PoliGAF 2016 |OT16| Unpresidented

Status
Not open for further replies.
BreezyLimbo said:
People cheering Romney in 2016

What a year
Click to expand...

I'll take what I can. I haven't gotten a good night's sleep in months, and barely any in the last week.

Everything is still horrible. Trump as President and Romney as Sec. of State.

Obama isn't dead and yet, he's still rolling in his future grave.
 
kirblar said:
The Mormon bloc of the GOP was pretty much the sole bright spot this year in the party.
Click to expand...

In a lot of ways, yes.

Also, generally, I think we need to be careful about using hyperbole. Romney is a lot of things, but calling him a spineless coward isn't useful. Rational Rs, however they may have failed in the past, are really the only hope we have in the next 4 years. Maybe lets be realistic about their failures but also their successes.
 
Crab said:
Then he'd vote against it.

Then he'd vote against it. His history is pretty clear on both of these issues. He co-sponsored the Freedom of Choice Act!

I don't think you quite understand what he's saying we should do.
Click to expand...
PBY said:
Yup. What exactly is the alternative? I mean, Ds have near-zero leverage hear.
Click to expand...
I don't think so.

When it comes to Sanders, WHITE working class comes first. It's why he was in Vermont and not New York. It's why he abandoned campaigning in the south during the primaries.

You guys like to say he'd be against it and all, but the past incarnations of 'democratic socialism' in the US were discriminatory, and these well-meaning men passed them all the same to alleviate the troubles of white people, with women and minorities explicitly excluded.

Sanders is of the same ilk.
 
Stupid question:

GOP are planing to drop taxes from 35% to something less than that. Would that help make corporations possibly be able to invest in jobs here? Like since manufacturing would be expensive here they either do automation or outsource it.
 
I disagree with Romney on very many things and did not want him to become president, but I would definitely not call him spineless. He criticized Trump in the most searing, public way, took a lot of heat for that and never backed off those remarks to bend a knee, like Cruz, Rubio, et al.

We've seen all year plenty of actually spineless Republicans who expressed not an ounce of moral courage in taking on Trump. Romney definitely wasn't one.
Abinash117 said:
Stupid question:

GOP are planing to drop taxes from 35% to something less than that. Would that help make corporations possibly be able to invest in jobs here? Like since manufacturing would be expensive here they either do automation or outsource it.
Click to expand...

I think Pope Francis came up with the best analogy for explaining why this philosophy doesn't work:

The promise was that when the glass was full, it would overflow, benefitting the poor. But what happens instead, is that when the glass is full, it magically gets bigger nothing ever comes out for the poor.
Click to expand...
 
dramatis, I don't really know how to respond to that other than to say I don't think you could possibly be more wrong. Even I'm not so uncharitable as to suggest Clinton did not care about the plight of the working class.
 
On the Vox podcast they mentioned how it was a smart political move by Schumer to endorse Ellison to DNC chair so that he wouldn't challenge Pelosi.

Of course just by mentioning that I would expect some people to have their pitchforks out.
 
SteuwT9.jpg
 
Totakeke said:
On the Vox podcast they mentioned how it was a smart political move by Schumer to endorse Ellison to DNC chair so that he wouldn't challenge Pelosi.

Of course just by mentioning that I would expect some people to have their pitchforks out.
Click to expand...
But are there going to be any non-older white men challenging Pelosi? Because the current options don't seem that great.
 
Totakeke said:
On the Vox podcast they mentioned how it was a smart political move by Schumer to endorse Ellison to DNC chair so that he wouldn't challenge Pelosi.

Of course just by mentioning that I would expect some people to have their pitchforks out.
Click to expand...

I mean, if he really wanted to challenge her he could have turned down the DNC chair and done it anyway. So I'm not entirely sure the idea he wanted her job passes the smell test.
 
Crab said:
dramatis, I don't really know how to respond to that other than to say I don't think you could possibly be more wrong. Even I'm not so uncharitable as to suggest Clinton did not care about the plight of the working class.
Click to expand...
No one talks about the non-white Working Class (in politics.) There's a reason for that.
 
RastaMentality said:
But are there going to be any non-older white men challenging Pelosi? Because the current options don't seem that great.
Click to expand...

Tim Ryan is pretty young by political standards - iirc, he was the youngest member of the House upon his election.

I also agree with B-Dubs. If Ellison had challenged Pelosi I think he'd have won, or at least, I think he'd have thought he was competitive enough to have gone for it. I don't buy that the DNC chair was to lure him away.
 
kirblar said:
No one talks about the non-white Working Class (in politics.) There's a reason for that.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and the reason is that it's significantly easier for most Democratic politicians to lump all black voters into the same box rather than recognise that the black working class wants economic address just as much as they want justice address, because it allows the Democrats to at least tacitly keep the support of big business. soul over in OT did a great post addressing this; I'll have to PM to see if I can lure him PoliGAF's way.
 
Crab said:
Yeah, and the reason is that it's significantly easier for most Democratic politicians to lump all black voters into the same box rather than recognise that the black working class wants economic address just as much as they want justice address, because it allows the Democrats to at least tacitly keep the support of big business. soul over in OT did a great post addressing this; I'll have to PM to see if I can lure him PoliGAF's way.
Click to expand...
Or because they have no other options because the GOP and WWC are both racist and don't want a thing to do with them because they're incapable of seeing past skin color for any sort of solidarity?

The success of strong welfare states only in homogenous societies sure points to this being a huge dealbreaker for people.
 
whyamihere said:
Tim Ryan was pro-life until last year. Maybe he's not the best person for the job.
Click to expand...

Not last year. Last year was when he gave the speech explaining why his convictions changed. He changed his position in 2013, when he got his first 90%+ rating from planned parenthood. Last year he was 100%.
 
whyamihere said:
Tim Ryan was pro-life until last year. Maybe he's not the best person for the job.
Click to expand...

I honestly don't like this attitude. It was the same with Hillary's "but she didn't support gay marriage in the 70s, so she hates LGBT people."

Who cares what people thought as long as they're supportive now and they truly changed their hearts on the issues you care about?

Anoregon said:
Supply-side ("trickle down") economics doesn't work. Period.
Click to expand...

I don't know how many times we'll need to get burned on this until people stop trying trickle down. So annoying.
 
Abinash117 said:
Stupid question:

GOP are planing to drop taxes from 35% to something less than that. Would that help make corporations possibly be able to invest in jobs here? Like since manufacturing would be expensive here they either do automation or outsource it.
Click to expand...

Supply-side ("trickle down") economics doesn't work. Period.
 
kirblar said:
I think ditching Pelosi is a necessity, simply based on image b/c of the BUT BUT BUT THE ESTABLISHMENT crap. It's unfortunate.
Click to expand...

If you want a symbolistic sacrificial lamb, it has to be Chuck Schumer, since he hasn't even taken the job yet, and who gets to be the brand new senate democrat leader sends a lot bigger message than the continuation of an old one.

It's been apparent for years that Chuck Schumer is the absolute worst person for that job in the modern political climate, and the election results prove it.

I don't know if they should go for a more boring pick like Durbin or to find someone more progressive to fire the base up, but just not the guy that is the definition of wall street establishment.
 
what's wrong with Pelosi? I thought Reid and Pelosi did a good job through the Obama era, but I'm open to being persuaded otherwise.
 
I know jack shit about Tim Ryan but I don't think he should be tossed aside just because he had a bad opinion that he no longer agrees with.
 
Abinash117 said:
Stupid question:

GOP are planing to drop taxes from 35% to something less than that. Would that help make corporations possibly be able to invest in jobs here? Like since manufacturing would be expensive here they either do automation or outsource it.
Click to expand...

You'd have to actually provide an incentive to do any of that.

There's no reason to assume that a lower tax burden would, in of itself, cause companies to redirect gains into building a US manufacturing base any more than they are today.
 
I would take Romney as Secretary of State in a heartbeat.
 
Dropping Schumer right after the most anti-Semitic campaign in recent American political history would, uhh, not look good.

I don't like him, but we can wait a bit.
 
jtb said:
what's wrong with Pelosi? I thought Reid and Pelosi did a good job through the Obama era, but I'm open to being persuaded otherwise.
Click to expand...

She's absolutely awful in front of the mic, and has backed a few bad bills that the "both sides" crowd loves to single out.

But other than that, she's extremely good at her job behind the scenes.
 
I'm not rushing to replace Pelosi. I thought she did a good job under difficult circumstances. I wasn't happy with her criticisms of Warren, but it's not enough for me to be keen to see her go.

EDIT: In fact, I'm not sure who does want to see Pelosi go? To the best of my knowledge, she's viewed reasonably well by most of the Sanders wing of the party, and nobody seems to really know about Tim Ryan.
 
as far as Pelosi goes, it doesn't seem like there's anyone else worthy of the role anyway

maybe Ellison should have tried to become minority leader instead of part time DNC chair.
 
Crab said:
The Democrats have no real veto power. Even if they refused to cooperate with Trump on anything whatsoever, he could still do it. So the question is: if, on the rare occasion he comes up with a good idea, do we let him get all the credit or do we try and snatch it? Because if the Democrats just mindlessly block it, and it happens anyway (which it would), and it is good, that's not going to play out well in the polling booth.

I mean, I can't imagine Trump will come up with many if any good ideas that don't hurt or penalize some group in some way, so this probably won't happen. But if it does, the above is true.
Click to expand...

A big reason why the GOP was able to get away with stonewalling the shit out of Obama was because they knew that Democrats wouldn't stroll out to the polls in midterms to vote them out anyways. This is a really shitty situation, but I just don't see how we have the leverage not to focus our energies on the heinous shit. This is going to be an extremely delicate two years no matter how you look at it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT13| For Queen and Country
386 387 388 389 390
19K
2M
Magni replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT15| Orange is the New Black
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
The Technomancer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT11| Well this is exciting
393 394 395 396 397
20K
1M
sc0la replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT12| The last days of the Republic
397 398 399 400 401
20K
1M
StoOgE replied
Top Bottom