Jump to content

smjjames

Members
  • Posts

    1,087
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by smjjames

  1. While it's true that the situation was far more complex than some (whichever Democrats GD is alluding to) make it out to be, it's still flawed in that way which is reminiscent of the North/South split that dominated most of the 19th century. Of course, the Founders had never intended for it to be a godly perfect document either. @Guard Dog (on the Clinton thing from 25 years ago) I guess some might have seen it as a vestige of the Cold War days when messing with foriegn elections (South America, Central America, and the Caribbean in particular) in the fight against communism was the norm, if more hidden. Hypocrisy abounds on both sides, but pretty sure none of them even Clinton went to the same level as Trump. Meanwhile, probably barely making a blip in the US, Britain is having 'the most important general election evar!', but I guess it'll make a splash later.
  2. No, Trump is just a corrupt piece of **** surrounded by corrupt pieces of ****. Sure, the details aren't simple, but the root cause of Trump is simply Trump.
  3. Some would say that there is a difference between a private citizen vs an entire government, Anyways, not sure whether you're using irony sarcastically or being serious. It has it's share of shadyness, I agree with that, but whether the specific actions with the Steele dossier are against the law, I don't know. Also, you do know that the Steel dossier stuff was initiated by a Republican, right? @Gromnir Yeah, if the impeachment fails to go through, the Republicans better not complain when a Democrat does it because hey, 'precedent'.
  4. Try telling Trump that though..... If there is an end, logic dictates that there must be a beginning. We won't really know what it's a beginning of until after Trump is out of office, but there is definetly some kind of shift happening, and it's something that started before Trump, he's just a symptom/byproduct of that chaos shift. As for getting out of the two party system. We'd have to get rid of FPTP, which is the main thing keeping the two party system in place. The whole moving the embassy to Jerusalem is/was going to be a minefield no matter who is in office. While the situation is definetly not ideal, it would have been better to get something meaningful from Israel in exchange (the Palestineians would certianly have preferred concessions) rather than it happening for free., it may be better in the long run to not have that minefield being kicked around, I dunno.
  5. Aren't the subsidies to keep food prices down? Trump isn't the only one to do that with Agriculture. The main example with Trump though is the coal industry, which is failing despite attempts, and the steel industry, which hasn't exactly improved AFAIK.
  6. Yeah, If we go by roughly 30 year intervals, we're about due for another major alignment shift, it's happened to the Republicans and now the Democrats are undergoing it. There is a lot of disagreement just where the alignment shifts are post WWII, but maybe it's just become more fluid since the beginnings of mass media (everything post WWII, though arguably you could go pre-WWI,, especially since the 1990's.
  7. Yea, she has been having some campaign issues the past few months, so, not a complete surprise. Given her not insubstantial support, compared to others that have dropped out, it'll be interesting to see the realignment of supporters.
  8. Except that it wasn't just a crowded field, one of the Democrats literally split into two and the Republican party rising out of the ashes of the breakup of the Whigs filled the vacuum. It's a kind of situation that we haven't seen in modern history. As much internal fighting and despair as there has been on both sides (Republicans pre-2016 and Democrats since), neither party seems like they'll literally split into two and decide on two different candidates. Sure, there is a pretty big split between the moderates and liberals/progressives, but if a literal split didn't happen in 2016, I'm not sure a split would ever actually happen in today's conditions. Still, as GD said, the fact that the Green party isn't as organized as the Libertarians and is only on the ballot in 21 states is a pretty major obstacle to getting half the Democrats. Not to mention that whatever your secret weapon is, they or it is going to have to become as visible as the top runners at this point fast because visibility is key.
  9. @Zoraptor What rumor? It'd be pretty hard to get any crazier than Trump and I just hope it's not Jill Stein type crazy (or Marianne Williamson on the Democrat side) since it does help to have a non-wacko candidate. One thing that would be particularily crazy is a Trump style body snatching with one of the candidates switching to Green on being nominated (or maybe after being elected), except that Trump switched before he ran and none of the current candidates have a past with the Green party. Probably the only one I cold see doing it would be maybe Tulsi Gabbard.
  10. Al Gore? Though I'm sure you can find someone with less climate hypocrisy. Really though, I did consider voting Jill Stein in 2016, before I found out that 'her wrapper is a little loose', and I have voted for green party for local stuff a couple times. edit: If it's Howie Hawkins, that's an interesting choice as he (over 20 years ago at least) favored anarcho-communism and libertarian-muncipalism, which makes him even further left than Bernie Sanders (he's also the nominee of the socialist party) in some aspects. Wiki doesn't have a more up to date or detailed list of positions though.
  11. @ComradeMaster Just wondering out of curiosity, which candidates would you vote for? Seems like maybe Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren. I seriously doubt that more candidates are going to pop up, it's way too late in the game and the latest time that anybody has announced and gotten the nomination was in August (Bill Clinton). The two most recent would be considered moderate, not left. Not left of Biden anyway and Bloomberg is more like Republican-lite or something.
  12. I don't get it, why would he say that? Maybe it's in reference to Trump somehow still having less deportations than Obama (though to be fair, it's two terms vs one term. I think it's still less for even at this point in Obama's Presidency, not sure), but still....
  13. I'm pretty sure he could claim credit for the sky being blue if he thought he could get away with it, it's that bad.
  14. Plus the fact that the heading doesn’t provide full context and the article itself does sound like he is talking about the centennial bill, not the centennial itself, though it’s not 100% clear in the article. Of course, it doesn’t help that he often does say dumb things that are dumb even in context, so, it’s a little like Biden and his gaffes,
  15. It's possible to get that amount without going into shadyness or conspiracy theories. Though yeah, there is a ton out there already in the public and more domestically that could be found with some detective work. That said, it calls into question that if Giuliani has '40 years of dirt', why not use what he already has instead of focusing on something in which wrongdoing hasn't been proven and has been debunked. Theres also the fact that Trump only wanted them to say the magic words and didn't care whether they actually went through with an investigation. It is possible to be ethically shady/dubious while legal at the same time.
  16. And then there's the whole 'I've got insurance if Trump tries to throw me under the bus'. Sarcasm or not, it still comes off as a little ominous. Most likely he's just BS'ing, but still, doesn't seem like something to joke about when you're talking about the President (whether that's Trump, (Hillary) Clinton, or otherwise). He's also claiming to have 40 years of dirt on Biden, so there's that BS.
  17. Anarchism is more like 'none of the above' though, right? Because they want to flip the metaphorical table of government, whatever the ideology. There are rightwing and leftwing anarchists, so, it's not so easily defined on a spectrum. In any case, ktchong linked an article claiming that Falun Gong is far-right, which is what I was responding to. Unless it's a Horseshoe theory sort of thing where they go so far left that they flip polarity.
  18. That's false equivalency all over the place ktchong, for one, China isn't invading another country to do it and the US didn't round people up into re-education camps in Iraq and Afghanistan. A much more direct equivalent of what China is doing would be like the US rounding up Native Americans into re-education camps. Also, I coulda sworn Falun Gong was more centrist or left, but then, when you're communist, everything else may as well be far right because everything else is to the right of you.
  19. Ah, but is it an IVORY Tower of Widsom? (Yes, I'm messing with you. ) Anyways, geeze, the impeachment defense is coming down to splitting hairs nanoscopically..... Also, Trump massively throwing Giuliani under the bus when?
  20. Confirmed fixed on iphone here as well.
  21. Geological studies though, are generally public, and yeah, the ground truthing (though I can imagine some trump-like going FAKE NEWS!!! THERE'S GOLD IN THEM THAR HILLS! MY GUT TELLS ME SO! no matter how much ground truthing is done) would suck up quite a bit of cash.
  22. Hm, on ipad it's fine, but I checked my iphone and yeah it's screwed up in a similar way as mentioned. This is with the default safari browser.
  23. Lol! that tweet is like, self contradictory up to three times at least.
  24. and @ShadySands Plus theres several that are effectively acting acting or acting acting acting because the acting has been replaced several times.
  25. Sounds like you're describing a lite version of 'free healthcare', or perhaps 'free healthcare that allows private insurance to exist'. Course though, the 'above a certain dollar amount' is something that isn't going to be agreed on, especially given how hospitals charge ridiculous amounts for things that would cost little to none elsewhere.
×
×
  • Create New...