|
computer parts posted:At what point do you believe that running on anti-immigrant and minority platforms was not a winning strategy? Because that's been a thing for literally forever. That won't help if their response to unemployed 20-somethings with 6 digits of debt and no job prospects is "gently caress you, I hope you starve to death."
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 20:39 |
|
|
Mr Jaunts posted:Yeah, but I don't think can do that via executive order; that was what the Employee Non-Discrimination Act was supposed to do. Which, it should be noted, has an exception for religious groups, non-profits and the like, similar to the contraception mandate. I presume that was included to sweeten the deal for House Republicans, but they still didn't bite. I wonder how many times Big O is going to have to veto repeals of the ACA. I'm guessing daily. computer parts posted:At what point do you believe that running on anti-immigrant and minority platforms was not a winning strategy? Because that's been a thing for literally forever. Because the third leg of their platform is "millenials are lazy, whiny children who are too busy complaining to bootstrap their way into jobs." Millenials seem to have managed to recognize the fact that the Right is try to forcefeed them a fried poo poo sandiwch. Magres fucked around with this message at 20:22 on Jul 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:19
|
|
|
Berke Negri posted:Man, I am kind of bummed my naming Gerald Ford as the third greatest president of the post-war period didnt elicit a response. Lol he fell down one time. This young phenom, Chevy Chase, he knows what's up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:21
|
|
|
For all those expressing their happy dream of moving to another country, remember that if America collapses, the rest of the world goes with it. Too big to fail. Suck it up and stay to fight for what you believe in
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:21
|
|
|
greatn posted:Lol he fell down one time. This young phenom, Chevy Chase, he knows what's up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Part of the reason the youth are blah about politics is how disillusioned some of them are and how risky it is to get involved in that poo poo right now, especially when you're unemployed, 27, and have $150,000 of debt. Which is exactly why the right kicked public support out from under higher education. Reagan and Meese clearing out People's Park wasn't that long ago, really. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
HelloSailorSign posted:For all those expressing their happy dream of moving to another country, remember that if America collapses, the rest of the world goes with it. That and all of the other countries are either worse than the US or will reject/discriminate heavily against you unless you're the type of person who would do fine in the US (White professionals).
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
The best way to stay positive is to look at the past and realize that the past 1000 years have been a steady progression to better quality of living for more people. Just over 50 years ago people were getting lynched and hit with fire hoses for racial equality. It may not be completely fixed, but it is getting better. 10 years ago states were passing laws preventing same sex marriage that are now being taken down. There may be minor set backs, but in general things are getting better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
Mr Jaunts posted:Now that the floodgates have apparently been opened, will it be long until people start claiming that hiring black people is against their religion? Or is that too hyperbolic of a prediction? What do you mean hyperbolic? Religious freedom was used as an argument to discriminate against black people during the Civil Rights Movement, but fortunately no one in power actually listened to those horrible shitheads no matter how much they cried about how Jesus wants them to lynch every black man. But for some reason that I absolutely cannot fathom, the fundies try this exact same poo poo with gay and trans people, and a ton of neoliberals are all "Mmm, yes we've got to respect the very sincere religous belief that LGBT peope aren't people and deserve to starve to death in the gutter". I didn't even know before this that they'd put a reigious carveout in the ENDA. What the gently caress, that's like adding a footnote to the Civil Rights Act that says "Ignore the foregoing if you mutter something about Jesus before kicking the blacks out of your restaurant"
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Sorry GOP, you are loving up the nation that you've sworn to protect at all costs and you don't even see it. I think they do. They've got this Party-for-Hire dynamic and I think they're primarily working for oligarchic interests which no longer wish to be subsumed within institutional frameworks. Their agenda's consistent with aiming for a cross between Post-Soviet Russia and an unironic version of that speech from Network. Accretionist fucked around with this message at 20:34 on Jul 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:30
|
|
|
US Politics July: Of Unions and Uteri EDIT: Or, US Politics July: God Bless America(n men) Amergin fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Jul 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:The biggest sign of this, in the end, is that the right has declared that America is perfect, it can never fail, and needs no improvement. That's exactly the point where every empire begins its inevitable slide downward and also the point where the slide can't be stopped. It also goes unnoticed day by day because you think of things like "the fall of Rome," as if it were one singular incident where the empire was there one day and not the next. Rather, the decline is gradual. I though that actually lead to Caesar? Because was it not the Particans declaring nothing was wrong that lead to the rise of the populists?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:I though that actually lead to Caesar? Because was it not the Particans declaring nothing was wrong that lead to the rise of the populists? Julius Sanderus 
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:I think they do. They've got this Party-for-Hire dynamic and I think they're primarily working for oligarchic interests which no longer wish to be subsumed within institutional frameworks. It's like they're aiming for a cross between Post-Soviet Russia and an unironic version of that speech from Network. Network posted:There are no nations. There are no peoples. There are no Russians. There are no Arabs. There are no third worlds. There is no West. There is only one holistic system of systems, one vast and immane, interwoven, interacting, multivariate, multinational dominion of dollars. Petro-dollars, electro-dollars, multi-dollars, reichmarks, rins, rubles, pounds, and shekels. From 1976. Christ.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
Magres posted:Julius Sanderus I should have said the Grachi.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:What do you mean hyperbolic? Religious freedom was used as an argument to discriminate against black people during the Civil Rights Movement, but fortunately no one in power actually listened to those horrible shitheads no matter how much they cried about how Jesus wants them to lynch every black man. I don't know, I guess I just wanted to go on believing that we'd gotten past that. I guess not  And in other poo poo news, a decision in Halbig v. Burwell could eliminate the federal subsidies for people buying health insurance on the federal exchanges. Ugh.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
It really just never ends, does it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:42
|
|
|
Mr Jaunts posted:And in other poo poo news, a decision in Halbig v. Burwell could eliminate the federal subsidies for people buying health insurance on the federal exchanges. Ugh. On the bright side, it seems like it's too late for this. Even if the court rules against Obama here, and even if an en banc ruling confirms it, and even if the Supreme Court agrees on appeal, by the time it's all said and done, people will have had health care through the exchanges for two years already by the time SCOTUS rules on it. I can't believe the Republicans would do well after they've just yanked health care away from millions of people. I imagine a ruling against the subsidies would be the quickest way to push every single red state into opting into the ACA out of a massive populist backlash.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
Magres posted:Also given that Millenials lean fairly left, even if they don't think there's much difference between the parties they vote Democratic and that's a start to taking back our god damned country from the loving retarded lunatics that we know as the Tea Party. Everyone I know is a raging libertarian (even if they don't vote Ron Paul 2008) who thinks they're progressive for supporting gay marriage while ("ironically") hating anyone poorer and/or less white than them anyway so I'm not optimistic about this millennial future 
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:All I could find was a forwardprogressives.com link, but goddamn. Just how loving sheltered and facile are John Roberts and co. to actually believe that racism just Is Not A Problem Anymore and racism against white people and ARE RELIGIOUS FREEDOMS are of more pressing concern? As much as I hate Monday's ruling, I don't know if this one hold up to scrutiny. First, this case was heard by the Supreme Court in 1968, and he lost that 8-0. But the article says he was making a 1st amendment claim; didn't Hobby Lobby use the exemption in the ACA for religious non-profits to build their case?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
Oh yeah no one will blame the people who wrote the bill.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:On the bright side, it seems like it's too late for this. Even if the court rules against Obama here, and even if an en banc ruling confirms it, and even if the Supreme Court agrees on appeal, by the time it's all said and done, people will have had health care through the exchanges for two years already by the time SCOTUS rules on it. I can't believe the Republicans would do well after they've just yanked health care away from millions of people. I imagine a ruling against the subsidies would be the quickest way to push every single red state into opting into the ACA out of a massive populist backlash. Yeahhhhh we all know Republicans would just blame Obama and their base would eat it up like candy, come on now 
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
Can someone actually substantiate the whole pendulum argument with historical examples, preferably over a long term and not being subject to an overarching movement in a particular historical direction? I'd also like to exclude the New Deal era from this as it has yet to be seen if that was an aberration or not.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Yeahhhhh we all know Republicans would just blame Obama and their base would eat it up like candy, come on now Yep, they'll just say "Look, we told you it would fail! It can't hold up to scrutiny and went bankrupt and now Obama took away your healthcare. You were better off before Obamacare.". And people will believe it, and I will drink so heavily my liver pickles.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:On the bright side, it seems like it's too late for this. Even if the court rules against Obama here, and even if the Supreme Court agrees on appeal, by the time it's all said and done, people will have had health care through the exchanges for two years already by the time SCOTUS rules on it. I can't believe the Republicans would do well after they've just yanked health care away from millions of people. I imagine a ruling against the subsidies would be the quickest way to push every single red state into opting into the ACA out of a massive populist backlash.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:Most Americans don't actually approve of the ACA. Now once health care gets yanked away from them, they might, but there's just so many misunderstandings and so much misinformation about the law that I'm skeptical. Many Americans don't approve of the ACA because it doesn't go far enough.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Many Americans don't approve of the ACA because it doesn't go far enough.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
Magres posted:I wonder how many times Big O is going to have to veto repeals of the ACA. I'm guessing daily. That's one way to keep Obama "doing his job". Can't take a vacation in Hawaii for longer than 10 days if Congress keeps passing bills to repeal ACA.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:Most Americans don't actually approve of the ACA. Polls that show that result typically conflate "ACA goes too far", "ACA doesn't go far enough", and "ACA is bad but it's better than doing nothing/GOP proposals".
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
a shameful boehner posted:From 1976. Christ. Network is my favorite Glenn Beck biopic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Many Americans don't approve of the ACA because it doesn't go far enough. What are the latest polls regarding UHC?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
Oil! posted:The best way to stay positive is to look at the past and realize that the past 1000 years have been a steady progression to better quality of living for more people. Just over 50 years ago people were getting lynched and hit with fire hoses for racial equality. It may not be completely fixed, but it is getting better. 10 years ago states were passing laws preventing same sex marriage that are now being taken down. There may be minor set backs, but in general things are getting better. No. It has been getting better for about the last 200 years, if you ignore that was confined to white Europeans and Americans until the last 50, and gloss over the huge reversals in that. And even that was the result of the upheaval and revolutionary thinking kicked off from the industrial revolution and the past 100 years of fallout from that. At its most charitable things have only consistently gotten better for 200 years. And 200 years out of 12000 years isn't a trend, it is a rounding error. The idea that the "arc of history is long but it bends towards freedom" of democrats, or the "historical determinism towards socialism" of Marxists, or "spreading of freedom" by republicans, or "exponential growth of liberty" by libertarians is stunningly ahistorical; a suitable applause line in a speech, but one with no basis in reality. Things like the Harrappan civilization and the Hanseatic League brought about "steady progress to better quality of living" before and they were washed away with the tide of history. There is no intrinsic force that will make things constantly better. If anything the smart money is on a reversion to the norm
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
a shameful boehner posted:I had a coworker who just got a job doing design work for a mobile application for a company in Gothenburg who will be emigrating there in the next few months. I just got back from an interview for a job that may send me to Bremen. Germany may not be Sweden, but I'll still take it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:I've not seen any statistics that show that. Links? http://pos.org/2014/03/looking-beyond-voter-support-or-opposition-of-the-aca/
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:I've not seen any statistics that show that. Links? He's only half-right. A majority polled say it doesn't go far enough but, when pressed, often give conservative answers as to what they'd like to see (only 10% of the "not liberal enough" contingent wants single-payer). ComradeCosmobot fucked around with this message at 21:07 on Jul 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
Mr Jaunts posted:Dunno if this has been posted yet, but hot on the heels of the Hobby Lobby decision comes a letter asking for a religious exemption from Obama's executive order barring federal contractors from discriminating against LGBT folks. This article is conflating two entirely separate issues. The letter is asking for an exception for religious non-profits like churches, schools, charities, etc that are explicitly religious. These organizations already have the right to discriminate in most cases and the existing LGBT anti-discrimination laws in different states and municipalities have exemptions that allow this. A lot of people disagree with those exemptions but they are the status quo, and they are included in the proposed ENDA law as noted in the letter. The letter is just asking for these exemptions to be included in Obama's executive order like they have been included in the vast majority of ENDA laws already on the books. Hobby lobby, which isn't mentioned in the letter and is entirely unrelated, extends religious rights to for-profit "closely held" corporations in certain circumstances. This is obviously far more dangerous and more potentially damaging than giving religious exemptions to explicitly religious non-profits.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:He's only half-right. "Too liberal" and "not liberal enough" are bullshit qualifications. The average person doesn't know what would be more "liberal" because "liberal" is a slanderous term now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:No. It has been getting better for about the last 200 years, if you ignore that was confined to white Europeans and Americans until the last 50, and gloss over the huge reversals in that. And even that was the result of the upheaval and revolutionary thinking kicked off from the industrial revolution and the past 100 years of fallout from that. At its most charitable things have only consistently gotten better for 200 years. And 200 years out of 12000 years isn't a trend, it is a rounding error. This belongs in the argument thread OP.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:No. It has been getting better for about the last 200 years, if you ignore that was confined to white Europeans and Americans until the last 50, and gloss over the huge reversals in that. And even that was the result of the upheaval and revolutionary thinking kicked off from the industrial revolution and the past 100 years of fallout from that. At its most charitable things have only consistently gotten better for 200 years. And 200 years out of 12000 years isn't a trend, it is a rounding error. The grand arc of history has been one of humanity as a whole enjoying better standards of living and health (happiness is less tangible to quantify). That doesn't mean the Golden Path requires America to stick around forever though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 21:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 20:39 |
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:There is no intrinsic force that will make things constantly better. If anything the smart money is on a reversion to the norm On the other hand a "reversion to the norm" requires the total collapse of modern society and I tend to bet against the apocalypse.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 21:09
|
|