Page 86 of 228 FirstFirst ... 3676848586878896136186 ... LastLast
Results 851 to 860 of 2276

Thread: OT: Politics

  1. #851
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,084
    Quote Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
    Things like immigration, well... I take a hard stance that illegal immigrants are criminals.
    I'm not saying this to shame, but to maybe get you to think about it a bit. Do you refer to the people who knowingly hire undocumented immigrants as criminals and publicly call them out on a regular basis? I would argue they're the bigger problem, if there weren't work here there would be no undocumented immigrants. But if you flip on pretty much any conservative news, undocumented immigrants are barely even acknowledged as human. They're illegals and criminals.

    I could go into all your other points about taxes and health care and how you've been mislead there, but I don't want to spend the time on it, tbh.
    Ever so many citizens of this republic think they ought to believe that the Universe is a monarchy, and therefore they are always at odds with the republic. -Alan Watts

    I work for the company building the Paragon

  2. #852
    Quote Originally Posted by Lurker27 View Post
    Liberals shoot themselves in the foot by focusing on extremely unpopular social issues. Gordon alludes to it, but democrats are getting outplayed like crazy in a metapolitical, or purely political sense. Intelligent strategy would completely de-emphasize LGBTQ, racial, and immigration issues and focus entirely on economic self-interest.

    The economy at least as defined by stock prices is as overbought as it's been, with the exception of the tech bubble:
    https://www.advisorperspectives.com/...on-july-update

    Even considering lower corporate taxation won't help that much since the effective rates were so low due to loopholes.

    Just saying it will be hard to lay the correction purely at the feet of the tariffs, though I think the global implications for monetary velocity are important. It actually does seem to have affected China, and China 2025 is legitimately scary in terms of being set up to takeover global economic leadership. It's possible defensive economic action is warranted, though the implementation of the tariffs (including Europe and Canada, why?) is not structured intelligently.
    i think its three fold:

    1. trumps support, nothing matters to them. provided liberals are mad, they don't care. there is no bottom, pedophilia, treason, attacking POWs and veterans, they literally don't care. so his 35-40% support is baked in, there is no changing there minds.

    2. democrats are amazing at fumbling the ball. i actually disagree that democrats should make it about the economy. "the economy" is this big nebulous thing, that for 40 years the republicans have been garbage at, and democrats have done really well, but somehow the perception is that republicans are better at it than democrats. thats a losing fight. democrats need to make the election about healthcare. its tangible. people's lives changed with the ACA was passed. the ACA is as popular as it ever has been, hell, medicare for all is super popular ... its tangible, its something the democrats are known to do better, and it can win. also republican scare tactics doesn't work well here, as we've seen the GOP's bag of tricks here, and we know they have nothing. literally nothing, no plan, no alternative, nothing. so the fear mongering game doesn't work, there is no MS13 or "libs just want more crime" bullshit.

    3. where democrats will fumble the ball, will be in picking someone the fox news of the world can vilify well. it worked so well with hillary. she was a bit of a robot, sure, but the GOP and fox news knew for over a decade that she was going to run for president. and all they did was try to stick things to her. none of it was real, no murders, no Benghazi, her emails ... all pathetic ... but 10-12 years of constant "hillary is bad" programming made her bad regardless of the facts. democrats will pick someone fox news can define as terrible. and they will lose becuase of it. all they have to do is make the democrat seem kinda sketchy, and people will vote for trump again despite everything.

    on the plus side, i think this is why its actually a good thing no "front runner" has been named ... keeps the years of bullshit to a minimum if they don't know who to attack.




    and because of the electoral college, less than 100k people across three states picked trump over hillary! awesome way to measure the will of the people guys!
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  3. #853
    Insider
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,182
    1. I agree that elections are won on the margins, my point is that many Democratic talking points are not attractive to those on the margins. People vote against liberalism largely because they're scared of change (small c conservatism). Talking about non-traditional social values, particularly focus on righting victimhood wrongs, is a losing platform, regardless of how morally right it is. The realization in 2016 is that America is more racist and more misogynist than we thought. The correct political gamesmanship response is to move away from those issues, not double down on them. Democrats are really very bad at not taking the bait on social issues.

    2. I do not think this is a popular issue to build the platform around, it's too nuanced and feels like a handout. I would focus on a balanced budget (defense cuts and "bring the troops home")and a simplified but more progressive tax structure. In short, wrest away the fiscal responsibility and personal empowerment narrative from the conservatives.

    3. Hillary didn't lose because she "was villified", she lost because she was an uninspiring choice within her own party (e.g. Sanders would have mobilized the base more). If Hillary attained Obama level turnout (either election) she wins. Trump won for a variety of very gross reasons, but the most basic (and true) version is "Hillary Lost at Politics".
    "So you've done this before?"
    "Oh, hell no. But I think it's gonna work."

  4. #854
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by PBSteve View Post
    I'm not saying this to shame, but to maybe get you to think about it a bit. Do you refer to the people who knowingly hire undocumented immigrants as criminals and publicly call them out on a regular basis? I would argue they're the bigger problem, if there weren't work here there would be no undocumented immigrants. But if you flip on pretty much any conservative news, undocumented immigrants are barely even acknowledged as human. They're illegals and criminals.

    I could go into all your other points about taxes and health care and how you've been mislead there, but I don't want to spend the time on it, tbh.
    Texas and California are probably 2 of the absolute worst about this... Yes, fundamentally I do agree that those who hire immigrants are also criminals. Locally, a Pilgrims Pride plant got hit with a raid where the undocumented laborers were sent home. Interestingly, I have a family member who did their workman's comp claims. The injuries stemming from this plant were horrific and the underlying truth is that the plant did NOT have to compensate these workers, nor file OSHA violations or anything. Absolutely inhumane! Fundamentally, yes I agree that those who knowingly hire undocumented immigrants are also criminals and should be prosecuted as such.

    The tough part for me is that very few citizens are willing to do some of the jobs for the wages offered (below minimum wage). So, what's funny is that republicans will have to accept cost increases for certain products if they actually cared to enforce any of it. The agriculture industry as a whole is riddled with these issues. I don't have solutions... just many 1st hand observations.

  5. #855
    Quote Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
    Texas and California are probably 2 of the absolute worst about this... Yes, fundamentally I do agree that those who hire immigrants are also criminals. Locally, a Pilgrims Pride plant got hit with a raid where the undocumented laborers were sent home. Interestingly, I have a family member who did their workman's comp claims. The injuries stemming from this plant were horrific and the underlying truth is that the plant did NOT have to compensate these workers, nor file OSHA violations or anything. Absolutely inhumane! Fundamentally, yes I agree that those who knowingly hire undocumented immigrants are also criminals and should be prosecuted as such.

    The tough part for me is that very few citizens are willing to do some of the jobs for the wages offered (below minimum wage). So, what's funny is that republicans will have to accept cost increases for certain products if they actually cared to enforce any of it. The agriculture industry as a whole is riddled with these issues. I don't have solutions... just many 1st hand observations.
    this has been democratic immigration policy for at least 25 years .... prosecute the companies that hire them. if they are un-hireable, they don't come. problem solved.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  6. #856
    Quote Originally Posted by Lurker27 View Post
    1. I agree that elections are won on the margins, my point is that many Democratic talking points are not attractive to those on the margins. People vote against liberalism largely because they're scared of change (small c conservatism). Talking about non-traditional social values, particularly focus on righting victimhood wrongs, is a losing platform, regardless of how morally right it is. The realization in 2016 is that America is more racist and more misogynist than we thought. The correct political gamesmanship response is to move away from those issues, not double down on them. Democrats are really very bad at not taking the bait on social issues.

    2. I do not think this is a popular issue to build the platform around, it's too nuanced and feels like a handout. I would focus on a balanced budget (defense cuts and "bring the troops home")and a simplified but more progressive tax structure. In short, wrest away the fiscal responsibility and personal empowerment narrative from the conservatives.

    3. Hillary didn't lose because she "was villified", she lost because she was an uninspiring choice within her own party (e.g. Sanders would have mobilized the base more). If Hillary attained Obama level turnout (either election) she wins. Trump won for a variety of very gross reasons, but the most basic (and true) version is "Hillary Lost at Politics".
    the demographics disagree. hillary's turnout was pretty damn good: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/28/u...ns-defeat.html

    people don't vote for an admitted sexual assaulter because hillary isn't inspiring. they vote for an admitted sexual assaulter because they think hillary is worse (somehow). and that takes 2 decades of painting her as evil. hell, they've been doing since the 1990s, when she was leading the bill clinton charge for health insurance reform.

    for example, even after the access holywood tape came out, i was in the suburbs (shutter) waiting in line for a movie, and the two 40-50 something housewives in front of me were discussing how they couldn't vote for clinton because she didn't divorce bill in the 1990s. this is again, after the access Hollywood tape came out, and of course we've known forever that trump has a bunch of fail marriages, has cheated on every single one of his wives etc etc
    Last edited by cockerpunk; 08-30-2018 at 01:24 PM.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  7. #857
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk View Post
    this has been democratic immigration policy for at least 25 years .... prosecute the companies that hire them. if they are un-hireable, they don't come. problem solved.
    I don't disagree with the method, but it doesn't eliminate culpability from the immigrants themselves. It also doesn't mean that all citizenship rights are afforded to the undocumented immigrants. We agree on this, right?

  8. #858
    Quote Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
    I don't disagree with the method, but it doesn't eliminate culpability from the immigrants themselves. It also doesn't mean that all citizenship rights are afforded to the undocumented immigrants. We agree on this, right?
    again, democratic immigration policy for 25+ years .... if they commit a crime, send em out. otherwise you likly arn't going to run across them very often, but if you do, send em out. and have a path to citizenship/tax paying for those that want to make a life here, and for those who already have made a life here.

    personally, i don't give a shit if someone has been here for 30 years, made a living, a life, and never had ANY legal trouble at all to cause them to be deported. that makes them better citizens than most born here citizens in my book. they are fucking white knights to have done that. and i really, frankly, don't care. they should pay taxes, and be citizens like everyone else.


    remember of course, that the GOP isn't just against illegal immigration ... they are against legal immigration too. constantly trying to reduce the legal numbers as well. well, of brown people anyway.
    Last edited by cockerpunk; 08-30-2018 at 01:43 PM.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  9. #859
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,084
    Quote Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
    I don't disagree with the method, but it doesn't eliminate culpability from the immigrants themselves. It also doesn't mean that all citizenship rights are afforded to the undocumented immigrants. We agree on this, right?
    Rights enumerated in the Constitution are explicitly extended to all persons within the territory.

    But no, they should not (and can't) collect SSI or Medicaid benefits. Even though they generally pay into them.
    Ever so many citizens of this republic think they ought to believe that the Universe is a monarchy, and therefore they are always at odds with the republic. -Alan Watts

    I work for the company building the Paragon

  10. #860
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by PBSteve View Post
    Rights enumerated in the Constitution are explicitly extended to all persons within the territory.
    Please explain. That's not how the 14th amendment reads. Rights are for citizens.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •