard of white male mediocrity...and apparently, so does she.


d

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Marauder21
Charter member
48433 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 02:49 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
23. "Yes, I do like someone who can push the party tot he left and speaks"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

like an actual normal person and doesn't take shit from the GOP.

I'm sure by the end of the year, someone on here will come up with a reason why we need to hate her, but fuck em.

------

12 play and 12 planets are enlighten for all the Aliens to Party and free those on the Sex Planet-maxxx

XBL: trkc21
Twitter: @tyrcasey

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Stadiq
Member since Dec 21st 2005
3028 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 05:28 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
32. "Right. And some people really underestimate"
In response to Reply # 23


          


How badly people want to see more "fight" in Dems.


  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

isaaaa
Member since May 10th 2007
29977 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 06:41 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
35. "I love that woman!"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          


Anti-gentrification, cheap alcohol & trying to look pretty in our twilight posting years (c) Big Reg
http://Tupreme.com

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Fire1986
Member since Jul 15th 2005
597 posts
Fri Feb-08-19 09:32 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
38. "NO"
In response to Reply # 0


          

The real problem here is that Americans expect to understand their government in five minutes.

#basic

Everything has been figured out except how to live.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Amritsar
Member since Jan 18th 2008
28669 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 10:03 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
41. "Green New Deal would account for 34% of government spending "
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

in addition to the already 38% current govt spending on other shit


With AOC's plan that would mean over 3/4s of our economy spent on the government?! WTF


And, as it stands right now. The proposed Green New Deal requires 3 TIMES more than what the govt collects in taxes. 3 times.




This all sounds great in fairy land. But Numbers look croooooked

_______________________________________________
"Ran through enough dope for Castro to build schools in Cuba. Teach ya kids how to read and write. And use the Ruger."

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Stadiq
Member since Dec 21st 2005
3028 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 11:10 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
43. "This is a strange reply"
In response to Reply # 41
Sat Feb-09-19 11:11 AM by Stadiq

          

First, you didn’t clarify where you got these numbers.

But, just playing along, your response assumes everything
else remains the same.

You could reduce military spending, tax the rich, tax
the shit out of the super rich, etc.

Obviously, the plan isn’t to triple everyone’s tax bill. Cmon.

This response also assumes the economy would
stay the same. Further, this response doesn’t seem
to consider the potential new jobs, etc.

Not saying we shouldn’t think about this critically,
but we also shouldn’t shit on the entire plan without
context, facts, etc.

Finally, if people are happier, healthier, etc- what’s the
difference what % of the economy is spent on Gov? Is
there a number you would like to see personally?

This was a Fox News like response.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Damali
Member since Sep 12th 2002
33436 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 01:55 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
46. "well done. *applause*"
In response to Reply # 43


          

d

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
Stadiq
Member since Dec 21st 2005
3028 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 02:35 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
47. "Thanks. People also act like money spent by gov"
In response to Reply # 46


          


Just vanishes or something. When it’s invested
domestically (like this) it obviously goes to employees,
contractors, etc.

People act like it’s just put into a pile and lit on fire to
make their “government spending!!” boogie man
argument.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
Brew
Member since Nov 23rd 2002
16570 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 03:58 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
51. "Haha yea - that's pretty much Repugs' entire platform."
In response to Reply # 47


          

>Just vanishes or something. When it’s invested
>domestically (like this) it obviously goes to employees,
>contractors, etc.
>
>People act like it’s just put into a pile and lit on fire
>to
>make their “government spending!!” boogie man
>argument.

Create boogie man arguments, bleed the country's/people's resources dry, rinse, repeat.

----------------------------------------

"Fuck aliens." © WarriorPoet415

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Brew
Member since Nov 23rd 2002
16570 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 03:54 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
50. "Beat me to it."
In response to Reply # 43
Sat Feb-09-19 03:55 PM by Brew

          

>First, you didn’t clarify where you got these numbers.
>
>But, just playing along, your response assumes everything
>else remains the same.
>
>You could reduce military spending, tax the rich, tax
>the shit out of the super rich, etc.

^^^ this was gonna be my response here. You can, and have to, trim the fat elsewhere. And there's a LOT of fucking fat.


>Obviously, the plan isn’t to triple everyone’s tax bill.
>Cmon.
>
>This response also assumes the economy would
>stay the same. Further, this response doesn’t seem
>to consider the potential new jobs, etc.
>
>Not saying we shouldn’t think about this critically,
>but we also shouldn’t shit on the entire plan without
>context, facts, etc.
>
>Finally, if people are happier, healthier, etc- what’s the
>difference what % of the economy is spent on Gov? Is
>there a number you would like to see personally?
>
>This was a Fox News like response.

Yep yep yep yep. You'd be surprised how well off a country can be when your money is invested in your people (keeping them safe, healthy, happy) rather than wasted on defense contractors and glorified no show jobs.

----------------------------------------

"Fuck aliens." © WarriorPoet415

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
Stadiq
Member since Dec 21st 2005
3028 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 08:35 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
57. "Yeah man"
In response to Reply # 50


          


It’s crazy to me when even people who lean left
say “we can’t afford it” when it comes to investing
in actual regular people, the environment, etc.

That boogie man worked on a lot of folks.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Amritsar
Member since Jan 18th 2008
28669 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 05:17 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
52. "Links: "
In response to Reply # 43
Sat Feb-09-19 05:18 PM by Amritsar

  

          

https://twitter.com/bopinion/status/1093962533998874625?s=21


https://twitter.com/bopinion/status/1093962535403950085?s=21

_______________________________________________
"Ran through enough dope for Castro to build schools in Cuba. Teach ya kids how to read and write. And use the Ruger."

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
stravinskian
Member since Feb 24th 2003
11360 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 05:53 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
53. "Wait, her GND plan includes M4A, UBI, and free tuition?!"
In response to Reply # 52


          

(Medicare for all, Universal Basic Income, and free tuition, that is.)

I support all of those plans on their own. But in what sense are they "green"?

I don't idolize AOC like a lot of people do these days, but if true this is very disappointing. This is not a plan for environmental sustainability. It's a recipe to keep ignoring the problem, and all the other problems.

The Bloomberg analysis is naive and trite. The simple "does it fit in the budget" analysis ignores the tax hikes that would help pay for it and the stimulative effects that are supposed to be encoded in the name. Then again, FDR's New Deal was not as stimulative as it was expected to be. From what I understand, we barely made a dent in the depression until the war forced us to increase spending by another order of magnitude.

It would take much more serious academic analysis to understand the costs of all this. That's part of why it's a bad idea to pack so much important stuff into one package. None of this is supposed to be a pipe dream, and none of it needs to be, but when you package it like this (or allow the media to package it like this), that's what it becomes.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
bentagain
Member since Mar 19th 2008
13714 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 05:53 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
54. "She's also proposing a 70% marginal tax rate "
In response to Reply # 52


  

          

on those making more than $10M/yr

I think what you're missing...is those figures are presented in the context of nothing else changing

One of her ideas is to tax the shit out of the rich.

---------------------------------------------------------------

If you can't understand it without an explanation

you can't understand it with an explanation

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
Stadiq
Member since Dec 21st 2005
3028 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 08:32 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
56. "Again, a lazy critique that ignores context"
In response to Reply # 52


          



From tax increases to cuts in other areas to new jobs
and potential economic growth etc.

The “government spending would equal x percent
of the economy” is especially lazy, until you can
tell me what percent you’re looking for.

Like others have said, it’s refreshing to see the left
“Start big”.

It’s so refreshing to have a fairly concise message
for people to vote for other than “look how bad the
other guys are”

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
stravinskian
Member since Feb 24th 2003
11360 posts
Sun Feb-10-19 07:38 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
58. "It's silly to base our proposals on wishful thinking, though. "
In response to Reply # 56
Sun Feb-10-19 07:43 PM by stravinskian

          

Is it something we want to make happen or not.

Yeah, it's POSSIBLE that it would expand the economy enough to increase tax revenues to cover this spending. But there's no guarantee of that.

It's exactly the same argument that the Republicans make about tax cuts, and we mock them mercilessly for it, and rightly so. These supply-side true believers say every penny of tax cuts will be paid for because the economy will expand and the overall amount of tax income will increase.

They aren't just making that shit up. There are SOME circumstances where a tax cut will stimulate the economy, even enough to pay for itself (generally the cuts have to be targeted to the poor and middle-class, but these GOPers aren't into details). That's why a tax cut was such a big part of the Obama stimulus.

But I'm sure I don't need to convince you that tax cuts DON'T always pay for themselves. And in some cases (like the latest giant federal tax cut) they don't even stimulate economic growth.

Similarly, federal spending doesn't NECESSARILY stimulate economic growth. And a lot of this stuff in this version of the Green New Deal is especially sketchy, in economic terms. That doesn't mean it isn't the right thing to do. I'm just saying it isn't easy to be sure that these initiatives will pay for themselves, in the short term or even in the long term.

Putting up solar panels and windmills, and retrofitting the energy grid to use them, would put a huge number of people to work. It would also put a huge number of people out of work by disrupting existing industries (particularly natural gas).

(Also, speaking as a physicist, it's questionable how much we'd gain in energy efficiency and environmental impact doing this, since it would require huge amounts of energy storage and transportation, both of which are quite inefficient, and can be heavily polluting, especially in the case of big batteries, which are the simplest way to store energy, but also require a lot of natural resources themselves, and produce significant pollutants over time. But that's part of the environmental argument, so separate from the economic argument.)

Medicare for All, again, might be stimulative in that it would save the average person quite a bit of money. But at the same time, if it ends private insurance (which I agree with most OKPs is an inefficient and inhuman relic of the past), then it would put millions of people out of work. In and of itself, this would cause a major recession or more likely a depression.

Now admittedly, that's ignoring the fact that the CONSUMERS of health care would be better off under Medicare for All. But if a hundred million people are saving money on health care (paying more in taxes but mostly saving more than that in premiums), but a few million people have their lives completely destroyed -- I don't see how that shakes out, and I don't see any of these "bold ideas" progressives putting any effort into figuring it out. And even less into using whatever we know about the economics of health care to inform their bold proposals.

It's a similar story on a slightly smaller scale for free College tuition. Again, it's the right thing to do, if we can ever get it done. But everybody who works for a private nonprofit university or college (including me) would be putting zero dollars into the economy or the federal treasury for the foreseeable future.


It would be great if we can find a way to do these things. And I'm not even certain that this approach is unaffordable. I just don't see the supporters showing any interest in the question of WHETHER it's possible. What worries me about so much of the new left is that the proposals seem specifically *designed* to be impossible. Designed that way so that we never have to find out whether they could have worked or not. It's like we've all just given up on progress and just want to feel better about ourselves as everything we care about goes down the shithole.


  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
Stadiq
Member since Dec 21st 2005
3028 posts
Mon Feb-11-19 01:01 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
65. "few things"
In response to Reply # 58


          

>Is it something we want to make happen or not.
>
>Yeah, it's POSSIBLE that it would expand the economy enough to
>increase tax revenues to cover this spending. But there's no
>guarantee of that.

I never said that the economic expansion would cover spending. I'm just saying "nope, can't afford it" etc doesn't even consider the possible changes to the economy.

The critique of "gov spending would = 75% of economy" or whatever assumed everything else would stay the same, for instance.




>
>It's exactly the same argument that the Republicans make about
>tax cuts, and we mock them mercilessly for it, and rightly so.
>These supply-side true believers say every penny of tax cuts
>will be paid for because the economy will expand and the
>overall amount of tax income will increase.
>
>They aren't just making that shit up. There are SOME
>circumstances where a tax cut will stimulate the economy, even
>enough to pay for itself (generally the cuts have to be
>targeted to the poor and middle-class, but these GOPers aren't
>into details). That's why a tax cut was such a big part of the
>Obama stimulus.

Well, sure. You're speaking to a Demand side guy. They argue tax cuts to the rich stimulate the economy, when they don't.

And even if they do, they don't stimulate the economy as well/efficiently as giving tax cuts to middle class.


>
>But I'm sure I don't need to convince you that tax cuts DON'T
>always pay for themselves. And in some cases (like the latest
>giant federal tax cut) they don't even stimulate economic
>growth.

Right. The gains mostly went to the top, and they pocketed it. Since trickle down is some bull shit.



>
>Similarly, federal spending doesn't NECESSARILY stimulate
>economic growth. And a lot of this stuff in this version of
>the Green New Deal is especially sketchy, in economic terms.
>That doesn't mean it isn't the right thing to do. I'm just
>saying it isn't easy to be sure that these initiatives will
>pay for themselves, in the short term or even in the long
>term.
>
>Putting up solar panels and windmills, and retrofitting the
>energy grid to use them, would put a huge number of people to
>work. It would also put a huge number of people out of work by
>disrupting existing industries (particularly natural gas).

Right. Which is why it would have be done in a very careful way so that, ideally, those folks could transition to clean jobs.

>
>(Also, speaking as a physicist, it's questionable how much
>we'd gain in energy efficiency and environmental impact doing
>this, since it would require huge amounts of energy storage
>and transportation, both of which are quite inefficient, and
>can be heavily polluting, especially in the case of big
>batteries, which are the simplest way to store energy, but
>also require a lot of natural resources themselves, and
>produce significant pollutants over time. But that's part of
>the environmental argument, so separate from the economic
>argument.)

Interesting. What is your preferred alternative/plan then?

>
>Medicare for All, again, might be stimulative in that it would
>save the average person quite a bit of money. But at the same
>time, if it ends private insurance (which I agree with most
>OKPs is an inefficient and inhuman relic of the past), then it
>would put millions of people out of work. In and of itself,
>this would cause a major recession or more likely a
>depression.

I agree that M4A needs to be a long term goal because of this. The other thing is that, crazy as it seems, there are folks who like their insurance as it is.

It should definitely happen in phases.

But maybe starting at M4A this time, gets us the public option.


>
>Now admittedly, that's ignoring the fact that the CONSUMERS of
>health care would be better off under Medicare for All. But if
>a hundred million people are saving money on health care
>(paying more in taxes but mostly saving more than that in
>premiums), but a few million people have their lives
>completely destroyed -- I don't see how that shakes out, and I
>don't see any of these "bold ideas" progressives putting any
>effort into figuring it out. And even less into using whatever
>we know about the economics of health care to inform their
>bold proposals.

What is your preferred alternative?


>
>It's a similar story on a slightly smaller scale for free
>College tuition. Again, it's the right thing to do, if we can
>ever get it done. But everybody who works for a private
>nonprofit university or college (including me) would be
>putting zero dollars into the economy or the federal treasury
>for the foreseeable future.
>

As lefty as I am, I am even iffy on free college. I need to do more research to be honest. But my knee jerk reaction is that a plan like that should be purely needs based.

Also, college isn't for everyone and the left needs to stop speaking like it is.

I think this should be dead last on the priority list, actually.

>
>It would be great if we can find a way to do these things. And
>I'm not even certain that this approach is unaffordable. I
>just don't see the supporters showing any interest in the
>question of WHETHER it's possible. What worries me about so
>much of the new left is that the proposals seem specifically
>*designed* to be impossible. Designed that way so that we
>never have to find out whether they could have worked or not.
>It's like we've all just given up on progress and just want to
>feel better about ourselves as everything we care about goes
>down the shithole.
>
>
>


The problem, though, is if the left puts forth a complicated, nuanced plan- then they lose the audience, as the left often does.

In general, I think presenting a "new deal for a new generation" is a very good idea/plan- especially one that sets a moon-shot type goal of zero emissions.


Are the specifics of the plan what I would personally put in there? Not in every case, certainly. But overall, I think it is a good idea/strategy.


And when a criticism is put forth that essentially assumes nothing else would change, we gotta call them on it.


  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
GOMEZ
Member since Feb 13th 2003
4923 posts
Sat Feb-09-19 08:07 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
55. "Realistically that won’t all pass but I like the strategy. Start BIG "
In response to Reply # 41


  

          

One of my beefs w dem strategy during the Obama years was that they would start from the compromise position, then make concessions and still not pick up a single republican vote.

I like the dems/lefties being aggressive. Plus if the republican alternative is sticking w fossil fuels and an ever widening wealth gap that’s just a slow suicide.


https://www.instagram.com/sbmission365/

In a generation of swine, the one-eyed pig is king.
-Hunter S. Thompson

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

flipnile
Member since Nov 05th 2003
10972 posts
Sun Feb-10-19 09:29 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
62. "I think they hate her because she's the answer to Trump"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

In some ways she's similar (draws a lot of attention, outsider to politics, radical ideas and willing to push them), in other ways she's the complete opposite. My theory is they are scared she could beat Trump, and more importantly, whatever repub runs in 2024.

She can win the crowd. They want to stomp-out people like that early before they grow into the next Obama.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Mgmt
Member since Feb 17th 2005
21077 posts
Mon Feb-11-19 02:38 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
63. "I sort of disagree"
In response to Reply # 62


  

          

>In some ways she's similar (draws a lot of attention,
>outsider to politics, radical ideas and willing to push them),
>in other ways she's the complete opposite. My theory is they
>are scared she could beat Trump, and more importantly,
>whatever repub runs in 2024.
>
>She can win the crowd. They want to stomp-out people like that
>early before they grow into the next Obama.

The way that Fox News and its commenters go so hard at her, she’s worth more to them alive than dead. Similar to the way Obama was great for the conservative talking head industry

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Willong
Member since Jun 08th 2009
213 posts
Mon Feb-11-19 04:36 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
64. "lefty Sarah Palin"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Marauder21
Charter member
48433 posts
Mon Feb-11-19 01:16 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
66. "That doesn't even make sense"
In response to Reply # 64


  

          

Unless you mean conservative writers are horny for both of them.

------

12 play and 12 planets are enlighten for all the Aliens to Party and free those on the Sex Planet-maxxx

XBL: trkc21
Twitter: @tyrcasey

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
mista k5
Member since Feb 01st 2006
8930 posts
Mon Feb-11-19 01:21 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
67. "theyre both women that wear glasses sometimes, duh"
In response to Reply # 66


  

          

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Dr Claw
Member since Jun 25th 2003
129333 posts
Mon Feb-11-19 01:23 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
68. "Sarah Palin wishes she was that smart."
In response to Reply # 64


  

          

I have no hesitation in calling that woman a "bimbo".

there are other Republican women who seem, ignorant, but not outright... dumb and trollish. She's basically Alaska Donald Trump.

Yes, I'm mad. Let's move on.

Jays | Cavs | Eagles | Sabres | Tarheels

PSN: Dr_Claw_77 | XBL: Dr Claw 077 | FB: drclaw077 | T: @drclaw77 | http://thepeoplesvault.wordpress.com
Does he ACCEPT? http://i.imgur.com/TBMrAkD.jpg

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
walihorse
Member since Aug 03rd 2006
15445 posts
Mon Feb-11-19 02:43 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
69. "What about AOC do you see as similar to Palin?"
In response to Reply # 64


  

          

only thing I wold agree is her being inexperienced in politics, but at least she not (hopefully) being considered as a VP pick.

At this point, I think we do need "career" politicians elected to the presidency. I mean people who were comgressmen, senators, governors. Who had to actually deal with their own states issues and make it easier to judge them on past choices.

If a fat guy falls in the woods and there is no one around to see it, do the trees laugh?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Buddy_Gilapagos
Charter member
43237 posts
Mon Feb-11-19 03:17 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
70. "This is that sexist/racist bullshit. And it ain't just this guy. "
In response to Reply # 64


  

          

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/commentary-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-becomes-the-sarah-palin-of-the-left/

What's funny is when you go through the points laid out against her, its such a weak case.

Nevermind she isn't running for VP of the country, but look at the bullet points. Clearly a couple of those are hyperbole. The Israel comment isn't a gaffe but rather the truth. And all the gaffes are the type of gaffes you would expect a junior freshman congressperson to make.

But the media and the right goes wild and amplify every mistake that that she makes to some unreasonable degree.

Whats's funny is the folks that try to clown her get self-owned way more than it's actually her making mistakes.

Look at this dummy trying to clown AOC and ends up in an argument with her Parody Account.

https://twitter.com/BorisEP/status/1094992901946380288

But no one thinks to call this dummy a dummy. SMH.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
bentagain
Member since Mar 19th 2008
13714 posts
Mon Feb-11-19 03:39 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
72. "The Green New Deal will be D policy"
In response to Reply # 70


  

          

The measure is supported by at least six senators with their eyes on the White House: Cory Booker of New Jersey, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Kamala Harris of California, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota.

AOC brought it to the forefront

Now it's up to the candidates to deliver specifics.

---------------------------------------------------------------

If you can't understand it without an explanation

you can't understand it with an explanation

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Mynoriti
Charter member
33481 posts
Mon Feb-11-19 03:31 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
71. "you tried"
In response to Reply # 64


  

          

--------
http://ambitiondeficitdisorder.tumblr.com/

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
legsdiamond
Member since May 05th 2011
59303 posts
Mon Feb-11-19 03:55 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
73. "No he didn’t. Lol"
In response to Reply # 71


          

shut up already, damn

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Buddy_Gilapagos
Charter member
43237 posts
Wed Feb-13-19 04:35 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
74. "Kamala Harris & Elizabeth Warren need to follow AOC to learn how to"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

turn the hate into a source of power.




**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

walihorse
Member since Aug 03rd 2006
15445 posts
Thu Feb-14-19 10:41 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
75. "Republicans are trolling the Green New Deal. (swipe)"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/14/republicans-are-trolling-green-new-deal-heres-how-democrats-will-troll-them-back/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a64adb11ab6b

By Greg Sargent
Opinion writer
February 14 at 9:14 AM
Republicans are gleeful about the Green New Deal, which they see as a major political liability for Democrats. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is planning a vote on the GND on the theory that any Senate Democrat — a field that includes several 2020 presidential hopefuls — who votes for it will self-immolate on the spot.

Many commentators have scowled in agreement with McConnell’s theory. But what’s discussed far less often is the politics of the big-picture contrast that forms the backdrop of this debate: one pitting a Democratic Party that recognizes the scale of the global warming challenge and wants to do something about it, and a Republican Party that simply does not.

Democrats now hope to change that.

On Thursday, Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) will deliver a speech on the GND on the Senate floor, in which the minority leader will call on Republicans to acknowledge that climate change is a serious threat and is largely human-created, and to pledge that Congress will act to address it, according to a source familiar with his plan.

ADVERTISING

“I challenge Leader McConnell to say that climate change is real, that it’s caused by humans, and that Congress needs to act,” Schumer will say. “This is what two-thirds of the American people agree with. Two-thirds.”

“Since Leader McConnell became majority leader in 2014, there has not been a single Republican bill to meaningfully reduce carbon emissions on the floor of the Senate,” Schumer will add.

“We’re supposed to conduct the business of the nation,” Schumer will continue. “We’re supposed to tackle our country’s greatest challenges. Climate change is probably the number one threat to the planet. And yet not a single Republican bill that addresses climate change in a meaningful way. Not one.”

Schumer intends this floor speech, which will also list numerous examples of the GOP refusal to act, as an opening shot in a series of efforts by Democrats to highlight Republican climate denialism, which variously concerns the science, the scale of the problem and the need for legislative action against it.


The source says this will include more floor speeches and messaging on social media. If McConnell does push a GND vote, it will also include an effort to push amendments that highlight these themes.

President Trump, of course, has firmly installed this denialism in the White House. He has constantly dismissed the science and is aggressively dismantling his predecessor’s efforts to combat climate change in a way that threatens to substantially increase greenhouse-gas emissions. This, even though a massive study conducted by own administration determined that climate change poses a dire threat to our future, a conclusion Trump blithely dismissed by saying: “I don’t believe it.”

The Green New Deal is radical

Republicans believe they can put Democrats on the defensive over the Green New Deal because it really is quite radical. The resolution introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) stakes out the ambitious goal of substantially reducing greenhouse-gas emissions by 2030 and bringing them down to net-zero by 2050.


The document sketches out goals largely in keeping with the scientific consensus on how rapidly we must act to avoid long-term catastrophe, without settling definitively on solutions (it avoids emphasizing things like carbon pricing or an all-renewables future, for instance). The GND also calls for an extraordinarily ambitious overhaul of our political economy, proposing vast new public expenditures, a jobs guarantee and universal housing and health care.

The combination of the GND’s toweringly ambitious climate goals, its dramatic aspirations to economic justice and its policy vagueness are what render it so controversial, including among many Democrats and liberals. For some, such as Jonathan Chait and Mike Pesca, the GND sets unrealistic goals, avoids acknowledging necessary tough choices and forces lawmakers to pledge fealty to an economic vision well to the left of the median of the Democratic Party, complicating hopes for more realistic solutions in the immediate future.

But for others, such as David Roberts and Ryan Cooper, many of those things are features. The GND avoids making many specific choices that might immediately divide the progressive and climate coalitions. But, by laying out an aspirational framework suffused with massively juiced-up urgency, it challenges all progressives, liberals and Democrats to get cracking on the hard thinking necessary to fill in — and find consensus on — all those specifics.


Many on both sides agree on the GND’s capacity to divide Democrats, which is why Republicans are professing to be so gleeful. After all, numerous senators who are also running for president have generally endorsed the concept of the Green New Deal.

Those 2020 hopefuls want to preserve space to develop their own specific proposals that avoid its more controversial prescriptions. McConnell hopes to force them — and many other Senate Democrats — to take a stand on its specifics. It’s certainly possible that this will put many Democrats in an uncomfortable political position, but until we see how McConnell structures the votes, it’s hard to say for sure.

Turning the tables on GOP denialism

Still, one thing that all Democrats agree on is the general need for very ambitious action, which poses such a stark contrast with the GOP that itself puts Democrats on the right side of the politics of the issue. And it’s this contrast that Schumer is hoping to refocus the debate upon — one that unites Democrats and, hopefully, puts Republicans on the defensive.


The Green New Deal embodies two important aspects of the evolution of the climate movement: a belief that only a very bold, multi-faceted approach will now suffice; and an acknowledgement that the Republican Party is unlikely to play any serious role in mitigating what now poses a dire threat to humanity’s future. A decade ago, Democrats tried to pass a more GOP- and market-friendly cap-and-trade plan, but it ran into a wall of GOP intransigence and fossil-fuel-industry-funded denialism.

Now the problem has gotten much worse, but the denialism remains. The fact that Democrats will try to respond to GOP trolling of the GND by going on offense against that denialism — abandoning defensiveness or accommodation, and spotlighting the reality of today’s GOP — itself shows that the GND is having some of its intended impact.

If a fat guy falls in the woods and there is no one around to see it, do the trees laugh?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
walihorse
Member since Aug 03rd 2006
15445 posts
Thu Feb-14-19 10:51 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
76. "I think every single Dem Sanator votes for this"
In response to Reply # 75


  

          

I think there is no way it'll pass though the GOP Senate, but coupled with Schumer's speech, I hope it puts the GOP on the position of firmly voting against this issue.

I hope the Dem are willing to go forward and show that even though the GND isn't perfect it is a starting point. A serious attempt at starting. All they have to do is vote and say see I voted for it, the GOP did not.

If a fat guy falls in the woods and there is no one around to see it, do the trees laugh?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
stravinskian
Member since Feb 24th 2003
11360 posts
Thu Feb-14-19 10:52 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
77. "Yeah I think the Instagram progressives have walked us into a ditch."
In response to Reply # 75
Thu Feb-14-19 10:54 AM by stravinskian

          

I have no confidence we come out ahead on this one, even just on the basic political level. It was never gonna matter for climate change.

When people are writing op-eds about how progressives are about to win a trolling contest against Mitch McConnell, it's time to turn off the internet for the week.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
mista k5
Member since Feb 01st 2006
8930 posts
Thu Feb-14-19 11:50 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
79. "mitch's smug turtle smile is so annoying"
In response to Reply # 75


  

          

i hope this vote blows up in his face.

people keep trying to distort the GND proposal to criticize it but all it is saying is there is a major problem, science says we need a solution by __ date. lets find a way to get there by that date.

also the new deal part is the health care and job guarantee, its supposed to attack both things. shes not peppering things into a climate deal.

bottom line is what is the GOP plan to attack these issues???

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

legsdiamond
Member since May 05th 2011
59303 posts
Thu Feb-14-19 11:46 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
78. "Ain’t no way that shit gets passed BUT"
In response to Reply # 0


          

if it can push things further to the left than cool beans.

Personally I think it’s way too heavy to work in this current political climate.

Shot would be hard to pass even if progressives controlled all 3 branches of government.

shut up already, damn

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
bentagain
Member since Mar 19th 2008
13714 posts
Thu Feb-14-19 12:12 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
80. "It's literally an idea...like the article posted above states"
In response to Reply # 78


  

          

It's not policy heavy

so this vote is essentially a litmus test

Do you agree that we need to act to combat climate change, yes or no?

How we reach the goals laid out in this framework is what is to be decided

I love the idea of bringing this to a vote now

it will turn into what happened with the ACA...propose something better.

---------------------------------------------------------------

If you can't understand it without an explanation

you can't understand it with an explanation

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Lobby General Discussion topic #13312589 Previous topic | Next topic
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.25
Copyright © DCScripts.com