• 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 2017 |OT1| From Russia with Love

Status
Not open for further replies.

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
I'm not sure if this has been brought up, but one of the biggest problems of total, and utter obstruction by Democratic senators, is having to deal with... Democratic voters.

Moderate/centrist Democratic voters are far more likely than moderate/centrist Republicans to be turned off by their party being too combative. Ironically because the people who have cultivated Democratic principles over the years have conditioned them to the idea that cooperation and collaboration are inherently good things, and extreme partisanship and obstinacy are inherently bad things.

If Trump gets his 20% tax on Mexican imports, these are the US household staples that will be hardest hit.
Code:
Value of US food imports from Mexico (2015)
Fresh vegetables		$4.8 billion
Fresh fruit			$4.3 billion
Wine and beer			$2.7 billion
Snack foods			$1.7 billion
Processed fruits and vegetables	$1.4 billion

Data: US Trade Representative's Office

It's okay. They'll make it up by all the tax cuts they'll soon be receiving.
 
Big food isn't going to let this happen.

Kind of funny a lot of Trump's worst ideas, Liberals will have to ally themselves with massive, unsavory companies like Kraft, Nestle and Coca-Cola
 
Gonna go snort some coke to make more sense of this.

Despite Trump’s prior reservations -- he told the Wall Street Journal on Jan. 13 that “I don’t love” the plan -- there is now broad agreement among senior administration officials that border adjustment is the best approach for a broad overhaul of the U.S. tax code.

The official described the proposal as the “most nationalist” way for the U.S. to tax its companies and said Trump was previously opposed only because he doesn’t like the word “adjustable.” He would prefer to simply call it a border tax, the official said.

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/...rade-war-as-trump-clash-with-mexico-escalates
 
Bicameralism isn't very good because the upper house either an entirely or almost entirely symbolic branch (the UK House of Lords, for example), an unrepresentative sample to differentiate it from the more representative lower house (the US Senate), or an equally representative but entirely unnecessary house (my state senate falls under this, and I'm fairly certain more bicameral state legislatures are the same) that only slows the process of decision making.

In terms of US state legislatures they have to be due to a Supreme Court decision. Some states, such as New York, get around this a little by making sure certain areas get about as few people per district (within the allowed tolerances to be considered equal) while others get about as many people per district as possible in one house.
 

Mirand

Member
Maybe the one upside in having all of these crazy Trump orders being floated by the six people Trump trusts with no policy input is that there's going to be push back from all sorts of unexpected groups.
 
Maybe the one upside in having all of these crazy Trump orders being floated by the six people Trump trusts with no policy input is that there's going to be push back from all sorts of unexpected groups.

There are a ton of massive industries that all stand to get fucked by most of this stuff he keeps proposing. Every bit of it is the third rail for them; I personally can't wait until the AARP starts getting after them. And honestly, a trade war is coming so I hope our NAFTA partners play hardball during it. There's no reason to reward a toddler throwing a tantrum, and they should just keep Trump pissed off constantly. It's clear that he's going to age worse than most Presidents ever do since he takes every slight so personally, he'll have ulcers by April.
 

Ogodei

Member
I would say it depends. I know that there have been debates in the House of Commons that have absolutely swung votes, and indeed brought down Prime Ministers. Geoffrey Howes speech to the House of Commons brought down Margaret Thatcher, and I know that in recent debates on gay marriage / mental health / losing a child that the emotional speeches by MPs affected by these issues has made other MPs change their vote.

Debate has powerful signalling functions, so it ties back to what Gotchaye is saying. Somebody comes out publicly in support of a previously-controversial position and the position seems to get a lot of pull in the room, suddenly the impossible becomes possible, not because anybody changed their POV, but because now they understand what other people were thinking.
 
Guys, people who are truly poor don't have refrigerators. Therefore, they do not buy fresh food and will be unaffected by the tariff.

The thing that still gets me about this is that they were so out of touch with the lower and middle income class, to even know that most places you can rent have refrigerators, even crappier ones.
 
It really seems like Trump wanted to abort the fetus that turned into Tiffany.

C25aXQyUQAAJvaD.jpg


The picture on the left is now in the WH. Photoshopped hand or no?

C3MY07vWIAEiCda.jpg
 
Avocados should go extinct or be banned. There is no way to justify the exorbitant amount of water required to grow them in the context of our water-scarce future of climate change.
 
I'm not sure if we're allowed to post this kind of thing, but holy crap the comments in this /r/sandersforpresident thread are unreal: https://redd.it/5qgoga

Tons of 100+ upvoted comments about how Obama/Hillary were just as bad/worse than Trump. How can anyone even still pretend to think that?
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Avocados should go extinct or be banned. There is no way to justify the exorbitant amount of water required to grow them in the context of our water-scarce future of climate change.

It's still way less water needed than to produce meat.
 
It's still way less water needed than to produce meat.

Let's pick our battles haha. There's a big difference between getting people to stop eating avocados and getting people to stop eating meat. I don't see any plausible way that we can transition society away from eating real meat until we can offer a nearly indistinguishable synthetic alternative. Then I think you can actually make a persuasive moral argument without disrupting the existing structure/culture too much (it just changes things on the internal supply chains).

More importantly, avocados and meat don't share the same geographical context. Nobody is debating whether to raise cows on their land or grow avocados. Avocados are replacing other crops that we should be producing more of.
 
It's a good pick to make a stand on, she's blatantly unqualified and the pick is offensive to anyone with more than half a brain cell. Her and Sessions are where the Dems should make their stands.

I still think Tillerson should have been considered as unqualified.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Let's pick our battles haha. There's a big difference between getting people to stop eating avocados and getting people to stop eating meat. I don't see any plausible way that we can transition society away from eating real meat until we can offer a nearly indistinguishable synthetic alternative. Then I think you can actually make a persuasive moral argument without disrupting the existing structure/culture too much (it just changes things on the internal supply chains).

More importantly, avocados and meat don't share the same geographical context. Nobody is debating whether to raise cows on their land or grow avocados. Avocados are replacing other crops that we should be producing more of.

Except it's not all or nothing. You don't have to be vegetarian to sometimes substitute out something, and almost everything you eat is in favor of something you didn't eat instead.

It'd be really dumb if people substitute meat for avacodos because they're worried about avacodo water usage.
 
In terms of US state legislatures they have to be due to a Supreme Court decision. Some states, such as New York, get around this a little by making sure certain areas get about as few people per district (within the allowed tolerances to be considered equal) while others get about as many people per district as possible in one house.
While that's fine, it still means a second house is wholly unnecessary and we should emulate Nebraska :p
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Here's a better comparison:

WH version on the left, original Getty shot on the right.

lol

I'm not seeing much of a difference here. I think it has to do with perspective/zoom and not Photoshop.

As for that RoguePOTUS twitter account, if that's true, I can't even.
 
Poking the environmentalist hive seems like a really poorly thought out idea.

A really good campaign against the GOP could be run using nothing but pictures of wolf puppies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom