[Sandwich]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/harriss-debate-bounce-is-fading/ time to mention reparations, stat!

Well, the DNC has to bridge the cap between the newly empowered ultra-left, who don't like the DNC but represent a huge voting block, and the entire moderate voting block of the US, who don't really want free shit for everybody and don't want an obvious racist in the white house. They can't figure out how to make both parties happy. They need the moderates to actually win states, but they need the liberals to make headlines/keep berners from commenting on the internet. I think they thought Biden was their dude, but they neglected his "creepy uncle" vibe. It's gonna be a tough 2020 if they can't rally the liberals around biden or knock out enough of the bernie-replicants to aggregate support behind a single left wing candidate. If you add up all of the berniebots together, that's a pretty big bloc of voters and they could easily win the primary...but identity politics are so fractured that you really have to wonder whether a bernie voter is going to slot into harris support if he drops out...or if booker will head to biden's camp when he's done.

 

[johnbryanpeters]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/harriss-debate-bounce-is-fading/ time to mention reparations, stat!

Well, the DNC has to bridge the cap between the newly empowered ultra-left, who don't like the DNC but represent a huge voting block, and the entire moderate voting block of the US, who don't really want free shit for everybody and don't want an obvious racist in the white house. They can't figure out how to make both parties happy. They need the moderates to actually win states, but they need the liberals to make headlines/keep berners from commenting on the internet. I think they thought Biden was their dude, but they neglected his "creepy uncle" vibe. It's gonna be a tough 2020 if they can't rally the liberals around biden or knock out enough of the bernie-replicants to aggregate support behind a single left wing candidate. If you add up all of the berniebots together, that's a pretty big bloc of voters and they could easily win the primary...but identity politics are so fractured that you really have to wonder whether a bernie voter is going to slot into harris support if he drops out...or if booker will head to biden's camp when he's done.

I'm ultra-left, and will vote to remove Trump, even with distaste, Not sure what that means in the larger context.

 

[DaveW]

I'm ultra-left, and will vote to remove Trump, even with distaste, Not sure what that means in the larger context.

heh that would probably make you fractionally to the right of centre down here!

 

[Pesqueeb]

I'm ultra-left, and will vote to remove Trump, even with distaste, Not sure what that means in the larger context.

 

[Pesqueeb]

heh that would probably make you fractionally to the right of centre down here!

Yes, but we all know that NZ is a socialist hell-scape with mandatory gay marriage and forced abortion summer camps. You probably even have a functional social safety net!

Edit: and even worse, everyone has access to health care!

 

[6thElement]

Yes, but we all know that NZ is a socialist hell-scape with mandatory gay marriage and forced abortion summer camps. You probably even have a functional social safety net!

Edit: and even worse, everyone has access to health care!

Freedum hating Kiwi's.

 

[Pesqueeb]

John Delaney's Wikipedia vandalized to say he died at the Democratic debate

John Delaney's Wikipedia page was vandalized to say he had died at the Democratic debate at the hands of Warren. The page was changed back shortly after.

www.usatoday.com

 

[Brian HCM#1]

I'm ultra-left, and will vote to remove Trump, even with distaste, Not sure what that means in the larger context.

The problem is, the left has gone way too far left, it is scarring the moderate left. Biden is the Democrats best chance of the Democrats wining back the presidency. If Bernie or Warren get the nomination, the moderates will vote Independent giving Trump a 2020 win, way too much free shit promised by them and will cause a severe recession and will destroy the economy. As a Republican, I do actually like Tulsi Gabbard. If she had a better foreign policy, she could give Biden a real run for his money and might actually be a good fit for the country. However, I do enjoy watching the current Democratic debates, one can't write a funnier comedy.

 

[Pesqueeb]

 

[SkaredShtles]

<snip> way too much free shit promised by them and will cause a severe recession and will destroy the economy.

Does it not seem odd to you that so many civilized nations in the world *can* provide the universal services that are being discussed (education, healthcare, retirement), and yet, the *WEALTHIEST NATION IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANITY* says, "we can't do that - it'll destroy our economy."

Do you really believe that?

 

[Pesqueeb]

Does it not seem odd to you that so many civilized nations in the world *can* provide the universal services that are being discussed (education, healthcare, retirement), and yet, the *WEALTHIEST NATION IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANITY* says, "we can't do that - it'll destroy our economy."

Do you really believe that?

Of course he does. He has to at this point because anything else would be an admission of being sold snake-oil.

No matter if it was your personal choice or not..... Your government represents YOU.
And what represents you for the next while is looking to be on a par with inquisition era Catholic church.

DaveW is right. *This* government does represent our dear friend Brian, and an unfortunate number of voters who think just like him. In all of it's racism, in all of it's misogyny, in all of it's facist/nationalism, in all of it's disregard for the poor, the oppressed and the afflicted, but mostly, in all of its self serving.

It was definately the ME NOW voters that won.

Its a morality issue. All of this was pretty obvious in 2016. If you're still willing to self identify as supporting trump and generically the Republican party at this point you have no morals period. You stand for or at minimum with racists, bigots, and generically people who do not care for anyone besides themselves and those who remain willfully ignorant and simple. At this point you have to be actively trying to stay ignorant to support these people.

Now, before I hear "I'm not racist I have a black friend!" or "leftists accusation about xxxxxx" or "Godwin's law!" bear in mind GOP politics & policies; anybody supporting them either 1) Agrees with their policies and actively wishes for suffering onto huge swaths of people 2) Only agrees with some of their policies, but is completely indifferent to the suffering that comes to others as a result 3) Is ignorant and generally unaware of the actual policies of the GOP and all they harm they do, believes all the propaganda, yet also actively resists any efforts to educate them about this, and dismisses all complaints from those sufferings as "liberal lies" or "fake news".

So regardless of their motivations, all 3 types of people are contributing to a great deal of harm to others while dismissing pleas & warnings from those who are suffering or bear witness too it. Based on their actions, their votes & support, contribute to the suffering they continue to happily ignore.

One side wants rights and care for everyone to be healthy, educated and happy. This of course is railed against as "giving away free stuff", or as simply "socialism" by any right winger with more than a 5th grade level reading ability, rare though those are becoming. The other wants to consolidate power and wealth to the top at the expense of everyone, plain and simple. And it sure seems they are winning at this point, I might add.

These people don't care about anyone. They want the system to be whatever they are told to want because they are so brainwashed and/or braindead that they even fight fervently against their own needs. A government of con-men for the benefit of con-men built on the backs of rubes who fervently believe in Schrodingers immigrant.

 

[Brian HCM#1]

Does it not seem odd to you that so many civilized nations in the world *can* provide the universal services that are being discussed (education, healthcare, retirement), and yet, the *WEALTHIEST NATION IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANITY* says, "we can't do that - it'll destroy our economy."

Do you really believe that?

Yes, true. They pay much more in taxes, Sweden for example has approx 10M people compared to the US which is approx 327M. How much money do those countries give to other countries in foreign aid? How many of those countries have military bases around the world (which WE pay those countries to be there) to be the worlds police? How many of those counties allow illegals aliens to sneak in and then support them? The US spent $50.1 billion in foreign aid alone, and another approx $150 Billion in overseas military bases. 2018 the US spent $275 billion on illegal immigration costs. So that's close to a half a Trillion dollars. I bet that could help provide some of those universal services you talk about. I think a flat rate tax for everyone, same percentage across the board whether you make $15K or $100M a year would be fair for all.

 

[Toshi]

Re taxes. Note that they kick in much earlier.

How Scandinavian Countries Pay for Their Government Spending

Bernie Sanders said he wants the United States to look more like Scandinavian countries policy-wise, including tax policy. What’s wrong with that?

taxfoundation.org

I would love for Brian to pay the same marginal rate I do.

 

[johnbryanpeters]

Yes, true. They pay much more in taxes, Sweden for example has approx 10M people compared to the US which is approx 327M. How much money do those countries give to other countries in foreign aid? How many of those countries have military bases around the world (which WE pay those countries to be there) to be the worlds police? How many of those counties allow illegals aliens to sneak in and then support them? The US spent $50.1 billion in foreign aid alone, and another approx $150 Billion in overseas military bases. 2018 the US spent $275 billion on illegal immigration costs. So that's close to a half a Trillion dollars. I bet that could help provide some of those universal services you talk about. I think a flat rate tax for everyone, same percentage across the board whether you make $15K or $100M a year would be fair for all.

1) Severely reduce the military. Get rid of overseas bases.
2) Restore progressive taxation, hitting the wealthy a lot harder.
3) Open the borders, gradually, over, say 20 years.
4) I sort of think stop foreign aid, but I have not educated myself on the subject.

 

[Brian HCM#1]

Re taxes. Note that they kick in much earlier.

How Scandinavian Countries Pay for Their Government Spending

Bernie Sanders said he wants the United States to look more like Scandinavian countries policy-wise, including tax policy. What’s wrong with that?

taxfoundation.org

I would love for Brian to pay the same marginal rate I do.

We were @ 35% in 2017, It did drop a little in 2018 under Trumps tax break, but got nailed elsewhere because with his new tax plan. Wanna compare what we paid in property taxes? Remember, I live in the San Francisco Bay Area, cost of living is outrageous. Money does not go very far here. It really does suck!

 

[SkaredShtles]

Yes, true. They pay much more in taxes, Sweden for example has approx 10M people compared to the US which is approx 327M. How much money do those countries give to other countries in foreign aid? How many of those countries have military bases around the world (which WE pay those countries to be there) to be the worlds police? How many of those counties allow illegals aliens to sneak in and then support them? The US spent $50.1 billion in foreign aid alone, and another approx $150 Billion in overseas military bases. 2018 the US spent $275 billion on illegal immigration costs. So that's close to a half a Trillion dollars. I bet that could help provide some of those universal services you talk about. I think a flat rate tax for everyone, same percentage across the board whether you make $15K or $100M a year would be fair for all.

Some of these things are *EXACTLY* what needs to happen. But you have to FUCKING VOTE for the people that would even *entertain* these things. Which is NOT the GOP. They won't even discuss it.

 

[Brian HCM#1]

1) Severely reduce the military. Get rid of overseas bases.
2) Restore progressive taxation, hitting the wealthy a lot harder.
3) Open the borders, gradually, over, say 20 years.
4) I sort of think stop foreign aid, but I have not educated myself on the subject.

1. I would be for getting rid of overseas military bases, but put enough money to better our defense systems to ward off potential attacks on our country
2. That's a tough one, I don't think its fair to make the wealthier pay more. My thoughts, the wealthy would cheat the tax system and keep most of their money overseas to avoid it. That would put us back to square one.
3. I have no problem with immigration, however you must be somewhat self sufficient and not rely on the government & tax payers to support you. Most from South America come here, do work VERY hard and for just peanuts, but still become a financial burden on us. We have a homeless crisis with our own citizens, and many homeless veterans. Our tax payer dollars should be helping them first and foremost, anything leftover can go to immigrants.
4. I'm for stopping all foreign aid.

Unfortunately to fund medical, education, retirement we're talking 10's of Trillions over the next 10 years or so. The numbers are outrageous. I guess we can do what AOC suggested and just "print" more money, then again our dollar would be less than lets say the Cambodian Riel which is 0.00024 Riel to $1 US.

I'm for something other than what we currently have, but no Democratic candidate has shown the true numbers to actually make it realistically work, because its virtually impossible. They're feeding everyone hopes and dreams, but have no solution to pay for it. Unfortunately that's the reality of it.

 

[Sandwich]

4 more years!

Biden in Iowa says 'poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids'

The former vice president's campaign said he "misspoke and immediately corrected himself" during remarks about leveling the playing field for low-income students.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[jonKranked]

They're feeding everyone hopes and dreams, but have no solution to pay for it.

so progressive taxation doesn't count?

 

[SkaredShtles]

So would you suggest people continue to vote for the GOP? Because I GUARANTEE they won't even discuss anything related to what you suggest.

 

[Toshi]

I retract my quip against Brian and the same marginal rates as me. I’d still like a higher marginal rate, but also one that applies to carried interest as well, and which kicks in at 1.5x median income a la Scandinavian countries.

 

[Toshi]

Saw a Yang 2020 bumper sticker today. Probably the first and last I’ll ever see.

 

[jonKranked]

Saw a Yang 2020 bumper sticker today. Probably the first and last I’ll ever see.

there's one i drive past on my way to work. it's good for a LOL

 

[6thElement]

Saw a Yang 2020 bumper sticker today. Probably the first and last I’ll ever see.

I spotted one in Alabama on the back of a car yesterday. That's definitely not the norm...

 

[Brian HCM#1]

So would you suggest people continue to vote for the GOP? Because I GUARANTEE they won't even discuss anything related to what you suggest.

Trump was never a "true" republican to begin with, he just ran on that ticket. That being said, Trump was elected president because both sides are severely broken & half of America wanted to try a something different instead of a politician. Trump runs the country as a business, which explains his lack of tact. The left is still running around scratching their heads still wondering how Trump won and is doing everything possible to prevent it happening again in 2020. The Russia collusion thing failed miserably. However, as long as there is CNN, MSNBC & Hollywood they're going to do their best to keep him out in 2020. IMO, Trump will win again in 2020, the left has way too many wacko's! Tulsi Gabbard would be my choice for a democratic candidate as she doesn't seem to have any screws loose.

 

[SkaredShtles]

<snip>Trump was elected president because both sides are severely broken & 26% of America wanted to try a complete moron. Trump runs the country as a business, which explains his complete failure at it.

Fixed that for you.

 

[Nick]

The Russia collusion thing failed miserably.

Brian. Dude. If you think that was a "thing" and not a very real interference... you're kidding yourself.

 

[Jm_]

Brian. Dude. If you think that was a "thing" and not a very real interference... you're kidding yourself.

Well, what was being investigated was possible collusion, in other words, Americans working WITH the Russians for their goal. While it is fact that Russia interfered with the elections, there was no hard evidence of collusion, but that didn't stop the Administration from lying to law officials and other various dirty deeds being uncovered.

 

[Toshi]

Well, what was being investigated was possible collusion, in other words, Americans working WITH the Russians for their goal. While it is fact that Russia interfered with the elections, there was no hard evidence of collusion, but that didn't stop the Administration from lying to law officials and other various dirty deeds being uncovered.

Manafort also lied his ass off and deleted all of his encrypted WhatsApp communications. The polling matchup with where Russia put its efforts is too much to be a coincidence.

 

[Nick]

Well, what was being investigated was possible collusion, in other words, Americans working WITH the Russians for their goal. While it is fact that Russia interfered with the elections, there was no hard evidence of collusion, but that didn't stop the Administration from lying to law officials and other various dirty deeds being uncovered.

Right. I mean, his campaign only had like, dozens and dozens of known interactions with only 18 or 19 Russians in the two years leading to the vote. Hard evidence aside.

 

[Sandwich]

Elizabeth Warren's New Plan On Guns Has A Goal: Reduce Gun Deaths By 80%

The Massachusetts senator introduced a sweeping gun control plan Saturday. She also said people have to maintain pressure on President Trump for more immediate change.

www.npr.org

I could get on board here

 

[Brian HCM#1]

Brian. Dude. If you think that was a "thing" and not a very real interference... you're kidding yourself.

No, its a real thing. However they were trying to pin it on Trump. Interference, yes. It needs to be looked into. Did it have a real effect on the outcome of the election? I doubt that. Do I think Hillary & Obama knew about what was going on? Hell YES! 30K emails wiped away, smashed Blackberry etc. My point was, the left was putting all their eggs in one basket with the Muller report & it turned up no collusion and no obstruction., I mean no obstruction as Trump allowed Muller to talk to everyone he wanted to and never blocked anyone from his investigation and was able to complete it. Muller looked like a lost puppy in the hearing a few weeks back. Clearly he just had his name on the report, he had no real clue what was even in it. It was just the left running around with their pitchforks looking for something.....anything and came up with nothing.

 

[Brian HCM#1]

Elizabeth Warren's New Plan On Guns Has A Goal: Reduce Gun Deaths By 80%

The Massachusetts senator introduced a sweeping gun control plan Saturday. She also said people have to maintain pressure on President Trump for more immediate change.

www.npr.org

I could get on board here

Keep guns away from Millennials and the majority of the mass shooting will been solved.

 

[Toshi]

No, its a real thing. However they were trying to pin it on Trump. Interference, yes. It needs to be looked into. Did it have a real effect on the outcome of the election? I doubt that. Do I think Hillary & Obama knew about what was going on? Hell YES! 30K emails wiped away, smashed Blackberry etc. My point was, the left was putting all their eggs in one basket with the Muller report & it turned up no collusion and no obstruction., I mean no obstruction as Trump allowed Muller to talk to everyone he wanted to and never blocked anyone from his investigation and was able to complete it. Muller looked like a lost puppy in the hearing a few weeks back. Clearly he just had his name on the report, he had no real clue what was even in it. It was just the left running around with their pitchforks looking for something.....anything and came up with nothing.

No obstruction? When did Trump sit for an in-person deposition again? And in case you missed all the evidence:

A Mueller Report obstruction of justice refresher

The special counsel's report was long. This is what he said about his probe into presidential obstruction of justice.

qz.com

 

[Nick]

@Brian HCM#1

 

[Sandwich]

Keep guns away from Millennials and the majority of the mass shooting will been solved.

U big dum dum

 

[Brian HCM#1]

U big dum dum

 

[Sandwich]

K

No millennials, no white people, and no males and we have a deal. If you want to generalize, let's generalize. Hell don't sell guns to men and you have corrected the problem entirely.

 

[Brian HCM#1]

K

No millennials, no white people, and no males and we have a deal. If you want to generalize, let's generalize. Hell don't sell guns to men and you have corrected the problem entirely.

I don't own a gun, nor have the desire to ever own one. However I would not stop a responsible person from having one. Okay, so they end up banning guns & let's say confiscating a high percentage of them. So what did we accomplish if one of those loony's says, well if I can have a gun, I'll drive my car/truck through a large crowd? I guess they can start to ban vehicles. Hey, what about making pipe bombs and walking in a crowd? I guess they can ban bombs too? My point is, if someone wants to commit a heinous crime, they'll find a way. At the end of the day banning guns will not solve a thing. Addressing the mentally ill, seeing the warning signs and trying to get them the help they need, would be the best start.

 

[Jm_]

So what did we accomplish if one of those loony's says, well if I can have a gun, I'll drive my car/truck through a large crowd? I guess they can start to ban vehicles. Hey, what about making pipe bombs and walking in a crowd?

The problem with that argument is that the barriers to carrying them out are higher and the results are less reliable. Science has told us time and time again that when the barriers are low, there are more mass murder events. It's not as easy to run down people in your car, because people can simply move out of the way. You might get a few and their might be a lot of injuries, but it's not the same as sitting back and plucking people off with a high capacity rifle. Same thing with a pipe bomb, to be really effective, you need a well constructed bomb and a lot of people, compared with just going to a gun store, buying a gun and ammo. The more effective the bomb, the more complex it is and the more likely it is to tip off the FBI with the construction and preparation.

Pretending that you can "control" a mass of people is just retarded. We trade a certain amount of freedom for security and safety. That's the basic premise of civilization. Why don't we sell people grenades? Why don't we sell all kinds of dangerous chemicals at the supermarket? For the same reason and to make these things from scratch, it takes quite a bit of effort. Contrary to the propaganda of the firearm industry and NRA, people are lazy and they are not going to go to extensive lengths to make instruments of death, except in rarefied cases, but the point is it will be far less than what we have today because the barriers are higher. There's all sorts of stuff that you wouldn't trust some jackass to own or use, but yet you think it's ok to give them a device that can kill dozens to hundreds from afar? Double standard.

This is what science has proven, so if we actually regulated guns to any reasonable extent, these mass murder events would be less and more lives would be saved. This is the basic premise of what they have done in literally every other 1st world nation. No, they wouldn't "find a way" to still kill people, that is not what science has shown.