Democrating Efforts

Posted by: jgw

Democrating Efforts - 02/01/20 06:33 PM

I live in the state of Washington. The other night I noticed a new ad by Democrats. It was a bit strange. What it said, basically, was that all them nice Republicans should be nice and join up with the Democrats to fix things.

It was all very civilized and, I think, understanding. Basically it worked very hard to be unspecific and odd. I guess is their plan - plea with the Republicans to be nice?

I would have thought it might have been a bit better had they, at the very least, had mentioned 10 or 20 offenses currently being done by their dear leading the Jackass Trump. You know, little stuff, like destroying national monuments, downgrading drinking water specs, constantly lying, attacking social security, medicare, and medicaid, pricing national parks out of the reach of poor folks, trying to destroy public education, etc?
Posted by: Greger

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/01/20 07:29 PM

I haven't seen any political ads.

I've heard that DNC members are having a quiet conversation about re-instating the superdelegate rules they changed after 2016. Because Sanders might win and they need to stop him one way or another.
The voters cannot be allowed to decide!

They've changed the debate rules so that Bloomburg will be allowed to buy his way in.

I lied about political ads...Boomburg's face popped up on my phone this morning.

Oh...and Democrats are looking at a pretty good chance of a brokered convention where no candidate has enough delegates to win the nomination.

We fix'n to see some serious shenanigans going on within the Democratic Party to completely divide the voters. Just like 2016.

Then they gonna blame the lefties when they lose.

Ya'll hide and watch! See if I'm wrong! Hmm
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/01/20 07:40 PM

Originally Posted By: Greger
I haven't seen any political ads.

I've heard that DNC members are having a quiet conversation about re-instating the superdelegate rules they changed after 2016. Because Sanders might win and they need to stop him one way or another.
The voters cannot be allowed to decide!


---This is a big no no, all it will accomplish is a repeat of 2016.

Originally Posted By: Greger

They've changed the debate rules so that Bloomburg will be allowed to buy his way in.


Didn't Mike Bloomberg just edge past Liz Warren in a few states?
That means he is polling well enough that a "rules change" isn't the point, it's just a recognition of the inevitable, that Bloomberg is about to qualify anyway, if not this debate then the next one.

The more I think about this so called "BOMBSHELL" the more I wonder if it has a slight Borscht smell to it.
Is Bernie really that upset about the debate rules, or just pissed that Bloomberg is moving up?
I'd bet it's a bit of both and that Bernie would much rather just have kindly old fuddy duddy Biden to smack around.

Originally Posted By: Greger

Oh...and Democrats are looking at a pretty good chance of a brokered convention where no candidate has enough delegates to win the nomination.

We fix'n to see some serious shenanigans going on within the Democratic Party to completely divide the voters. Just like 2016.

Then they gonna blame the lefties when they lose.

Ya'll hide and watch! See if I'm wrong! Hmm


I hope you are but if the DNC moguls are allowed to get away with that crap, it's Trump 2020 guaranteed, and all the pissed off people that crap generates also guarantees we lose Congress all over again, too.

Talk about snatching defeat away from the jaws of victory...
Posted by: Greger

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/01/20 08:17 PM

Quote:
Talk about snatching defeat away from the jaws of victory...


If the DNC plays fair, lefties will vote blue. If the DNC plays like Donald Trump, lefties will feed them to the sharks.
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/02/20 05:06 AM

Originally Posted By: Greger
Quote:
Talk about snatching defeat away from the jaws of victory...


If the DNC plays fair, lefties will vote blue. If the DNC plays like Donald Trump, lefties will feed them to the sharks.


Well, in effect they will be feeding themselves to Trump.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/02/20 09:03 PM

I wonder. Bernie is NOT a Democrat. I am not saying that HE says that. He has not joined that party and he does not run as a Democrat for his seat, he runs as an independent. Now, I wonder, how many of his supporters are members of the Democratic party. I have heard a lot of stuff about the far left of the Democratic party but, I wonder, how many are actually Democrats?

If they are not then they cannot caucus, if they can't caucus they can't vote for Bernie. Bernie is a sneaky devil, however, and probably told them purists to join the Democratic party. The whole damn bunch of them should be sent to the American Socialist Party where they actually belong.

This is one deal that simply make no sense whatsoever as far as I am concerned.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 01:10 AM

I'm not a Democrat. In Florida I'm not allowed to vote in the primary.

I won't join the party to vote for Bernie. I also won't join it to vote against Biden.

Bernie's whole operation in 2016 and this year is aimed at primary voters though so it isn't something I think they are overlooking.

The Democratic Party is not a very exclusive club. By registering as a Democrat I become a Democrat. Bernie's running as a Democrat makes him a Democrat. He will be a Democratic president. He won't be a tool of the DNC though, and he won't kowtow to their corporatist agenda.
Posted by: Ma_Republican

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 12:33 PM

Originally Posted By: Greger
I haven't seen any political ads.

I've heard that DNC members are having a quiet conversation about re-instating the superdelegate rules they changed after 2016. Because Sanders might win and they need to stop him one way or another.
The voters cannot be allowed to decide!

They've changed the debate rules so that Bloomburg will be allowed to buy his way in.

I lied about political ads...Boomburg's face popped up on my phone this morning.

Oh...and Democrats are looking at a pretty good chance of a brokered convention where no candidate has enough delegates to win the nomination.

We fix'n to see some serious shenanigans going on within the Democratic Party to completely divide the voters. Just like 2016.

Then they gonna blame the lefties when they lose.

Ya'll hide and watch! See if I'm wrong! Hmm


You assume that there are centrist and conservative Dems, there are none.

My children both just bought houses. When they started to listen to politics, they were concerned that nobody was protecting their best interests. I admit, I failed to bring them up as Republicans and I will forever be ashamed of that, but they are bot really bright and they are beginning to see the truth. Both parties are looking to hook voters, the Dems don't care about their current voting base because they are true blue and don't really care about anything but subsidies and handouts. The Republicans don't care about their base either, but their policies are more neutral and have a positive affect on anybody who has invested or has a 401K.

The left is the left and trying to prove that they are lefter than the other candidate. The right has no competitors, Trump is the current champion and will remain so until he finishes his second term. That Trump is a moron doesn't enter the equation, because who do you really want overseeing your life, somebody who has their fingers into every aspect of it, or somebody who knows your are there, but can't really be bothered making sure that you are toeing the party line?

Have a great day and a better tomorrow,

Tim
Posted by: pdx rick

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 01:09 PM

Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
... the Dems don't care about their current voting base because they are true blue and don't really care about anything but subsidies and handouts...

That asinine canard is all you old tired Boomer Conservatives have. That gum has lost its flavor. It really has.

smile
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 01:39 PM

Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican

You assume that there are centrist and conservative Dems, there are none.

Could you provide some clarity on what “centrist” and “conservative” mean to you? Like examples of specific policy. Maybe use Social Security and Medicare, since they are trending issues.
Posted by: Ma_Republican

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 02:04 PM

Originally Posted By: pdx rick
Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
... the Dems don't care about their current voting base because they are true blue and don't really care about anything but subsidies and handouts...

That asinine canard is all you old tired Boomer Conservatives have. That gum has lost its flavor. It really has.

smile


Why do you assume that is an insult? I am just stating the facts, and as proof all one has to do is look at a voting map. The population centers are blue, the rest of the state is usually red. The reasons are obvious, cities need more infrastructure and the ability to get it from the government means that handouts are available. Only a fool doesn't take advantage of the largess of free money. The fact that I do not advocate for it doesn't mean that I do not understand why it happens.

Tim
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 02:08 PM

I just read that Trump’s idea of tightening up on disability fraud is projected to save a massive $2.6 billion over ten years, and will only cost $1.8 billion to administer.

There’s lots of meat on that bone to gnaw, but first I’d like to get a handle on what the centrist and conservative positions on it would be?
Posted by: Ma_Republican

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 02:17 PM

Let's look at your leading candidates:
Every one of the leading Dem candidates what large increases in Medicare. I must admit that if Lizzy were to actually get elected, in a headdress and feathers, and implement Medicare for all, I would retire the next day, but it doesn't mean that it would be the right thing to do. It just means that I am Republican enough to take advantage of every government program available.

Your leading candidates, except for maybe Biden, all want large increases in Social Security. I am not sure where Joe stands on that, because he really isn't sure. Once he gets a whiff of which way the wind is blowing, he will form his opinion in sand.

Look, the first thing that JFK did upon getting elected POTUS, was to cut taxes. There used to be blue dog Dems who actually held fiscally conservative views. Not NO politician, Republican or Dem, are fiscally conservative. The only difference is that Reps with throw the voting public a tax cut bone every now and then. The Dems just take all the money they can beg, borrow or steal and spend it on any special interest of the hour. The system is F@c$ed right now and nobody in either party wants to fix it. But there are no moderate Dems, never mind conservative Dems, in the House, just lemmings willing to follow Nancy down the path to oblivion because she is the best politician. The Republicans aren't much better, but hell, at least we have Rand Paul.

Tim
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 02:17 PM

Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
I am just stating the facts, and as proof all one has to do is look at a voting map. The population centers are blue, the rest of the state is usually red. The reasons are obvious, cities need more infrastructure and the ability to get it from the government means that handouts are available.

WOW! I never would have recognized that fact on my own.

Maybe that’s why I need you to explain about centrists and conservatives.
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 02:23 PM

Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
Let's look at your leading candidates:
Every one of the leading Dem candidates what large increases in Medicare.

It’s my understanding that they want even larger decreases in insurance premiums. As a dyed in the wool pragmatist, I like that math.
Posted by: perotista

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 02:39 PM

Playing to one's base during the primaries is a given. But in the general one needs to move toward the middle. History shows that on average those who identify themselves as Republicans and Democrats vote for their party's candidate 90% of the time regardless of who that candidate is.

There are times during a general election where candidates care too much about their base and fail to attract the independent voter ALA Hillary Clinton. But she had a tough job of uniting her party, retrieving, placating angry Sanders voters.

After the gaining the nomination I would say in order.
1 uniting your base
2 making sure you have or gain the full support of independents which lean toward you party. History shows on average independent leans vote for the party they lean toward roughly 75% of the time.
3 Try to attract the pure or true independent voter which have no leans. These pure/true independents swing wildly from one party to the next. One never knows which way they'll go. A true wildcard in any election. Their reason for voting for who they do also varies wildly from election to election. This last group usually makes up 6-10% in any election.

The electorate is made up of the following, taking Gallup's margin of error of plus or minus 3 points into consideration.

Those who affiliate or identify with the two major parties 55-60% of the total electorate. Independents who lean toward one party or the other 30-35% and pure or true independents 6-10%. These numbers are dynamic and change constantly, but usually from month to month remain within the perimeters above.
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 02:40 PM

Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
Your leading candidates, except for maybe Biden, all want large increases in Social Security.

I hadn't heard that one. How to they plan to pay for it, by removing the taxable income caps on rich people?

I agree, it would be very unfair to take more money from rich people for the unnecessary purpose of preventing the elderly from living in poverty. The rich people really need that money for their own comfort and security.
Posted by: Hamish Howl

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 03:03 PM

Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
Originally Posted By: Greger
I haven't seen any political ads.

I've heard that DNC members are having a quiet conversation about re-instating the superdelegate rules they changed after 2016. Because Sanders might win and they need to stop him one way or another.
The voters cannot be allowed to decide!

They've changed the debate rules so that Bloomburg will be allowed to buy his way in.

I lied about political ads...Boomburg's face popped up on my phone this morning.

Oh...and Democrats are looking at a pretty good chance of a brokered convention where no candidate has enough delegates to win the nomination.

We fix'n to see some serious shenanigans going on within the Democratic Party to completely divide the voters. Just like 2016.

Then they gonna blame the lefties when they lose.

Ya'll hide and watch! See if I'm wrong! Hmm


You assume that there are centrist and conservative Dems, there are none.

My children both just bought houses. When they started to listen to politics, they were concerned that nobody was protecting their best interests. I admit, I failed to bring them up as Republicans and I will forever be ashamed of that, but they are bot really bright and they are beginning to see the truth. Both parties are looking to hook voters, the Dems don't care about their current voting base because they are true blue and don't really care about anything but subsidies and handouts. The Republicans don't care about their base either, but their policies are more neutral and have a positive affect on anybody who has invested or has a 401K.

The left is the left and trying to prove that they are lefter than the other candidate. The right has no competitors, Trump is the current champion and will remain so until he finishes his second term. That Trump is a moron doesn't enter the equation, because who do you really want overseeing your life, somebody who has their fingers into every aspect of it, or somebody who knows your are there, but can't really be bothered making sure that you are toeing the party line?

Have a great day and a better tomorrow,

Tim


You seem to exist solely as a collection of right wing talking points concerning the left wing.
Posted by: Hamish Howl

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 03:04 PM

Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
Originally Posted By: pdx rick
Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
... the Dems don't care about their current voting base because they are true blue and don't really care about anything but subsidies and handouts...

That asinine canard is all you old tired Boomer Conservatives have. That gum has lost its flavor. It really has.

smile


Why do you assume that is an insult? I am just stating the facts, and as proof all one has to do is look at a voting map. The population centers are blue, the rest of the state is usually red. The reasons are obvious, cities need more infrastructure and the ability to get it from the government means that handouts are available. Only a fool doesn't take advantage of the largess of free money. The fact that I do not advocate for it doesn't mean that I do not understand why it happens.

Tim


This would normally be the time to bring up the fact that red states tend to operate in the red at the expense of blue states, but these are not normal times, so I'm not going to do that.
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 04:01 PM

Where did Ma_R go? We were just getting some interesting topics on the table to discuss.
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 05:08 PM

Originally Posted By: Hamish Howl


You seem to exist solely as a collection of right wing talking points concerning the left wing.


We used to have a large collection of folks who would copy/paste RW talking points, thinking that's what debate is. I guess we eventually wore a lot of them down.

But notice how when you get a con who CAN debate, it gets interesting?
Because it is interesting. Keeps me honest, that's all I know.

How much mileage can one get out of "libtards are all poopyheads"?

As for MaR's assertion that large population centers generally go blue because they need infrastructure and spending on services, of course!
What do you expect large cities to do, hold bake sales and charge sidewalk tolls the moment you leave your apartment?

Every single time an entire state, or even a large city, tries to do the libertarian "drown government in the bathtub" thing, the tax base gets pissed off because quality of life in the city takes a steep nosedive.

I get that it's a time honored American tradition to bitch and moan about paying taxes, but we tried running large cities without them, and it was an endless series of disasters, epidemics, crime waves, garbage piling up everywhere, homes and businesses burning and starting large fire conflagrations that consumed entire neighborhoods, buildings collapsing, poisoned water, you simply cannot run a decent size city without a healthy tax base.

It's been tried before. It didn't work.

There's a collection of urban tax havens in some Brazilian cities.
They're called "favelas", and folks in favelas NEVER pay taxes...except they do pay, and pay and pay and pay, just not to the city. Instead, they wind up paying "protection" to the drug lords who run the favelas.
So you see, even when you eliminate taxation altogether in an urban environment, someone eventually comes around and demands you pay up anyway.
Posted by: Hamish Howl

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 06:38 PM

Originally Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas

How much mileage can one get out of "libtards are all poopyheads"?


Based on DP and Facebook, the answer is "all the mileage," because there isn't actually a debate, just people looking for in-group validation.


Quote:
Every single time an entire state, or even a large city, tries to do the libertarian "drown government in the bathtub" thing, the tax base gets pissed off because quality of life in the city takes a steep nosedive.


Yeah, that's even worse than it appears.

https://www.opb.org/news/article/polk-co...mergency-calls/

Quote:
I get that it's a time honored American tradition to bitch and moan about paying taxes,


It's 240 years of incessant whining by people who can't connect "paying the bills" with "any level of civilization at all."
Posted by: Hamish Howl

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 06:42 PM

From the link I posted, I give you the libertarian paradise:

Quote:
“Cuts will occur this year, and again next year. There is no stable funding right now based on our tax rate; due to that, employees are going where there’s more stability,” Wolfe said.

Due to the short staffing, sometimes the sheriff himself responds when the officer on duty calls and requests back up. Wolfe says effective on March 1, no one will be scheduled to provide patrol for four hours every day, and he will only authorize overtime during those hours in response to 911 calls involving an assault with a documented injury.

“If there is a traffic crash that is blocking the highway, we’re not responding. If there is a theft in progress, we’re not responding. I cannot pay deputies to come out of bed in the middle of the night to respond to calls when I don’t have the funding,” Wolf says.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 06:56 PM

I thought I might add that not once have the Dems taken over from the Republicans without inheriting a financial disaster. Obama, for instance, inherited the worst recession since the depression of 1920.

As a proud Republican I can see that you may have missed that one and every other one of Dems winning against Republicans. Kinda says something about the grand plans of the Republicans. Right now they are running historic deficits and apparently adding 1 TRILLION to the debt every year. I know, Obama added to the debt - the difference is that he, basically, saved the entire economy from absolute failure. Anyway, next time you claim Republican fiscal responsibility be careful!
Posted by: Ma_Republican

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 07:16 PM

Originally Posted By: jgw
I thought I might add that not once have the Dems taken over from the Republicans without inheriting a financial disaster. Obama, for instance, inherited the worst recession since the depression of 1920.

As a proud Republican I can see that you may have missed that one and every other one of Dems winning against Republicans. Kinda says something about the grand plans of the Republicans. Right now they are running historic deficits and apparently adding 1 TRILLION to the debt every year. I know, Obama added to the debt - the difference is that he, basically, saved the entire economy from absolute failure. Anyway, next time you claim Republican fiscal responsibility be careful!


I have been arguing this for almost 30 years here at CHB, it isn't fiscal conservancy that people want, it is fiscal spending, as high and mighty as possible, as long as they agree with where the money is getting spent. The fact that Trump, who at various times has been a Democrat and a Republican (but always a moron), is spending at ridiculous levels, doesn't mean that the Dems wouldn't howl if he decided to reduce government spending. They would cut that money in different places in the budget and spend it on something that they like, just like the Republicans do.

It is the same animal, just different colors with different priorities. The budget deficits are so large right now, that thinking that they will ever be reduced is a fairy tale. There will be algebraic gymnastics in future budgets that claim they will reduce the deficit by 2% over 10 years, but we know that will never happen. Both sides suck, nothing can be done about it.
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 07:26 PM

Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
The budget deficits are so large right now, that thinking that they will ever be reduced is a fairy tale. There will be algebraic gymnastics in future budgets that claim they will reduce the deficit by 2% over 10 years, but we know that will never happen.

I may have missed it, but how do tax cuts figure into your algebraic gymnastics? According to one point of view, it's really stupid to cut back on income when you are buying stuff and need to make payments.
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 07:32 PM

Let me put that into a simpler question: why would anyone cut taxes when we are running increasing deficits?
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 07:40 PM

Originally Posted By: Hamish Howl


Yeah, that's even worse than it appears.

https://www.opb.org/news/article/polk-co...mergency-calls/



Looks like they succeeded in drowning that thar gubmint in the bathtub alright.
Posted by: Hamish Howl

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 07:54 PM

Originally Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas
Originally Posted By: Hamish Howl


Yeah, that's even worse than it appears.

https://www.opb.org/news/article/polk-co...mergency-calls/



Looks like they succeeded in drowning that thar gubmint in the bathtub alright.


I'm sure it will work out just fine for everyone involved.
Posted by: Hamish Howl

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 07:58 PM

Originally Posted By: logtroll
Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
The budget deficits are so large right now, that thinking that they will ever be reduced is a fairy tale. There will be algebraic gymnastics in future budgets that claim they will reduce the deficit by 2% over 10 years, but we know that will never happen.

I may have missed it, but how do tax cuts figure into your algebraic gymnastics? According to one point of view, it's really stupid to cut back on income when you are buying stuff and need to make payments.


Very much this.

In a high tech society, you are going to spend or you are going to take immediate downgrades in your standard of living. So slashing revenues isn't really a sane option.

It is also worth mentioning that I spent quite a bit of time working on taxes last month, and the sorts of allowances made to working and middle class people took a beating, while life just got way easier on rich folks and C corporations.

Of course what the C corporations did was massive stock buybacks. Investment wasn't really a thing.
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 08:23 PM

Originally Posted By: Hamish Howl
Originally Posted By: logtroll
Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
The budget deficits are so large right now, that thinking that they will ever be reduced is a fairy tale. There will be algebraic gymnastics in future budgets that claim they will reduce the deficit by 2% over 10 years, but we know that will never happen.

I may have missed it, but how do tax cuts figure into your algebraic gymnastics? According to one point of view, it's really stupid to cut back on income when you are buying stuff and need to make payments.


Very much this.

In a high tech society, you are going to spend or you are going to take immediate downgrades in your standard of living. So slashing revenues isn't really a sane option.

It is also worth mentioning that I spent quite a bit of time working on taxes last month, and the sorts of allowances made to working and middle class people took a beating, while life just got way easier on rich folks and C corporations.

Of course what the C corporations did was massive stock buybacks. Investment wasn't really a thing.



For the enlightenment of all, please remind everyone why big corps love stock buybacks. It's a truly perverted reason...well....not for them but for anyone else.
Posted by: Hamish Howl

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 08:25 PM

Originally Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas
Originally Posted By: Hamish Howl
Originally Posted By: logtroll
Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
The budget deficits are so large right now, that thinking that they will ever be reduced is a fairy tale. There will be algebraic gymnastics in future budgets that claim they will reduce the deficit by 2% over 10 years, but we know that will never happen.

I may have missed it, but how do tax cuts figure into your algebraic gymnastics? According to one point of view, it's really stupid to cut back on income when you are buying stuff and need to make payments.


Very much this.

In a high tech society, you are going to spend or you are going to take immediate downgrades in your standard of living. So slashing revenues isn't really a sane option.

It is also worth mentioning that I spent quite a bit of time working on taxes last month, and the sorts of allowances made to working and middle class people took a beating, while life just got way easier on rich folks and C corporations.

Of course what the C corporations did was massive stock buybacks. Investment wasn't really a thing.



For the enlightenment of all, please remind everyone why big corps love stock buybacks. It's a truly perverted reason...well....not for them but for anyone else.


It's simple. The act of buying back the stock drives the stock price up. The board is composed of majority shareholders who benefit from the rising price of their stock.

Of course, it screws everyone else up, most especially the company itself (which becomes under capitalized by definition), but the big boys make some big $$$.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/03/20 09:35 PM

It doesn't hurt everybody. In particular if some (usually elderly) individual owns that stock say in a retirement portfolio, then they benefit by the share price rising if they sell it. You have to keep in mind that every stock transaction has both a buyer and a seller. One of those may be the company of the stock, or maybe not.
Posted by: Ma_Republican

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/04/20 05:32 PM

Originally Posted By: logtroll
Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
The budget deficits are so large right now, that thinking that they will ever be reduced is a fairy tale. There will be algebraic gymnastics in future budgets that claim they will reduce the deficit by 2% over 10 years, but we know that will never happen.

I may have missed it, but how do tax cuts figure into your algebraic gymnastics? According to one point of view, it's really stupid to cut back on income when you are buying stuff and need to make payments.


There is a theory that by cutting taxes, the population has more money to spend, increasing tax revenue. In theory it is an elegant assumption, in reality it doesn't really work. People are usually inclined to pay their bills, pay their kids college bills, or go to the casino.

In my opinion, every tax cut is a pay raise, and I will take every pay raise that I can get. The Dems refuse to pay down the deficit, the Reps refuse to not keep increasing the deficit, however the Reps will sometimes grow a pair and introduce a tax cut. The last one got me almost $200.00 a month in extra money. Nobody is going to pay down the deficit, nobody in government cares about the deficit, nobody in the private sector wants to think about the deficit.

Mr. Trump, PLEASE push another middle class tax cut through! I would really like another $200 per month in my paycheck. Given the choice of taking care of my family, or some theoretical struggling immigrant who needs a subsidy to make it, I choose my family. Hell, given the choice between the immigrant and take out Chinese food, I choose Chinese food. That is Democrating, my vote is money in my pocket, if I lose the popular vote, and I can't impeach somebody to change the outcome of the popular vote, then I guess I forfeit my Chinese.

But, I will bet on the Chinese food option. People like it when taxes are cut. Charity starts at home and the government never really wants to help you as much as it wants to help itself. Besides, who doesn't like take out Chinese?

Tim
Posted by: Hamish Howl

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/04/20 05:42 PM

Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican


There is a theory that by cutting taxes, the population has more money to spend, increasing tax revenue. In theory it is an elegant assumption, in reality it doesn't really work.


And there you have it.

Some things look great on paper, but just aren't so.
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/04/20 06:24 PM

Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
In my opinion, every tax cut is a pay raise, and I will take every pay raise that I can get.

Tim, when you go to the automatic teller and you get a $200 cash advance on your credit card, do you consider that to be a pay raise?
Posted by: jgw

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/04/20 06:48 PM

It may be of interest that Obama was steadily reducing the deficit when he left. He had also been working on the national debt as well. Instead of continuing that the jackass Trump decided debt was good (he always did claim he was "the master of debt"). Anway, his solution to debt was simply to not pay it! He had a very long history of that.

Here are some links to understand the national debt (best I've found - easy to understand)
If you read it all it will help you, in part, understand why Trump is messing with SS.
https://www.thebalance.com/national-debt-under-obama-3306293
https://www.thebalance.com/the-u-s-debt-and-how-it-got-so-big-3305778
https://www.thebalance.com/what-is-the-national-debt-4031393

The result is that we have a president with absolutely no respect for debt. Since the Republicans are forgiving his behavior (they now admit that he did bahave badly) perhaps he will forgive the nation debt, destroy the dollar, and bring on a complete collapse of our economy. Then, perhaps, they might understand why the rest of us are concerned with his behavior?
Posted by: Ma_Republican

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/04/20 07:24 PM

Originally Posted By: logtroll
Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
In my opinion, every tax cut is a pay raise, and I will take every pay raise that I can get.

Tim, when you go to the automatic teller and you get a $200 cash advance on your credit card, do you consider that to be a pay raise?


The big difference is that when I go to an ATM, I never get a cash advance, it is my money, to spend as I see fit. A tax cut is also, in theory, my money. However, I will never have to repay it, as it is obvious that the deficit will never be repaid. I can beat my head against the wall, or I can just take the money and bank it.

I like to tell people that Momma raised ugly kids, not dumb kids. Turning down free money is dumb, and a tax cut is as free as money gets.

Tim
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/04/20 07:57 PM

Thanks, that explains everything...
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/04/20 08:52 PM

Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
I like to tell people that Momma raised ugly kids, not dumb kids. Turning down free money is dumb, and a tax cut is as free as money gets.

I have another question - do you think there are many right-wingers who are actually fiscally conservative, or better yet fiscally responsible?

Or all they all just selfishly greedy without a care for the consequences?
Posted by: Greger

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/04/20 09:55 PM

Quote:
In my opinion, every tax cut is a pay raise, and I will take every pay raise that I can get.


Me too! My property tax just got cut in half because I'm old, poor, and crippled. That and the COLA on the SS check added up to about $70 a month so I'm walkin' in high cotton this year!
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/04/20 09:57 PM

Originally Posted By: Greger
Quote:
In my opinion, every tax cut is a pay raise, and I will take every pay raise that I can get.


Me too! My property tax just got cut in half because I'm old, poor, and crippled. That and the COLA on the SS check was was about $70 Bucks a month so I'm walkin' in high cotton this year!

Tsk, tsk... you and Timbo are peas in a pod!
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/05/20 02:06 AM

I don't mind giving working people a $200 tax cut. Great idea! But when you give the Waltons a 20 million dollar tax cut at the same time, something is rotten in Denmark.
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/05/20 03:38 PM

Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
I don't mind giving working people a $200 tax cut. Great idea! But when you give the Waltons a 20 million dollar tax cut at the same time, something is rotten in Denmark.


I mind when Exxon gets a billion or more in tax REFUNDS.
I mind when Amazon pays ZERO.
I mind the way Warren Buffett minds, that his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does.

Yeah yeah yeah I've heard the stock answer: "Buffett can always mail a check for the difference if he feels that guilty."

That isn't the point.
Posted by: Ma_Republican

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/05/20 04:16 PM

Originally Posted By: logtroll
Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
I like to tell people that Momma raised ugly kids, not dumb kids. Turning down free money is dumb, and a tax cut is as free as money gets.

I have another question - do you think there are many right-wingers who are actually fiscally conservative, or better yet fiscally responsible?

Or all they all just selfishly greedy without a care for the consequences?


You say greedy, I say pragmatic. There comes a time when fighting is just too hard. I am fiscally responsible and fiscally conservative. I pay my bills on time, do not usually run a deficit and have enough to put some in the savings account for a rainy day (or a vacation).

I refuse to be shamed. You don't want free money, send it my way and I will take your share too. I have no say in how my taxes are spent, if I did we would be paying much less in taxes. My representatives in congress do not share my fiscal conservancy, as a matter of fact, they are the exact opposite of what I believe in.

If they want to return some of my tax contributions, I will take the money and run. You should do the same, because if you really believe that the government will be there for you when you need it, I have some beach front property in Iowa. I will show it to you on an app.

Tim
Posted by: Hamish Howl

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/05/20 04:56 PM

Originally Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas
Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
I don't mind giving working people a $200 tax cut. Great idea! But when you give the Waltons a 20 million dollar tax cut at the same time, something is rotten in Denmark.


I mind when Exxon gets a billion or more in tax REFUNDS.
I mind when Amazon pays ZERO.
I mind the way Warren Buffett minds, that his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does.

Yeah yeah yeah I've heard the stock answer: "Buffett can always mail a check for the difference if he feels that guilty."

That isn't the point.


This is precisely why capitalism is a doomed model.

Capitalism is only 150 years old. There hasn't yet been time for the average Joe to see the built in failure mode, mostly because the people who doom the system (billionaires, by today's standards) have been remarkable effective in making sure the vast majority of people don't get it.

Liquidity sumps are an immutable part of capitalism. Money arrives at these sumps and stops moving (ie, Apple or Amazon).

So Jeff Bezos wins, and all the wannabe tycoons lose, but still screech out their support for mathematically-guaranteed failure.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/05/20 08:17 PM

Whoever takes over, after the 2020 election, cannot give any tax breaks without wrecking the economy. We are already at a serious tipping point (our tax debt is bigger than our annual GDP!) Tax breaks would cause it all to come apart, you know, little things like a dollar becoming worth approximately 2 cents and jobs going away.

I know what will happen if the Dems take charge. They will behave exactly like they normally do. They will try their best to fix the debt problem (normally without pointing out where it came from and who did it). They will raise taxes but, hopefully, they will work with corporations and the very rich. We should remember, we are, right now, experiencing the benefits of the Bush tax cut and the Obama tax cut. I fear the Trump tax cut has broken the proverbial back.

Anyway, in the fullness of time..................
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/06/20 02:17 AM

Originally Posted By: Ma_Republican
You say greedy, I say pragmatic. There comes a time when fighting is just too hard. I am fiscally responsible and fiscally conservative. I pay my bills on time, do not usually run a deficit and have enough to put some in the savings account for a rainy day (or a vacation).

I refuse to be shamed. You don't want free money, send it my way and I will take your share too. I have no say in how my taxes are spent, if I did we would be paying much less in taxes. My representatives in congress do not share my fiscal conservancy, as a matter of fact, they are the exact opposite of what I believe in.

If they want to return some of my tax contributions, I will take the money and run. You should do the same, because if you really believe that the government will be there for you when you need it, I have some beach front property in Iowa. I will show it to you on an app.

Tim

I was agreeing with you, Tim, not fighting. You are just one of those patriots who needs a full menu of laws and regulations to keep you an honest and team-playing American!
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/15/20 07:31 PM

Trump has no respect at all for the Constitution or the Republic no matter how much his supporters claim otherwise and he represents a clear and present threat to this Republic.

The fact that Trump can spend money to yell COMMIE COMMIE COMMIE at every Democratic candidate is not a measure by which we should choose a candidate, just because so called "independents" might get scared the second Trump calls them a commie.

NEWS FLASH: Trump and Trumpers think anyone who doesn't like Trump is a commie, even other Republicans!

Independents are hereby on notice to explain why they should honor anything Trump claims given the above .

Not only are independents now required to justify their air of superiority, they are now required to prove it lock stock and barrel because if they're so timid that just hearing Trump yell COMMIE one time is enough to shake the foundations of their values, then it sounds like they're turning the word "independent" into a synonym for "uninformed idiot".

If they're not uninformed idiots, they should be able to see right through Trump's weak sauce red baiting AND they should also be able to make an intelligent determination as to the policies and values of the Democratic candidates as well as any other candidates.

I'm fed up with people walking around acting superior by claiming they are "independent" and then proving that they really don't even know as much as either Republicans OR Democrats.

It's like watching old bikers walking around claiming they are "patriots" while proving that they have no respect for anything remotely patriotic, or "Constitutionalists" that don't know f*ck-all about the Constitution, or Christians who don't know f*ck-all about Christ.

I might as well tell everyone I'm a doctor, because I read about healthcare a lot.
Hey!!! I'm "an independent" doctor!!!
I don't believe in the AMA and I attended medical school at the University of Hard Knocks!

Bullshit bullshit bullshit ad nauseum.
Sorry so called "independents"...not all of you get the "free pass" and not all of you ever deserved any kind of a pass.
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/15/20 08:05 PM

Originally Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas
I might as well tell everyone I'm a doctor, because I read about healthcare a lot.

Did you, by chance, ever stay at a Holiday Inn Express?
Posted by: jgw

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/15/20 09:26 PM

I am not sure about what you are answering.

Apparently you don't understand why I believe something Trump said? I believe absolutely NOTHING Trump says. He lies 80% of the time, in incredibly ignorant, and I refuse to actually listen to him at all!

I also have absolutely no idea how one "honors" the jackass trump.

I guess I am an independent. I vote for the best I can find. Most of the time that would be a Democrat but I have strayed, over the years. I did NOT vote for Trump and will vote for whoever runs as a Democrat this time around as I want that Jackass gone!

I am not sure about Trump crying COMMIE all the time, I suspect he also mixes in, a lot, "SOCIALIST". I do, however, believe that comes from the simple fact of the Democrats constantly using the word "socialist".

OH, my wife signed me up as a Democrat years ago. Right now half my email is from Democrats begging for money <sigh>

Many currently claiming to be a patriot, etc., as far as I can tell, are those who believe they REALLY understand America. Some of those would be White Supremacists, anti-vaxxers, etc. who tend to march around a lot waving flags (American, and oddities). There is a kindofa standard setup. Normal folks might wave a flag or two, the really serious jerks tend to have EVERYBODY waving a flag. Just watch a hundred march and EVERYBODY had a flag. It was almost very exiting.
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/15/20 09:30 PM

I am hearing so much talk about how Democrats have to stay away from anyone who might have the slightest deviation from "moderate" because "it might frighten the independents"...or the other excuse: "it might frighten the moderates".

It's being said in the media, it's been bandied about in discussion forums, etc.

First I posed one question, got no answer. The first question was, "If we do elect a moderate, who are the so called "moderates" in the GOP they're supposed to work with, where ARE these so called "moderate" Republicans?"
Now I am asking "Where are these independents and what makes them feel so superior that they call themselves independents?"

That's not a slam, it's an honest question.
If a person is independent, and yet they are frightened by someone who is a wee bit different from the rest of the slate of candidates, then they're not all that independent.
I say that because it makes that "independent" sound much more like one of the moderates.

So to me, all the talk about independents and moderates sounds like a bunch of undefined buzz words.

The moderates and the independents are both bringing a lot of pressure on people to avoid making any kind of a choice that might scare them off.
I think it is perfectly legitimate to want to know who we should expect to work with on the other side, because from where I sit, all I see is "Party of Trump".

The Republican Party IS the Party of Trump now.
They are not moderate and they are not independent, they are neither.
So that has a very profound effect, one would think, on the choices we are going to make.

Personally, I like Bernie Sanders, but I am realistic enough to understand that, like any other candidate, there is no guarantee.
I am buoyed by his emergence as a lead with great numbers so far, but it is early yet, so this field could shake out any number of ways in the coming months.
That informs ME that I need to have alternate choices.

And for that reason, I am feeling stymied by all the pressure to select "moderates" because after watching Obama the Moderate get crushed for eight years, I just don't see the value in choosing a "moderate".
No one on the other side sees our moderates as anything but target practice.

And we should all take that very much into account.
I hope that makes more sense.
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/15/20 09:42 PM

Here's a popular moderate talking point:
"If we elect Bernie, business will abandon the US markets, manufacturing, services, etc. Jobs will plummet and there will be mass loss of wealth and value, everyone will feel the hit."

Oct. 26 and Oct. 29 of last year (weekend in between) Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos' stock lost $19.2 billion over those two trading days.
TWENTY BILLION DOLLARS.

Did YOU GAIN any of that lost wealth?
Did you become more affluent?
Was your earning potential personally impacted?

I can point to similar consecutive trading days where companies like Amazon GAINED tens of billions.

Again, did you become more affluent? Was your earning potential personally impacted?

The moderates seem to think that all our "precious billionaires" might pull a "JOHN GALT" (Oooooo be very scared!) and punish us.
Like we're not being punished now?
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/15/20 09:47 PM

The Republicans have gone to great efforts to demonize "liberal" "centrist", "moderate", etc. to be coequal with socialist and communist. So what's the difference? They freak out at the idea of a "Democrat" winning the presidency. I suspect they all know they have done some very bad and un-American things and when the power swings back to Democrats, they will have to answer for those things. The House of Cards collapses.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/16/20 09:38 PM

The liberal, centrist, moderate thing is interesting. What the pollsters have found that none of that makes any difference at all. In my local paper the Sunday question was, what president did you like best. there were 7 answers. The first was "Kennedy and Trump". My first response was "HUH?" Then it dawned on me. The person who answered wasn't talking about politics at all! She actually answered the question, She 'liked' Kennedy and she 'liked' Trump. I suspect this is how most people vote too. They vote for who they 'like'. first comes the political blather and most listen and discount the whole thing. People vote for who they like and, when voting for president tend to put a lot of their decision on how things are. Right now they are pretty good! People talk about the homeless, the poor that are not paid enough, etc. but, still - they vote for who they like!

Bernie's problem, basically, is that he is not real likeable. He also says that youth are voting more now which, it turns out is a flat out lie. so, Bernie also lies? This might be a big deal if most of them have the same problem one way or another.

Your thought that politicians have to answer for whatever is also not quite true. That only happens if a particular voter, making a decision, has considered anything but whether he/she likes the candidate. If they do not, and want to justify, they might, otherwise they just don't care. I have heard a bunch of stuff that tends to infer that they have faith in the mythic American Voting Public. Really, REALLY? Sorry, I just don't buy it.

Just looked this one over. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. The simple fact is that politics rarely make a whole lot of sense and tends to move around a lot. Right and wrong are a big part of politics and the problem there is that Right and wrong, in any other conversation might make sense. When dealing with polics, however, right and wrong are moving targets no matter which side.

Just saying........
Posted by: Greger

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/16/20 10:04 PM

Quote:
Bernie's problem, basically, is that he is not real likeable.


Hillary already used that line and it flopped. Turns out an awful lot of people like Bernie. He's been climbing in the polls ever since.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/16/20 10:14 PM

Then there’s them polls....

Sanders Demolishes Bloomberg, Buttigieg, and Klobuchar Head-to-Head, Says New Poll
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/16/20 10:16 PM

Leftists political economists, politicians, supporters have been pointing to the economic realities for years.
The far right, as in times past, copies the language of the left.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/17/20 07:28 PM

Hillary may have said it first but I believe it. He doesn't inspire me and he comes off as an angry old man. I am not alone on this one. Its just the way it is.

this is yet another one of them things that comes under the heading of "we will all know eventually".

I have, incidentally, voted for somebody I really didn't like a couple of times. I can't imagine why anybody would care but, I guess, its somehow important to some.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/17/20 07:30 PM

then there are them facts. I remember when Hillary was winning, according to the polls, right up to when she wasn't any more.
Posted by: Hamish Howl

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/17/20 07:35 PM

Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
The Republicans have gone to great efforts to demonize "liberal" "centrist", "moderate", etc. to be coequal with socialist and communist. So what's the difference? They freak out at the idea of a "Democrat" winning the presidency. I suspect they all know they have done some very bad and un-American things and when the power swings back to Democrats, they will have to answer for those things. The House of Cards collapses.


If they are not made to answer for those things, as the staff at Guantanamo Bay (and the politicians giving the orders) were not made to pay, as Nixon was pardoned by Ford, then it doesn't matter in the long run who wins the election.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/18/20 10:01 PM

The whole idea of "A Nation of Laws" may just be expecting too much from the average voter. Remember, nobody teaches civics any more. Many people just have never even been exposed to the concept. It's not so much they are stupid, just ignorant. The one hope, is that judges tend to know what that means, and why we want that.

I see Trump is busy pardoning as many high-profile scoundrels as he can find. It's not even partisan: He just commuted Blago's corruption sentence, and he's an Illinois Democrat! Obviously, Trump wants to create an acceptance of letting crooks walk free so his pardon of himself remains unchallenged. His one hangup may be that to accept a pardon, you have to admit you committed the crime. If he steadfastly refuses to admit guilt, he just might run out the clock on his Presidency without resigning so Pence can pardon him.
Posted by: Hamish Howl

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/18/20 10:07 PM

Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
The whole idea of "A Nation of Laws" may just be expecting too much from the average voter. Remember, nobody teaches civics any more.


This is of course deliberate. The republican attacks on public education began right after Brown v Board of Education and the very first thing they attacked was civics.
Posted by: CPWILL

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/18/20 11:23 PM

Originally Posted By: Hamish Howl
Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
The Republicans have gone to great efforts to demonize "liberal" "centrist", "moderate", etc. to be coequal with socialist and communist. So what's the difference? They freak out at the idea of a "Democrat" winning the presidency. I suspect they all know they have done some very bad and un-American things and when the power swings back to Democrats, they will have to answer for those things. The House of Cards collapses.


If they are not made to answer for those things, as the staff at Guantanamo Bay (and the politicians giving the orders) were not made to pay, as Nixon was pardoned by Ford, then it doesn't matter in the long run who wins the election.


This exact same conversation happened within the GOP in 2015/2016.


1. No President is going to want to set the precedent that the President gets prosecuted for what they did while President knowing the other team will almost certainly then do it to them.

2. Incoming Presidential administrations like expanded executive power. Regardless of party, therefore, they won't want it's abuses curbed because they wish to double-down on and possibly expand those abuses.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/20/20 03:03 AM

Democrats won't want to elect a dictator, and still believe in checks and balances. So I doubt the new Democrat in the office will try anything remotely like Trump. And even if the new President pardoned Trump, he still faces New York state charges for tax and bank fraud, money laundering, charitable foundation fraud, etc. All of his protection goes away as soon as the next guy is in office. The next President won't have anything to do with Trump's prosecution. It will be up to the US AG and the New York state AG.

That's why I think Trump will flee sometime between November and January.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/20/20 06:13 PM

Quote:
Trump will flee


Nah. He's got away with this sh*t his whole life. He has already fled to Florida. Where there is no state income tax.

In regards to executive power, Republicans seize it while in office, but scream bloody murder if a Democrat attempts to use it. The unitary executive clause of the constitution specifies that only Republicans are entitled to it.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/21/20 10:32 PM

But Florida is running away from him: When all those ex-felons get to vote, Florida is turning Blue. I suspect few Cubans will vote for him, either. Not to mention all the sane Black folks.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/21/20 11:37 PM

Remember the 2018 Blue Wave?

We elected another Republican governor who is an avowed trump supporter and our former TEA Party Governor defeated our incumbent Democratic Senator.

The State Democratic Party here is two part timers and four elderly volunteers.
Posted by: pdx rick

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/22/20 12:40 AM

Originally Posted By: Greger
Remember the 2018 Blue Wave?

We elected another Republican governor who is an avowed trump supporter and our former TEA Party Governor defeated our incumbent Democratic Senator.

Didn't your SecState who was also running for gov commit some shenanigans? Hmm
Posted by: Greger

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/22/20 01:12 AM

The Democratic candidate was the progressive mayor of Tallahassee.
He was under investigation for some sort of ethics violations. He was also black.

One recently appointed Republican SecState had to resign almost immediately as pictures of him in blackface surfaced.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/22/20 06:08 AM

I think every blackface accusation needs to be looked at in context. Playing Othello in a Shakespeare play is fine. Putting on a minstrel show where you are making fun of Black stereotypes, not so much. Unless all the characters playing those parts ARE actually Black.

I think a whole fraternity chapter donning blackface to freak out new pledges is kind of hilarious. In that case, the victims of the joke would be the new pledges and not Black people in general.
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/22/20 08:43 AM

Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
I think every blackface accusation needs to be looked at in context. Playing Othello in a Shakespeare play is fine. Putting on a minstrel show where you are making fun of Black stereotypes, not so much. Unless all the characters playing those parts ARE actually Black.

I think a whole fraternity chapter donning blackface to freak out new pledges is kind of hilarious. In that case, the victims of the joke would be the new pledges and not Black people in general.


I think that honest accusations of Republicans "calling Obama a NIGGER quietly among themselves in private deserve to have that toxic and forbidden word in PUBLIC, not to hurt black people but to spotlight what is being done TO black people.
Dick Gregory wrote the bestseller autobio story "Nigger" but he aimed it mostly at a white audience. His own community did not need to read it as much because most of them had LIVED IT much as he did.

Therefore I think that brutal honesty is essential.
Now, once one has used that word in such a way, for decency's sake any future use in the same account might be "N-word" or n***er because a one time use in the story sets the record straight most of the time and its potency is the "less is more" kind.

Obama was a moderate. The GOP did everything but openly call him a Field N***er, but they sure as sh*t said he was one in private amongst themselves often enough.
McConnell played the part of Massa of de Plantation when he strode up and told F-N Obama "You will not nominate a Supreme Court Justice" (on his watch as Massa) and then he and cohorts doubled down and promised to block ALL SCOTUS nominees if Hillary won, too.
And watch this space because I guarantee you Mitch plans to block any and all SCOTUS noms if a Dem wins POTUS in 2020, and 2030...eternally if he can help it.

But it started with him making Obama into a F-N and now he's decided all Democrats are such. We are ALL now his F-N and House n***ers.

"Yowzuh!! Yassuh! Yassuh Massa Mitch, you do boss! Ah'z steppin and fetchin for yo sho nuff!!"

Trump and Mitch prefer their black community and black lawmakers to come from this selection, long as they can wear a suit.



And when it comes to de white folks, they clearly prefer the folks who admire the "You in a heap o trouble boy" sheriffs with the mirrored shades, like Jackie Gleason in the Cannonball Run movies.

It is clear and indisputable now, and everyone else better get a clue.
Trump's Party considers ALL Democrats and all liberals and lefties (ESPECIALLY MODERATES) to be as low as "the N-Word" and any future moderate will face this fact HEAD ON.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/22/20 06:52 PM

I think you are absolutely right. I also find it interesting that Trump is making some headway in his "do nothing" Democrats. The Dems, of course, except for Pelosi, never even bother to counter that one. ESPECIALLY Do Nothing Mitch! Who, absolutely, wins the "Do Nothing Award" hands down! The Dems, however, never even refer to him as Moscow Mitch let alone Do Nothing Mitch.

I find it very strange. The Repubicans know, flat out, how to make a statement and, even when its a lie, they tend to make it stick. The Democrats - no so much (even when its the truth) Its almost as if they just don't think that language is all that important.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/22/20 09:34 PM

Quote:
ESPECIALLY Do Nothing Mitch! Who, absolutely, wins the "Do Nothing Award" hands down!

Au contraire mon frer! Mitch is a busy busy man! The Senate confirms roughly 3000 conservative judges every day. While everybody is looking at the Trump diversion he's building a Christian conservative judiciary that will be locking up pot smokers and people of color for a generation to come.

He just wrangled an impeachment trial with no witnesses or testimony.

Perhaps you think stopping the Democratic agenda cold for the last 10 years was easy? Just because you don't like what he does doesn't mean he isn't doing anything.

**edit** Yeah I pulled that number out of my ass but 1 in 4 circuit judges is now a Trump appointee.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/22/20 11:11 PM

All we need is 2/3 of the Senate, and we can impeach all of his judicial appointments en masse.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/23/20 01:39 AM

Quote:
All we need is 2/3 of the Senate


All we'll get is a 2-3 seat majority.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/23/20 03:00 AM

I'm not saying it's likely. I'm just saying it's not impossible. Gives us something to work for.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/23/20 06:53 PM

Bernie doesn't even show up to vote 67% of the time. Yep, busy Bernie!
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/24/20 10:55 PM

Originally Posted By: jgw
Bernie doesn't even show up to vote 67% of the time. Yep, busy Bernie!


Trump doesn't even show up to do any presidenting 67 percent of the time, and when he does, 67 percent of it is watching Fox News.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Democrating Efforts - 02/25/20 08:13 PM

I think you are wrong about Trump. I think his actually working time may be about half of what you think.

Its interesting. The current governor of Iowa (I think) was made an offer, by the Trump folk, if he would sign up to be the vice president. He would do all the work and Trump would do whatever he wanted. he turned it down but it, pretty much, set the Trump standard for doing the work of a president. I am not convinced anything has changed as he has his 'team' led by his pet Nazi, Stephen Miller, and Jared Kushner the smartest man in the world and his lovely daughter Ivanka, who apparently knows EVERYTHING!