Support NeoGAF

[pigeon]

Forgive me if I don't think somebody saying "I didn't call him a nationalist socialist, because you know, he is." is being earnest.

Honestly, forgive me.

No

Post better and lurk more before putting everybody on blast for shit and expecting anybody to care what you think

 

[Toxi]

Run against Trump

"See how shitty that guy is? Elect me so I can check him!"

Run against trump

It should be easier, they have nobody to run against at all

Huh. Guess this is obvious in retrospect.

 

[plagiarize]

Forgive me if I don't think somebody saying "I didn't call him a nationalist socialist, because you know, he is." or "I wasn't saying he was a 'white nationalist'. I was saying he was a 'white' 'nationalist'." is being earnest.

Honestly, forgive me.

Do I need to reiterate that I don't think he's a Nazi again? Because I think it'll be the third time I've said it.

But I'll do it for you.

I don't think he's a Nazi.

I don't think socialist is a bad word. I understand that nationalist has come to be seen as something equitable to racism and xenophobia, but that's not what I meant.

I am a globalist. I am pro trade.

Call it protectionism. Call it populism. I don't like it and that's why I didn't like Bernie.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Run against trump

It should be easier, they have nobody to run against at all

Honestly I don't think so.

Run against Republicans. Tie Trump to every Republican and sell how his anti-establishment pitch was a big lie.

This is also advantageous in the event Trump doesn't actually run again or gets successfully primary challenged or something.

 

[Odrion]

plagiarize's dad is a motherfucker

in that his dad presumably has or had a intimate relationship with his mother after his birth

 

[plagiarize]

Honestly I don't think so.

Run against Republicans. Tie Trump to every Republican and sell how his anti-establishment pitch was a big lie.

This is also advantageous in the event Trump doesn't actually run again or gets successfully primary challenged or something.

At this point, I think if they lose the house, the house will just propose rule changes to limit what a democratic house can do and ram them through before the dems take power.

plagiarize's dad is a motherfucker

in that his dad presumably has or had a intimate relationship with his mother after his birth

I can tell you he has for a fact.

 

[VendettaRed07]

At this point, I think if they lose the house, the house will just propose rule changes to limit what a democratic house can do and ram them through before the dems take power.

Republicans won't limit the power of the house. That would be suicide. Even in the event that they lose it this time they've held on to the house for all but four years since 1995. The house is their best check going forward and easier for them to maintain than the Senate.

 

[JP_]

Good. Populism is ass.

What do you call fighting wealth inequality?

 

[plagiarize]

Republicans won't limit the power of the house. That would be suicide. Even in the event that they lose it this time they've held on to the house for all but four years since 1995.

I don't think Republicans are forwards looking at all. They will do whatever is politically expedient at that exact moment in time. Like blocking a supreme court nomination for over a year.

 

[Diablos]

If the House would change the rules and Dems come in afterwards as the majority can't they just change them back

 

[plagiarize]

If the House would change the rules and Dems come in afterwards as the majority can't they just change them back

We'd need the Presidency I believe.

Obviously I'm referring to what happened in North Carolina.

 

[VendettaRed07]

I don't think Republicans are forwards looking at all. They will do whatever is politically expedient at that exact moment in time. Like blocking a supreme court nomination for over a year.

Then you are severely underestimating them.

They believe they have a future just like everyone else and this notion that the clock is ticking for them isn't really substantiated by much more than wishful thinking. Especially considering we are sitting on the eve of them having the most power they have had in 100 years.

Them blocking a SCOTUS was a forward thinking move. As they now are positioned to maintain a judiciary lean for a generation. Being reactionary or implementing short term political manouvers doesn't have a shelf life. The issues at hand might be but the issues can change.

 

[Rebel Leader]

If the House would change the rules and Dems come in afterwards as the majority can't they just change them back

"you must get president approves for any rule change"

New house law!

 

[Poor GRIMES]

this is some game of thrones shit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BjgEsK4LbE

 

[plagiarize]

Then you are severely underestimating them.

They believe they have a future just like everyone else and this notion that the clock is ticking for them isn't really substantiated by much more than wishful thinking. Especially considering we are sitting on the eve of them having the most power they have had in 100 years.

Them blocking a SCOTUS was a forward thinking move. As they now are positioned to maintain a judiciary lean for a generation. Being reactionary or implementing short term political manouvers doesn't have a shelf life. The issues at hand might be but the issues can change.

They have established a precedent that will likely be used against them, should the Dems regain senate control but not the presidency. It was far from a sure thing that blocking Obama's nomination would give them the nomination.

They blocked it because Obama was doing it. They were going to block any and all Clinton nominations too.

 

[Rebel Leader]

this is some game of thrones shit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BjgEsK4LbE

SHAME!!!!!!

 

[ezekial45]

Here's some positive news.

Obama is planning on working with dems to coach the party into regaining control of areas on the local level and guiding new leadership.

http://time.com/4606711/president-obama-democrats-coach/?xid=time_socialflow_twitter

 

[VendettaRed07]

They have established a precedent that will likely be used against them, should the Dems regain senate control but not the presidency. It was far from a sure thing that blocking Obama's nomination would give them the nomination.

They blocked it because Obama was doing it. They were going to block any and all Clinton nominations too.

The thing is that Republicans regularly do this and Democrats repeatedly fail to take advantage of these precedents. Banking on their political opposing being weak has worked wonders.

 

[Diablos]

We'd need the Presidency I believe.

Obviously I'm referring to what happened in North Carolina.

Regarding DC though I thought the House comes up with the House rules...

 

[VendettaRed07]

Here's some positive news.

Obama is planning on working with dems to coach the party into regaining control of areas on the local level and guiding new leadership.

http://time.com/4606711/president-obama-democrats-coach/?xid=time_socialflow_twitter

I honestly have zero faith in his ability to do this.

He'll be as useful in this role as Miyamoto directing a paper mario game.

"I want to develop a new generation of talent. But btw Keith Ellison sucks and I don't like him, pls appoint some of my proven failure constituents to positions they don't really want and won't be competent in"

 

[plagiarize]

Regarding DC though I thought the House comes up with the House rules...

Who gives them the power to impeach? Is that in the constitution or somewhere else that they could push through? Obviously their powers can't be defined by their rules.

 

[Odrion]

I honestly have zero faith in his ability to do this.

He'll be as useful in this role as Miyamoto directing a paper mario game.

"I want to develop a new generation of talent. But btw Keith Ellison sucks and I don't like him, pls appoint some of my proven failure constituents to positions they don't really want and won't be competent in"

pretty much ._.

 

[Retromelon]

Louisiana Update
Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards' LGBT rights order thrown out by judge

An executive order issued by Louisiana’s governor that was aimed at protecting the rights of LGBT people in state government was thrown out Wednesday by a judge who said the governor exceeded his authority.

State District Judge Todd Hernandez ruled that Democratic Gov. John Bel Edwards’ anti-discrimination order is unconstitutional because it seeks to create or expand state law. The order prohibited discrimination in government and state contracts based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

The decision delivered a significant victory to Republican Attorney General Jeff Landry, who filed the lawsuit challenging the LGBT-rights order. Landry praised the ruling and said his challenge was aimed at “upholding the checks and balances on executive authority as established in our state constitution.”

Governor Edwards cuts millions from state executive budget

BATON ROUGE, La. -
Governor John Bel Edwards is slashing nearly $277 million from the state executive branch's budget via executive order.

Edwards' proclamation, published today, orders department heads to make their mid-year budget cuts by tomorrow.

The Department of Health and Hospitals is the hardest hit department, losing more than $251 million in this latest round of cuts. The vast majority of those cuts--almost $238 million worth--will come from medical vendor payments.

Higher education and the Office of State Police will also take heavy hits. The cuts strip OSP of $5.1 million dollars. Meanwhile, the state's universities will lose nearly $11 million. Around half of that will come from the LSU system, which is losing nearly $5.6 million. The University of Louisiana System will lose $3.4 million.

Edwards himself is cutting $1.8 million from his own office.

 

[metalslimer]

Wait how exactly is Perez a failure?

 

[pigeon]

I mean I prefer Ellison and don't think Perez needs to run but this is a bad take, what exactly do you not like about Perez besides the fact that Bernie didn't ask him to run

 

[whyamihere]

I'm pro-Ellison but Perez is a solid guy?

 

[Odrion]

I'm pro-Ellison but Perez is a solid guy?

pretty much but I have better faith in Ellison with grassroots type stuff and Perez doesn't seem that qualified and the energy is definitely with Ellison than Perez

edit:

Obama also criticized suggestions that Democrats should rethink their party’s policies and platform after Hillary Clinton‘s 2016 loss. The president thinks the messaging strategy was flawed, not the message itself. “I don’t think there’s something wrong with the core argument that the Democratic Party has made for years,” he told NPR.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm i hope that's more about not abandoning identity politics than it is about not making economic politics more prominent

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

If nothing else, I want Perez to take Hogan's mansion and kick another Republican out of office.

 

[whyamihere]

This is wild to see visualized:

 

[VendettaRed07]

I mean I prefer Ellison and don't think Perez needs to run but this is a bad take, what exactly do you not like about Perez besides the fact that Bernie didn't ask him to run

He flopped every opportunity or chance he was given when he was being floated as a possible VP and I haven't heard a single word from him since this election ended or anything about his desire to actually be head of the DNC. Keith has been all over the place clearly showing he wants the job, has the fire and passion to do it. Both him and Dean did at least and I would have been happy with either of them. I just have no interest in the idea of Perez because I don't see any interest from him in the first place. If he really wants the job he should be out there like Ellison has been. The wave is clearly behind Ellison. It isn't just Bernie, it's Harry Reid, Schumer, everyone is behind him. Obama is being stubborn and ridiculous pushing back and suggesting Perez. If he thought he could do the Job he should have fired DWS and gave it to him years ago.

Sure I'm probably being unfair to Perez but Obama to me has proven to be a poor judge of character time and time again. All of the people he had head the DNC failed spectacularly. He had 8 years to put people in positions to win and better develop a "new generation" but didn't really do it.

Also Comey. Who he still defends.

 

[Odrion]

Congrats Powel on your electoral victories.

 

[pigeon]

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm i hope that's more about not abandoning identity politics than it is about not making economic politics more prominent

if we're going to have an actual useful discussion I want to identify how exactly we can advance economic politics in a world where people don't want redistribution but want productive labor despite the fact that continuing automation (to say nothing of globalization which is really just a primitive form of automation) makes labor less and less valuable by making it more and more productive

but I'm also still too mad to not type like this

 

[whyamihere]

Perez was consistently floated as a good option during Hillary's VP search and almost everyone is impressed with him? What alternate reality is this?

 

[Odrion]

if we're going to have an actual useful discussion I want to identify how exactly we can advance economic politics in a world where people don't want redistribution but want productive labor despite the fact that continuing automation (to say nothing of globalization which is really just a primitive form of automation) makes labor less and less valuable by making it more and more productive

but I'm also still too mad to not type like this

people don't want redistribution of wealth?

 

[VendettaRed07]

Perez was consistently floated as a good option during Hillary's VP search and almost everyone is impressed with him? What alternate reality is this?

I honestly thought he did terrible every interview or national appearance he had over the summer. He came across as uncomfortable and nervous whenever I saw him. I know he was talked about and hyped up but he didn't leave a good impression with me any of the chances Hillary gave him on tour

 

[pigeon]

people don't want redistribution of wealth?

There were a bunch of studies recently that show that lots of Americans believe that the system is rigged but want the solution to be getting a "good job" rather than getting money from the government

I will look for the sources later

I am a big supporter of redistribution of wealth because globalism really doesn't work without it and also I'm a socialist but apparently people aren't convinced

 

[JP_]

if we're going to have an actual useful discussion I want to identify how exactly we can advance economic politics in a world where people don't want redistribution but want productive labor despite the fact that continuing automation (to say nothing of globalization which is really just a primitive form of automation) makes labor less and less valuable by making it more and more productive

but I'm also still too mad to not type like this

Why would dems drop redistribution?

There were a bunch of studies recently that show that lots of Americans believe that the system is rigged but want the solution to be getting a "good job" rather than getting money from the government

I will look for the sources later

I am a big supporter of redistribution of wealth because globalism really doesn't work without it and also I'm a socialist but apparently people aren't convinced

Afaik, taxing rich is still pretty popular. But yeah there is a dogmatic pushback against stuff like guaranteed income. Maybe another new deal/gi bill type thing instead, but more inclusive. Jobs/education from gov instead of cash. Infrastructure is the obvious avenue.

 

[Odrion]

There were a bunch of studies recently that show that lots of Americans believe that the system is rigged but want the solution to be getting a "good job" rather than getting money from the government

I will look for the sources later

I am a big supporter of redistribution of wealth because globalism really doesn't work without it and also I'm a socialist but apparently people aren't convinced

People were for redistribution in 2015: http://www.gallup.com/poll/182987/americans-continue-say-wealth-distribution-unfair.aspx

If things changed, I wonder what.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

if we're going to have an actual useful discussion I want to identify how exactly we can advance economic politics in a world where people don't want redistribution but want productive labor despite the fact that continuing automation (to say nothing of globalization which is really just a primitive form of automation) makes labor less and less valuable by making it more and more productive

but I'm also still too mad to not type like this

This is true. The starting point for people in OH, WI, MI, PA, etc... should be "You have no skills and are completely useless on the jobs market." It's brutal, but it's the truth. If the Dems go down the Bernie path and just decide to lie to these people by telling them that those jobs do exist still (they don't), I'll be very disappointed (still vote Dem, but damned if I'd volunteer or anything). The answer is UBI and other education programs to get these people relevant skills. They say no resoundingly to both of those.

Perez was consistently floated as a good option during Hillary's VP search and almost everyone is impressed with him? What alternate reality is this?

Yeah, he's a good dude. Should definitely boot out Hogan in MD.

 

[JP_]

This is true. The starting point for people in OH, WI, MI, PA, etc... should be "You have no skills and are completely useless on the jobs market." It's brutal, but it's the truth. If the Dems go down the Bernie path and just decide to lie to these people by telling them that those jobs do exist still (they don't), I'll be very disappointed (still vote Dem, but damned if I'd volunteer or anything). The answer is UBI and other education programs to get these people relevant skills. They say no resoundingly to both of those.



Yeah, he's a good dude. Should definitely boot out Hogan in MD.

Bernie was saying coal jobs were coming back...?

(That was rhetorical, he was proposing investing in retraining into clean energy like Clinton)

 

[Wafflecakes]

Bernie was saying coal jobs were coming back...?

He pretty blatantly lied that manufacturing jobs could come back, just like Trump.

"If we eliminate free trade deals all the jobs from 20 years ago will magically come back! I promise!"

 

[AntraxSuicide]

Bernie was saying coal jobs were coming back...?

(That was rhetorical, he was proposing investing in retraining into clean energy like Clinton)

He pretty blatantly lied that manufacturing jobs could come back, just like Trump.

"If we eliminate free trade deals all the jobs from 20 years ago will magically come back! I promise!"

Yeah he had some tweet to that effect last week, I think. He's definitely in the camp that thinks free trade is the main cause of the loss in manufacturing jobs, when the reality is that we make the same amount of shit as always but with 1/50th of the workforce. Automation is making these jobs obsolete, and quickly.

It is incorrect to view this problem as "little guy gets stiffed by rich people." It's actually just "guy who only knows how to pick cotton was born after the cotton gin was invented."

 

[JP_]

He pretty blatantly lied that manufacturing jobs could come back, just like Trump.

"If we eliminate free trade deals all the jobs from 20 years ago will magically come back! I promise!"

He talked about being against free trade, but moving forward he ran on opposing TPP and investing in clean energy retraining (for coal communities) and investing in infrastructure programs to put people to work.

BERNIE’S PLAN TO REBUILD RURAL AMERICA
Addressing the infrastructure crisis facing the country – and creating the millions of jobs our economy desperately needs – has been an essential plank of Senator Sanders’ campaign.

Senator Sanders’ Rebuild America Act will make substantial infrastructure investments in Iowa and throughout rural America.

Improving our electric grid. Senator Sanders understands that we desperately need to improve our aging rural electrical grid, which consists of a patchwork system of interconnected power generation, transmission, and distribution facilities, some of which date back to the early 1900s.

Today, the World Economic Forum ranks our electric grid at just 24th in the world in terms of reliability, just behind Barbados.

As part of the Rebuild America Act, Senator Sanders would invest $50 billion on power transmission and distribution modernization projects to improve the reliability and resiliency of our ever more complex electric power grid. This investment will also position our grid to accept new sources of locally generated renewable energy, and it will address critical vulnerabilities to cyber-attacks.

Investing in broadband and high-speed Internet services. Another critically important rural infrastructure issue that often goes overlooked is the expansion of broadband. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development ranks the U.S. 16th in the world in terms of broadband access.

Today, people living in Bucharest, Romania have access to much faster Internet than most of the United States. That’s unacceptable and must change.

Senator Sanders’ Rebuild America Act would invest $25 billion over five years to expand high-speed broadband networks in under-served and un-served areas, and would boost speeds and capacity all across the country, particularly in rural areas.

High-speed Internet access is no longer a luxury. It is essential for 21st century commerce, education, telemedicine, and public safety. And, it’s especially important for rural America to stay connected and to do business with the rest of the world.

Improving our dams and levees. Senator Sanders’ plan also addresses dams and levees. Right now, more than 4,000 of the nation’s 84,000 dams are considered deficient.

Even worse, one of every eleven levees have been rated as “likely to fail” during a major flood. Most of those facilities are in rural areas.

The Rebuild America Act will invest $12 billion a year to repair and improve the high-hazard dams that provide flood control, drinking water, irrigation, hydropower, and recreation across rural America; and the flood levees that protect our farms and our towns and cities.

This is a big contrast to what Trump was saying. As you put it, "If we eliminate free trade deals all the jobs from 20 years ago will magically come back! I promise!"

Yeah he had some tweet to that effect last week, I think. He's definitely in the camp that thinks free trade is the main cause of the loss in manufacturing jobs, when the reality is that we make the same amount of shit as always but with 1/50th of the workforce. Automation is making these jobs obsolete, and quickly.

It is incorrect to view this problem as "little guy gets stiffed by rich people." It's actually just "guy who only knows how to pick cotton was born after the cotton gin was invented."

It's both. Newer research actually does put some of the blame on trade. But I'm still not seeing Sanders claim reversing trade deals will bring the jobs back. Clearly he's focusing on other ways to help these communities.

edit: and FWIW, I'm more pro-free-trade than Bernie -- I think we should be careful about how the deals are structured, but generally I think they do more good than harm. BUT, for those that it does harm, more attention needs to be paid to help them reconfigure.

 

[And_Gignac]

Telling workers they are pretty much useless lol. Peak liberalism.

Talk about "empathy".


And damn, the defamatory and incendiary BS against Bern continues.

 

[Diablos]

Telling workers they are pretty much useless lol. Peak liberalism.

Talk about "empathy".

Yeah this is a bad strategy.

 

[pigeon]

Telling workers they are pretty much useless lol. Peak liberalism.

Talk about "empathy".


And damn, the defamatory and incendiary BS against Bern continues.

I thought you were done tbh

go be done tbh

somewhere else

tbh

 

[Plinko]

This is wild to see visualized:

I love how 50 years from now people will look at that map and say, "Spotted Eagle?"

 

[JP_]

I love how 50 years from now people will look at that map and say, "Spotted Eagle?"

The full name is actually Faith Spotted Eagle

 

[Funkyhamster]

This is true. The starting point for people in OH, WI, MI, PA, etc... should be "You have no skills and are completely useless on the jobs market." It's brutal, but it's the truth. If the Dems go down the Bernie path and just decide to lie to these people by telling them that those jobs do exist still (they don't), I'll be very disappointed (still vote Dem, but damned if I'd volunteer or anything). The answer is UBI and other education programs to get these people relevant skills. They say no resoundingly to both of those.

This is spot on (although hopefully there is a way of massaging that message to make it more palatable).

One thing that seems to have been neglected in the conversation about the economy is that isolationism or avoiding automation will result in the US getting out-competed by other countries. I've been reading Guns, Germs, and Steel, and it mentions that societies that avoid technology tend to end up being dominated or replaced by societies that embrace it. If we impose tariffs or whatever to bring back manufacturing jobs, China will continue to take advantage of automation and globalization and eventually dominate us. Given how much of Trump's campaign rhetoric focused on "winning" against China, I'm surprised that the contradiction between that rhetoric and his policies wasn't pointed out more (or maybe it was, and I just didn't notice).

 

[shinra-bansho]

50 years from now, people will look at that map and say "Idiots." Just as I do now.

Anyway, support for redistributive policy varies by racial resentment. Ergo, you can jettison that along with minority rights on the path to recapturing the flippers I guess.

Telling workers they are pretty much useless lol. Peak liberalism.

Talk about "empathy".

And damn, the defamatory and incendiary BS against Bern continues.

Empathy does shit all either. Tell us what should be done. Go.