• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2015 |OT| Keep Calm and Diablos On

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

East Lake

Member
It is actually incumbent upon the minority groups to find a solution since they're the ones who care about it. It's not going to be granted from above by Bernie or Hillary, even if they're yelled at enough to block these types of people from their events. The wealthy aren't going to fund this issue, and white people aren't going to do it for them.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Sea Manky said:
That lip service can still be valuable though. Bernie has certainly walked the walk his whole career, but it's well past time we get past the colorblind whitewashing of political discourse and start openly talking about racial problems in uncoded terms. Yes, we have a problem with racism; no, it's not incumbent upon minority groups to find a solution to it; and yes, we need policies that are directly targeted towards improving the situation for minorities full stop. The candidates should be saying these things at every speech and rally, and if they don't they'll get shouted at until they do.
Click to expand...

Pretty much how I look at it. Race is something no one wants to talk about, so even if you walk the walk you also need to talk the talk otherwise nothing will ever get fixed.
 
Metaphoreus

Metaphoreus

This is semantics, and nothing more
Plinko said:
I read your response to him but I really disagree.
Click to expand...

I seem to get this a lot. It's like I'm constantly arguing with dozens of contrarians.

Plinko said:
If you want to operate a business in the United States and take advantage of federal and state tax breaks, how in the world is there not a connection? The government makes the laws--why should they be exempt? Can a business publicly operate and say, "Well, you know what? Screw it--I'm just going to claim religious objection and sell alcohol to minors/guns without background checks/etc./?" Both of those would be breaking the law and the government gets involved. If those are set laws, don't we have set anti-discrimination laws as well? If we do not, we very well should if a business is going to be taking that money.

I'd argue that businesses shouldn't be considered private if they are taking money from the government that makes the laws.
Click to expand...

You're making two slightly different arguments in your first paragraph. Your first argument is that, because a person benefits from government-provided benefits (tax breaks), he or she should operate his or her business within the restrictions already imposed by law. To this argument, I have three responses: first, it's unnecessary--a person should follow the law because it's the law, not because he or she obtains some unrelated benefit from the lawmaker. Second, this is a bargain that is not made in the law. "Tax breaks" (which I'm interpreting very broadly, as including the right to deduct expenses from income in calculating the federal income tax due for a year) are not generally contingent on following unrelated provisions of law. Third, this doesn't explain why discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation in public accommodations should be illegal in some or all instances. So, in the states where such discrimination is not illegal (neither is it illegal under federal law), your argument has no relevance.

Your second argument is like FryeWulff's argument in the other thread. This argument is that, because a person obtains some government-provided benefit, he or she can't exclude prospective customers from his or her business. In other words, the law ought to impose certain restrictions on the operations of a business because of the advantages accruing to that business from government action. But without a logical connection between the benefit conferred and the burden imposed (e.g., you can deduct your business expenses but you must keep track of them so the IRS can audit them, if need be), it's just a blanket justification for the exercise of government power. So long as you can point to some government benefit--roads, tax deductions or credits, public parks, etc.--you can justify the imposition of any burden whatsoever on the person.

The argument you would make in your final paragraph, if I understand what you're saying, would upend American society, and should be rejected for that reason alone.

Aaron Strifed version: No ur wrong cuz of reasons
 
B

BertramCooper

Banned
ZFVfVq3.png


(His announcement is at 11 a.m. EDT today, BTW.)
 
F

Farmboy

Member
Metaphoreus said:
I seem to get this a lot. It's like I'm constantly arguing with dozens of contrarians.
Click to expand...

This reminds me of an old joke: a guy driving down a motorway hears a warning on the radio, to beware when driving on that particular road, as it's been reported that there's a wrong way driver on there. This makes him laugh as he says to himself "A wrong way driver? Why, there's dozens!"

OT: What possesses Kasich to jump in at this point? Angling for a VP spot?
 
U

User 406

Banned
East Lake said:
It is actually incumbent upon the minority groups to find a solution since they're the ones who care about it. It's not going to be granted from above by Bernie or Hillary, even if they're yelled at enough to block these types of people from their events. The wealthy aren't going to fund this issue, and white people aren't going to do it for them.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, this is why so little progress has been made since the CRA. Respectability politics and whitewashing political language to appeal more to whites hasn't worked. Expecting black people to hit upon a magic combination of watered down policies and friendly non-threatening collective public image that will finally get enough white racists to change their hearts is wrong and completely ineffective. White people have to actively fight white supremacy because nobody else has the power to end it. That's not going to happen as long as the problem is ignored.
 
N

NihonTiger90

Member
Farmboy said:
OT: What possesses Kasich to jump in at this point? Angling for a VP spot?
Click to expand...

He's tired of fighting with the state legislature on everything. :p

In all seriousness, he probably thinks that he's got a chance to be Walker but more palatable to independents and moderates in the general election.
 
E

Ecotic

Member
Farmboy said:
OT: What possesses Kasich to jump in at this point? Angling for a VP spot?
Click to expand...

Kasich's probably hoping Republican voters get desperate for victory and realize Bush can't win, Walker can't win, but maybe he can. Republicans in general are treating this election as if it's theirs to lose, so it's a long shot that they'll wake up and realize they need to act strategically here.
 
F

Farmboy

Member
Ecotic said:
Kasich's probably hoping Republican voters get desperate for victory and realize Bush can't win, Walker can't win, but maybe he can. Republicans in general are treating this election as if it's theirs to lose, so it's a long shot that they'll wake up and realize they need to act strategically here.
Click to expand...

Good answer, and I agree. If I was a Republican and somehow got to hand-pick my candidate out of this field, Kasich would probably be my choice. He's their best shot and yet still less than even money to beat Hillary.

But you're right that they actually seem to think this is 2008 in reverse, so they might as well shoot for the moon. I guess it's the Fox News bubble at work: in their world, Obama is as loathed by the public as Bush was.

So Kasich is probably hoping they'll come to their senses in that regard. They won't.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Farmboy said:
Good answer, and I agree. If I was a Republican and somehow got to hand-pick my candidate out of this field, Kasich would probably be my choice. He's their best shot and yet still less than even money to beat Hillary.

But you're right that they actually seem to think this is 2008 in reverse, so they might as well shoot for the moon. I guess it's the Fox News bubble at work: in their world, Obama is as loathed by the public as Bush was.

So Kasich is probably hoping they'll come to their senses in that regard. They won't.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that the "Surprise - you've lost again!" factor would be bigger than it was on Election Night 2012?

Oh wow.

Come to think of it, whenever someone mentions the Electoral College or posts an article about it on FreeRepublic, you get a pretty small response compared to most other topics. It seems like a topic that they either want to avoid or don't give much thought to.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
Jeb Bush will go negative. No surprise there.

Politics is as tough and nasty a business as you can find, and the Bushes are highly skilled at the dark art of negative campaigning. While they talk a good game about compassion, very little of it is shown to their opponents.

Considering this history, it ought to be obvious what’s coming down the pike. Marco Rubio may be Jeb’s friend and mentee, but he had the temerity to challenge Bush. The one-term senator will pay for it by being defined in Bush’s spots as a not ready for prime-time Republican Obama. Scott Walker should expect an assault on several grounds: no experience in foreign policy (though Bush himself has only been a state governor) and manager of an economy that doesn’t measure up to Florida’s under Bush. Rand Paul’s face will dissolve into Neville Chamberlain’s. Ted Cruz and Chris Christie have already provided the film footage to be depicted as ranting, unstable men whose fingers should be nowhere near the nuclear button. Mike Huckabee will be a tax-raising populist, with a Dukakis-like tendency to let dangerous criminals out early. John Kasich is going to get pegged as an Obamacare lover. And Donald Trump? Well, the imagination runs wild.
In reality, Bush won’t bother to launch most of these attacks because it will be clear most of his opponents can’t prevail. However, any GOP candidates high in the polls later this year should spend some money to construct a bomb shelter.
Naturally, all the top Republican contenders will air attack ads, many of which will be unsavory. But with by far the largest war chest, Bush will almost certainly sponsor the most. He’ll leave the pitiless parts to his surrogates and super PAC, where official ignorance of all muggings is legally required. And like his father and brother before him, he’ll attempt to eliminate his rivals with a gentlemanly smile and gracious wave.
The Bush family knows how it’s done. When you’re playing the nice guy, you can’t afford to be seen with dirty hands.
Click to expand...

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/07/jeb-bush-2016-mean-120364.html#ixzz3gXCrJeT8
 
F

Fuchsdh

Member
Macho Madness said:
How do you all feel about #EarnThisDamnVote going around? A movement that wants Dems to make race inequality a campaign focus or they don't vote.
Click to expand...

Well, it's incredibly stupid in that they are essentially saying "screw reality, we'd rather make things worse for us because you aren't campaigning hard enough to our electorate subgroup." I mean, I get that, if a candidate isn't hitting your notes I don't expect you to be happy about it, but realistically, do they think there's going to be any positive action from a Republican president? (Leaving aside the inherent folly of apparently expecting the president to solve racism or police force, one which is an abstract issue and the other which is mostly a state and local one.)

No one could give me or other posters in the Bernie thread an actual example of what else Sanders could do he's not already done or promised to do, they were mostly just disagreeing with his treatment of race issues as having economic underpinnings.

Pragmatically, I don't see black turnout actually being as high as it was in 2008 or 2012 anyhow.
 
F

Farmboy

Member
Palin predictably defends Trump. Also too: it's the media's fault.

Asked about the dispute between Donald Trump and Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona -- the candidate at the top of the ticket when she was 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee -- former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin Monday afternoon called both men heroes.
"I have the good fortune of knowing both John McCain and Donald Trump well," Palin told CNN in an email. "Both men have more in common than the today's media hype would have you believe. Both blazed trails in their careers and love our great nation."

Palin, who attached a photograph of McCain returning from Vietnam to her email, wrote, "Sen. McCain dedicated his life to serving our country, and in my humble opinion the sacrifices made by all ethical service members are heroic -- putting it all on the line to defend freedom IS heroic -- and Donald Trump is a hero in another arena."

"Trump is the candidate giving voice to untold millions of fed-up Americans witnessing a purposeful destruction of our economy and the equal opportunity for success that made America exceptional," Palin said. "We're watching career politicians throw away our kids' future through bankrupting public budgets and ripping open our porous borders which, obvious to all us non-politicians, puts us at great risk."

Seeming to take issue with some of the language used by McCain in the past to describe attendees at Trump rallies and some of the Senate tea party members, Palin added, "Everywhere I go, hard-working patriotic Americans -- not 'crazies' or 'wacko birds' -- ask me to pass on to Mr. Trump encouragement to keep educating the masses about true ramifications of illegal immigration, and in general the real state of our union.

Palin concluded by recommending both Trump and McCain "resolve the media driven wedge between them."

"We can keep the debate focused on significant issues at hand," she said. "I leave politics of personal destruction to those on the Left and lazy media lapdogs who's only take away from any debate is any salacious slip-up, as if they've never wanted to restate something they've publicly uttered."

"I'll fight the exhausting, divisive strategy that's taken hold under the current crop of politicians who refuse to allow our United States to unite. Both Mr. Trump and Sen. McCain can contribute their gifts and talents to join that fight to work together, because the Left is headed the other direction and under that desired division we will fall," she said.
Click to expand...

Trump is basically Palin on steroids. Jon Stewart also pointed that out yesterday (not that he needed to. It is known.)
 
O

Owzers

Member
I like Kasich, i probably have to learn more about all of his policies i won't like, but me liking him surely means he has no chance.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Poor Kasich. On his big day, sidelined by another entertaining Trump stunt.

If someone had pitched this storyline for the West Wing, the writer would've been laughed out of the room. My god..
 
T

Tamanon

Banned
HylianTom said:
Poor Kasich. On his big day, sidelined by another entertaining Trump stunt.

If someone had pitched this storyline for the West Wing, the writer would've been laughed out of the room. My god..
Click to expand...

To be fair, West Wing Republicans would be considered Liberal Democrats today.
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
BertramCooper said:
Is there anything the party can do at this point to contain Trump?

Anything at all?
Click to expand...

Not really. They could come down on him HARD, exclude him from the debates, channel every ounce of conservative PAC money away from him they could, but he can run as an independent and still ruin their day pretty hard.
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
Poodlestrike said:
Not really. They could come down on him HARD, exclude him from the debates, channel every ounce of conservative PAC money away from him they could, but he can run as an independent and still ruin their day pretty hard.
Click to expand...

I think you'd do nothing, let him flame out, but don't antagonize him so he runs 3rd party.
 
E

East Lake

Member
Sea Manky said:
On the contrary, this is why so little progress has been made since the CRA. Respectability politics and whitewashing political language to appeal more to whites hasn't worked. Expecting black people to hit upon a magic combination of watered down policies and friendly non-threatening collective public image that will finally get enough white racists to change their hearts is wrong and completely ineffective. White people have to actively fight white supremacy because nobody else has the power to end it. That's not going to happen as long as the problem is ignored.
Click to expand...
Who said anything about watered down policies? I don't think you realize it but you're effectively arguing for white people to all get together and grant black people their rights, which is a nice sentiment but more or less unworkable as any sort movement.

What's worse is they're heckling the dude who already supports their policies. It's not like they were in there to demand something more radical than what Bernie was offering.
 
I

Incognito

Troll
Oh mi god I cannot get enough of Trump. I'm addicted. Anyone else suffering same affliction? His Rick Perry line today about him wearing glasses all of the sudden to appear smart was funny because its true. :rollin
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
ivysaur12 said:
I think you'd do nothing, let him flame out, but don't antagonize him so he runs 3rd party.
Click to expand...

But then they run the risk of him actually winning the nom. It's out there, but if I were them I don't think I'd be confident enough in his eventual failure to just sit by and risk having it happen.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Incognito said:
Oh mi god I cannot get enough of Trump. I'm addicted. Anyone else suffering same affliction? His Rick Perry line today about him wearing glasses all of the sudden to appear smart was funny because its true. :rollin
Click to expand...

He's the greatest comedy option of all time. I have no idea what I'm going to do when he's gone.

Poodlestrike said:
But then they run the risk of him actually winning the nom. It's out there, but if I were them I don't think I'd be confident enough in his eventual failure to just sit by and risk having it happen.
Click to expand...

But they know if they force him out he'd just run third party and screw them in the worst way possible. They are literally stuck in an impossible situation, a real no win scenario.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Retromelon said:
They will offer him secretary of housing and urban development to keep him from going indie. Book it
Click to expand...

You think that would placate Trump?

lyAz9ZR.gif


You are not as used to hearing his shit as I am my friend. With him it's the top job or nothing. He will burn that party to the ground to get what he wants.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

GAF Museum - The Greatest OTs of All Time (or at least, some of the great ones)
|OT|
4
2K
Komatsu replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
Top Bottom