THE Political Thread (ALL Political Discussion Here - See Rules, P. 1)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 576, 577, 578 ... 583, 584, 585  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Wilt
LG Contributor
LG Contributor


Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 8955

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:46 am    Post subject:

At least 15 Democratic co-sponsors for Bernie's Medicare for All bill, including Franken, Booker, and Warren.

Yes, it's symbolic and it won't pass now, but the Dems have to maintain the momentum and make this the central issue in 2020.

And I'm so glad it's "Medicare for All" instead of the ineffective "Single Payer."
_________________
ˇHala Madrid!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hector the Pup
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 33200
Location: L.A.

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:04 am    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
governator wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
Lucky_Shot wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
Cuban would be an unfortunate continuation of the, "you need to be a rich, narcissistic celebrity with no political know how to run" syndrome. We dont need another business guy with no idea how government actually works, much less one as temperamental and unpleasant behind the scenes as Cuban is reputed to be.


The Cubans of the world have a great shot at beating Trump. I want to win I dont want another moral victory because we stick to our principles while Trump is president for another term

I do like the Bill Nye/Degrasse idea if youre not Cuban fans. The point is there are so many good choices I hope we dont put up another dud from the congress.


Why the urge to run people with no known ability to do the job?


I think there's different way to judge/evaluate a candidate's ability as a choice for US presidency outside of having done a governmental job. DeGrasse Tyson for example can be evaluated at how he managed to excel in academia, running a museum, conducting research, etc. I don't think you need to be a governor/mayor/congressman/senator at all to be a qualified candidate for the presidency. There might be a learning curve at the beginning which all presidents must go thru. It's not a one man job, it's a team job.


There certainly is a learning curve, but government and diplomacy and all that go with it are so far removed from business and entertainment and facilities management as to be completely foreign. A guy who is smart and friendly and earnest is nice, but asking degrasse Tyson to be the president is like saying a stand up comic should run a fortune five hundred corporation. It's ludicrous. This urge to despise professionalism in the most vital professional post on earth is staggering.


That's not to dismiss a non-politician getting into politics. It's just that there is no way in hell someone can go right to the top position and be expected to succeed. A more sane, competent and stable person would obviously do better than what we have now, but that's setting the bar for the toughest job on the planet painfully and dangerously low.

Want to talk about one of those folks running for congress or even senate? No problem. That happens all the time and some of them actually turn out well. If it doesn't, the damage is generally minimal or nonexistent.

Hell, Al Franken, a former standup comedian and SNL writer could probably win in a landslide if he ran in 2020, but he has a well established and respected track record as a senator on his list of qualifications.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 78346
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:16 am    Post subject:

Wilt wrote:
At least 15 Democratic co-sponsors for Bernie's Medicare for All bill, including Franken, Booker, and Warren.

Yes, it's symbolic and it won't pass now, but the Dems have to maintain the momentum and make this the central issue in 2020.

And I'm so glad it's "Medicare for All" instead of the ineffective "Single Payer."


Not so fast
_________________
Tolerance is an agreement to live in peace, not an agreement to be peaceful no matter the conduct of others. A peace treaty is not a suicide pact.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wilt
LG Contributor
LG Contributor


Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 8955

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:26 am    Post subject:

^

Consider it a challenge, and start convincing people. That's what we did with gay marriage, which polled very low not too long ago.


There are millions of people, particularly in rural areas, who believe government is evil, but they would be helped a lot by a government run healthcare program. It'll take time, but this bill could be the beginning of a long process.
_________________
ˇHala Madrid!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 15929
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:09 am    Post subject:

LakerSanity wrote:
^The concern is that, since Russia cannot be trusted, is an admission itself an attempt to manipulate us? Its hard to trust, for good or bad, what comes out of Russia. Hell, they could be telling the truth, but putting it out there in hopes someone asks the same question I am asking.


Lucky for us, all the evidence that has been uncovered points in 1 direction. So we already know what the truth is. Now that we all know their actions, affects, and who they were backing. Admitting to it is easy for them to do.
If you're worried they're trying to undermine our citizens' trust in our institutions. It's too late for that. Trump has been doing that since day 1.
_________________
"The fundamental cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt" - Bertrand Russell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 15929
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:24 am    Post subject:

splashmtn wrote:


See K, this is the issue...Fear. What are we so darn afraid of on the left?

You stated, "I do worry about the blow back from that type of stance." referring to a hard left stance. What Blow back?

You have a GOP that is ran by talk radio/fox news cooks. by way of brainwashing their voting base.



We completely agree when it comes to the right. And the unreasonableness of the GOP party in general. They are ran by the furthest right portion of their base. And they are ill-informed, self-sabotaging, and purely vindictive.

By blowback I mean a government shutdown. Budgets not being approved, debts not being paid back, institutions without funding, federal employees not able to work. Despite all the posturing, deals have to be made to run our country.
And if the Dems took a stance like, we're not passing anything till we get a living wage increase, free college, and/or medicare-for-all. Who knows if the right would ever budge. They'd probably blame us for whatever governmental and economic repercussions that occur.
But I guess the counterpoint to what I'm saying is. Is it worth keeping the government up and running in this current system that caters to the top 1% as income inequality just becomes worse and worse.
If grinding everything to a halt is the price. Maybe it's worth it. Cause the current system is rigged.
_________________
"The fundamental cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt" - Bertrand Russell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 40893
Location: In a world where admitting not knowing something is considered intelligent.

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:58 am    Post subject:

LakerSanity wrote:
^The concern is that, since Russia cannot be trusted, is an admission itself an attempt to manipulate us? Its hard to trust, for good or bad, what comes out of Russia. Hell, they could be telling the truth, but putting it out there in hopes someone asks the same question I am asking.


I share your concern. Putin's not above boasting about the election. We know he and company interfered. This may be another ploy to further interrupt the functioning of our government.

I haven't heard from the Trump camp. Has he denied the allegation? I haven't checked his twitter account for awhile.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

Your prayers are always answered. Sometimes the answer is NO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 6198

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:18 pm    Post subject:

kikanga wrote:
splashmtn wrote:


See K, this is the issue...Fear. What are we so darn afraid of on the left?

You stated, "I do worry about the blow back from that type of stance." referring to a hard left stance. What Blow back?

You have a GOP that is ran by talk radio/fox news cooks. by way of brainwashing their voting base.



We completely agree when it comes to the right. And the unreasonableness of the GOP party in general. They are ran by the furthest right portion of their base. And they are ill-informed, self-sabotaging, and purely vindictive.

By blowback I mean a government shutdown. Budgets not being approved, debts not being paid back, institutions without funding, federal employees not able to work. Despite all the posturing, deals have to be made to run our country.
And if the Dems took a stance like, we're not passing anything till we get a living wage increase, free college, and/or medicare-for-all. Who knows if the right would ever budge. They'd probably blame us for whatever governmental and economic repercussions that occur.
But I guess the counterpoint to what I'm saying is. Is it worth keeping the government up and running in this current system that caters to the top 1% as income inequality just becomes worse and worse.
If grinding everything to a halt is the price. Maybe it's worth it. Cause the current system is rigged.


Wow, This is crazy, you sound like the GOP... and right now, I'm actually ok with your strategy. The glove has to come off
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ribeye
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 7596

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:19 pm    Post subject:

Regarding Single Payer, or M4A (Medicare for all), or whatever one wants to call it, here is an EXCELLENT article, from a pragmatic point of view, that first provides a detailed visual of our very complicated heath care menagerie as it has e(de?)volved over the years, then asks many of the questions that will have to addressed, and solved, before the US can EFFECTIVELY move in that direction:

Here's some of the challenges Bernie's NEW "M4A" plan faces.

Quote:

    What’s the timeframe for implementation? Would it all go into effect immediately or over several years?
    Would it cover U.S. citizens only? Legally residing residents? Undocumented immigrants?
    Would the Hyde Amendment be repealed as part of it?
    If not, what provision, if any, would be made for women’s reproductive care?
    What about other controversial/religious issues like contraception, needle exchanges, living wills, EOL care and so forth?
    What provisions, if any, would be made for the 2-3 million people who work for the insurance industry, either directly or indirectly? Would they be retrained? Relocated?
    What role, if any, would private, profit-based insurance carriers play going forward? What about non-profit carriers?
    If they’d be kept around, would they be providing supplemental coverage, administration of the public plan (a la Medicare Advantage), or both?
    Assuming they’d be put out of business or massively reduced in size, what provisions, if any, would be made for the millions of middle-class Americans who have stock/401Ks/etc in the insurance carriers?
    How much would doctors/hospitals be paid/reimbursed for services? (Medicare reimburses about 80% as much as private insurance does; Medicaid only reimburses about 50% on average).
    How would reimbursement rates for different services be established? (i.e. price controls)
    What about chiropractors, acupuncture, acupressure, etc? Covered or no?
    What about experimental drugs or techniques?
    Aside from the private Group and Individual markets, what happens to the existing programs including Medicare, Medicaid, the VA, the ACA exchanges themselves, the Indian Health Service, FEHB and so forth?

    Oh, yeah, and one more thing:

    How much will it cost, and how will you pay for it (whose taxes would go up, by how much, etc)?

_________________
For the adults in the room only
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wilt
LG Contributor
LG Contributor


Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 8955

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:40 pm    Post subject:

Those are great questions.

One thing we can do, of course, is study how other advanced countries have done it, tell the public what we've learned, determine what we can implement in this country, convince the public, and then hopefully have enough political will with both houses under Democratic control.

There's no reason why this shouldn't be reality by 2024.
_________________
ˇHala Madrid!


Last edited by Wilt on Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:45 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 6198

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:44 pm    Post subject:

Wilt wrote:
Those are great questions.

One thing we can do, of course, is study how other advanced countries have done it, tell the public what we've learned, convince the public, and then hopefully have enough political will with both houses under Democratic control.

There's no reason why this shouldn't be reality by 2024.


are we ready to take on the giant pharmaceutical, health insurance and medical industrial complex industries? Billions in $, millions of workers... how to convince them to let go of the cash cows?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wilt
LG Contributor
LG Contributor


Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 8955

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:47 pm    Post subject:

It won't be easy, but it's doable. The Democratic Party has to be fully united behind and progressives have to maintain the pressure for years.
_________________
ˇHala Madrid!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 15929
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:26 pm    Post subject:

governator wrote:
kikanga wrote:
splashmtn wrote:


See K, this is the issue...Fear. What are we so darn afraid of on the left?

You stated, "I do worry about the blow back from that type of stance." referring to a hard left stance. What Blow back?

You have a GOP that is ran by talk radio/fox news cooks. by way of brainwashing their voting base.



We completely agree when it comes to the right. And the unreasonableness of the GOP party in general. They are ran by the furthest right portion of their base. And they are ill-informed, self-sabotaging, and purely vindictive.

By blowback I mean a government shutdown. Budgets not being approved, debts not being paid back, institutions without funding, federal employees not able to work. Despite all the posturing, deals have to be made to run our country.
And if the Dems took a stance like, we're not passing anything till we get a living wage increase, free college, and/or medicare-for-all. Who knows if the right would ever budge. They'd probably blame us for whatever governmental and economic repercussions that occur.
But I guess the counterpoint to what I'm saying is. Is it worth keeping the government up and running in this current system that caters to the top 1% as income inequality just becomes worse and worse.
If grinding everything to a halt is the price. Maybe it's worth it. Cause the current system is rigged.


Wow, This is crazy, you sound like the GOP... and right now, I'm actually ok with your strategy. The glove has to come off


One thing has become obvious in 2017 US politics. There is little cost within a political party for pushing the extremes. Some people won't vote if they feel their party is compromising too much (be it the left or right). But if you put an extremist to lead the party, voters still won't cross over to the other side.

That's why I'm starting to believe Sanders may have been the better option. While Bernie voters were turned off because of Hillary's perceived centrism. Hillary voters were more practical and knew the dangers of a President Trump. So they still would've voted Dem if Hillary lost the primary.

Barack was smart for speaking about ideal legislation (even though it wasn't very realistic). As opposed to Hillary who campaigned on more realistic goals. Barack never completely withdrew from Iraq or Afghanistan. He never was able to shut down Guantanamo. He wasn't able to achieve single payer. These are things he campaigned on and wanted to achieve. But he was faced with the reality that it would never happen when he went into office.
But at least every Dem knew what he wanted. So it was more tolerable when the eventual compromise was made (to get something done).
Maybe some Dems felt like Hillary was starting from the position that would eventually be the compromise. And that turned some voters off.
On the flip side, I'm not sure Bernie has it in him to compromise (eventually) to get something done. I can't think of much legislation he has crafted that eventually was put into law, despite his long tenure in the Senate.
_________________
"The fundamental cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt" - Bertrand Russell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 15929
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:49 pm    Post subject:

Crazy to think. This guy was our National Security Advisor.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/13/michael-flynn-promoted-us-russian-nuclear-project-from-white-house
Quote:
Michael Flynn 'promoted US-Russian nuclear project from White House'

Investigators examine former Trump adviser’s alleged links to private plan to build Middle East power plants

Among startling new details unearthed by investigators working for a congressional committee is that the nuclear power plan Flynn was allegedly secretly promoting, during the campaign and once he joined the White House, involved a Russian state-owned company currently under US sanctions.

They are also examining whether the proposal is still being promoted by the Trump administration, months after Flynn was forced out of his role.


Didn't Trump once upon a time say traitors should be executed? Wonder if that hardline stance applies to Flynn?
_________________
"The fundamental cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt" - Bertrand Russell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 39186
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 3:49 pm    Post subject:

White male privilege leads some guys to think they can say or do anything:

Judge sends Martin Shkreli to jail for Facebook post offering bounty for Hillary Clinton's hair - Bail revoked


-Martin Shkreli said the $5,000 bounty he posted for Hillary Clinton's hair was meant to be a joke.

-He apologized for the stunt to a federal judge.

-Prosecutors claimed he is a danger to the public because of the Clinton post and online comments he made targeting two other women.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
splashmtn
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 1295

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 6:13 pm    Post subject:

ChefLinda wrote:
After 8 years of Obama, there was a "whitelash." White America basically said, okay you had the black guy for 8 years, now we're giving the presidency back to a white male like it was before. Didn't matter that the most qualified woman went up against the least qualified man, white America said, we'll take the man.

That's the election in a nutshell. I'm not sure by 2020 that the same white America would be willing to vote for a 1) woman, 2) black woman, 3) non-white male.

I love Kamala Harris. I like Cory Booker. I like Oprah. But I'm skeptical the racists, er white working class, eh people suffering from "economic anxiety" are going to change their stripes that fast.

P.S. - Trump's most brilliant move (if it was his) was the "Make America Great Again" line because it subliminally communicated the above in four words.


ok CL...lets assume this is all 100% gospel truth. Which it is. But its not taking into consideration some people really do HATE hillary and spending your time in blue states when you should've been in those swing states begging for votes was a bad move. Bill told her to go there and hang out longer, Obama said after the fact, this is what he did and it worked to get him those wins in those swing states.

No reason to work on your base. you have that in the bag. you need to change the minds of some independents or borderline old school so called fiscal conservatives that are not so called racists republicans.

but lets get back to it. Lets say thee only reason she didnt win was due to what you stated above.

Then the DNC really blew it. Play the hand you're dealt. A bunch of people hate her for various reasons. Some just dont want to see a lady run the country, blah blah blah. And you see the idiot on the other side getting real burn via the media. Isn't it time to take a long hard look at the old White man thats also a lefty? Sure thats not pushing progress per se. But maybe it can get us as a people into a better place economically so we can stop panicking and start relaxing a bit. The non panick relaxed mode can have you voting for a woman for the first time even if you were not sure she should be up there. maybe your mind is changed now that your belly is full. because when you're starving the worse part of you comes out. that racist/sexist part.

again. lets admit this truth we all know. White women voted for obama( a half black man). But a lot of those same white women either did not vote at all for hillary or jumped ship and voted for mr Grab em by the...

Do you understand how bad of a candidate you have to be in order to lose those specific white lady votes that the dems had for two elections? Or at best how much some of these white women hate you for whatever reason.

Why would the DNC continue to push you? Thats not smart or strategic.
BUt we already know the answer to that question. It has less to do with them getting a woman in that was qualified. It was more to do with the fact that she was a big time corporate dem.


CL and anyone else who was really hyped on hillary winning because they truly believed she was a great candidate. Why could she not get anyone of note to run with her as her VP? Kane ...Who?


Last edited by splashmtn on Wed Sep 13, 2017 6:40 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 27686

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 6:28 pm    Post subject:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/latest-trump-top-democrats-agree-young-immigrants-015848937--politics.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChefLinda
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 13264
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 6:29 pm    Post subject:

Clinton got more votes than any white male in presidential election history. Only Obama had more votes. If not for unprecedented confluence of intervening events, she would be President.

Ignoring all that in favor of the "Hillary just wasn't likeable enough" is complete sexist bullxxxx.

/out


Last edited by ChefLinda on Wed Sep 13, 2017 6:42 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChefLinda
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 13264
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 6:30 pm    Post subject:

lakersken80 wrote:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/latest-trump-top-democrats-agree-young-immigrants-015848937--politics.html


Quote:
The Associated Press‏Verified account @AP

BREAKING: Schumer, Pelosi announce deal with Trump to protect young immigrants; will include border security, but no wall.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 39186
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 6:38 pm    Post subject:

ChefLinda wrote:
Clinton got more votes than any white male in presidential election history. Only Obama had more votes. If not for unprecedented confluence of intervening events, she would be President.

Ignoring all that in favor of the "Hillary just wasn't likeable enough" is complete sexist bullxxxx.

/out

_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
splashmtn
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 1295

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:23 pm    Post subject:

ChefLinda wrote:
Clinton got more votes than any white male in presidential election history. Only Obama had more votes. If not for unprecedented confluence of intervening events, she would be President.

Ignoring all that in favor of the "Hillary just wasn't likeable enough" is complete sexist bullxxxx.

/out

wait a minute CL. the events were about her not being liked or hated. it doesnt matter how it happened. It happened. they hated her for various reasons. Benghazi(stupid)...Emails(stupid) etc etc. doesnt matter.

Get your butt over to those swing states and live there. Court those white women that stayed home or was so ticked that a couple of them voted for the idiot. Thats what you do. hanging out in cali is stupid. hanging out in steady blue spots is stupid. thats not strategic. Your own husband told you to hang in the swing states. obama told you he did it. what more do you want to hear?

The sexism was there for her like the racism was there for obama. guess which of the two won...TWO TIMES. Guess which one beat out the other? Obama.

At what point do you switch it up? Change your strategy. Follow the winning formula.

There are two many dems in this country to lose an election when you're as popular as Hil was. We all knew she had more than enough experience. Why do you think she took that position? TO make sure if she decided to run there was nothing they could say policy wise to make it look like she wasnt experienced. Now you didnt have to agree with her ideas or direction. But you could never call her wet behind the ears like they do with newer candidates.

CL the only reason we're having this discussion is so the next DEM and DEM voters will learn. doing things the old fashion way could get you a nut in office. It's time to switch things up. Easy with the corporate dems. And hang out in the swing states. If you think the older white ladies aint voting for you. Fine. Go get the young white women that are between the ages of 18-29. Get that voting block up out of the house in the swing states.
This will push you over the racist hump of the sticks voters, sexist voters, and even the old ladies that think women shouldn't be in leadership roles.

If Kamala Runs. She better not make the same mistakes that Hil made. And I still dont like her because she will be yet another corporate dem. She will have a twofer..Darker Skin and she's a ...she.


Look at this CL and others. this is a very nice breakdown of maps.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/11/maps-presidential-election-race-gender-age/

Quote:
What if only women voted?

Let’s start with women. In Silver’s map, women would hand Clinton 458 electoral votes. (A candidate needs 270 to win.) In the map below, based on the YouGov data, Clinton still has a lock on 330 electoral votes. (Texas and South Carolina were too close to tell, but they would probably go to Trump.) In all 50 states, she gets more support from women than men, but her level of support among women varies widely. Their support for Clinton ranges from a high of 86 percent in Washington, DC, to a low of 30 percent in Utah. In New York and California, she’d win by more than 30 points. But in Wyoming and West Virginia, she’d lose by more than 20 points.


^^That backs up my theory of where she or any other woman should be spending their time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
splashmtn
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 1295

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:36 pm    Post subject:

kikanga wrote:
governator wrote:
kikanga wrote:
splashmtn wrote:


See K, this is the issue...Fear. What are we so darn afraid of on the left?

You stated, "I do worry about the blow back from that type of stance." referring to a hard left stance. What Blow back?

You have a GOP that is ran by talk radio/fox news cooks. by way of brainwashing their voting base.



We completely agree when it comes to the right. And the unreasonableness of the GOP party in general. They are ran by the furthest right portion of their base. And they are ill-informed, self-sabotaging, and purely vindictive.

By blowback I mean a government shutdown. Budgets not being approved, debts not being paid back, institutions without funding, federal employees not able to work. Despite all the posturing, deals have to be made to run our country.
And if the Dems took a stance like, we're not passing anything till we get a living wage increase, free college, and/or medicare-for-all. Who knows if the right would ever budge. They'd probably blame us for whatever governmental and economic repercussions that occur.
But I guess the counterpoint to what I'm saying is. Is it worth keeping the government up and running in this current system that caters to the top 1% as income inequality just becomes worse and worse.
If grinding everything to a halt is the price. Maybe it's worth it. Cause the current system is rigged.


Wow, This is crazy, you sound like the GOP... and right now, I'm actually ok with your strategy. The glove has to come off


One thing has become obvious in 2017 US politics. There is little cost within a political party for pushing the extremes. Some people won't vote if they feel their party is compromising too much (be it the left or right). But if you put an extremist to lead the party, voters still won't cross over to the other side.

That's why I'm starting to believe Sanders may have been the better option. While Bernie voters were turned off because of Hillary's perceived centrism. Hillary voters were more practical and knew the dangers of a President Trump. So they still would've voted Dem if Hillary lost the primary.

Barack was smart for speaking about ideal legislation (even though it wasn't very realistic). As opposed to Hillary who campaigned on more realistic goals. Barack never completely withdrew from Iraq or Afghanistan. He never was able to shut down Guantanamo. He wasn't able to achieve single payer. These are things he campaigned on and wanted to achieve. But he was faced with the reality that it would never happen when he went into office.
But at least every Dem knew what he wanted. So it was more tolerable when the eventual compromise was made (to get something done).
Maybe some Dems felt like Hillary was starting from the position that would eventually be the compromise. And that turned some voters off.
On the flip side, I'm not sure Bernie has it in him to compromise (eventually) to get something done. I can't think of much legislation he has crafted that eventually was put into law, despite his long tenure in the Senate.
all of what you stated is spot on. then comes to part about would bernie compromise.

I'll ask you.. what is their to compromise on coming from the right? What policies have you heard from the right side that has sounded remotely feasible even after a bending? Think about it. We're talking like its a different time. This is the party led by nuts on the radio and breitbart. There is no way to compromise with those types. you have to get them up out of there OR talk louder about something they want where their voters stop listening to the nuts and start listening to you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tox
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 10549

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:05 pm    Post subject:

ChefLinda wrote:
lakersken80 wrote:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/latest-trump-top-democrats-agree-young-immigrants-015848937--politics.html


Quote:
The Associated Press‏Verified account @AP

BREAKING: Schumer, Pelosi announce deal with Trump to protect young immigrants; will include border security, but no wall.


I'm OK with this.
_________________
https://j.gifs.com/Rnqnbk.gif
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wilt
LG Contributor
LG Contributor


Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 8955

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:12 pm    Post subject:

White House is now saying that they didn't agree on excluding the wall.

Maybe Trump realized that he need to keep the mythical wall alive as long as possible.
_________________
ˇHala Madrid!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tox
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 10549

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:32 pm    Post subject:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-hillary-clinton-right-about-why-she-lost/

Some of the charts about the disproportionate amount of attention Hillary's emails got are shocking.
_________________
https://j.gifs.com/Rnqnbk.gif
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 576, 577, 578 ... 583, 584, 585  Next
Page 577 of 585
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2010 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB