Random Politics
Moderators: Shirley, Sabo, brian, rass, DaveInSeattle
- Pruitt
- The Dude
- Posts: 18105
- Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:02 am
- Location: North Shore of Lake Ontario
Re: Random Politics
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
Re: Random Politics
Anyone who embraced and repeated the “Bernie bro” nonsense needs to take a look at the Markey/Kennedy stuff today and decide if maybe you got played a bit.
Re: Random Politics
What the fuck is it with Massachusetts and politicians named Kennedy?
Fuck that state.
And fuck Pelosi for endorsing him. Hypocrite asshole.
Fuck that state.
And fuck Pelosi for endorsing him. Hypocrite asshole.
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
- The Sybian
- The Dude
- Posts: 19074
- Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:36 am
- Location: Working in the Crap Part of Jersey
Re: Random Politics
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
-Pruitt
Re: Random Politics
"What a bunch of pedantic pricks." - sybian
Re: Random Politics
FUCK THE KENNEDYS.
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
- govmentchedda
- The Dude
- Posts: 12840
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:36 pm
Re: Random Politics
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
Re: Random Politics
I didn't realize it violates a city rule still in San Francisco. (I'm able to get a haircut in New Mexico, so this would never occur to me.)
But yea, not a good look.
But yea, not a good look.
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
- Pruitt
- The Dude
- Posts: 18105
- Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:02 am
- Location: North Shore of Lake Ontario
Re: Random Politics
"But her hair do" could become 2020's "But her e-mails."
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
Re: Random Politics
It varies county by county. I’m in San Mateo county (just south of SF county). And activities like salons have closed and opened again two different times in my area.
This will piss people off enough that she might only get 70% of the votes in her next election instead of 80%.
"What a bunch of pedantic pricks." - sybian
Re: Random Politics
Your lips to god's ears.
Re: Random Politics
Yes, let's hope a Republican beats Nancy Pelosi in one of the most liberal districts in the country. That will bode well.
Bandwagon fan of the 2023 STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS!
Re: Random Politics
Just to play devil's advocate, let's say she does. To a moderate republican for X years until next election, is it 6? And then someone who is not Nancy Pelosi retakes the seat. Worst thing ever?
Dances with Wolves (1) - BSF
"This place was rockin'," said BSF21.
"There is nothing ever uncommon about BSF21."
"This place was rockin'," said BSF21.
"There is nothing ever uncommon about BSF21."
Re: Random Politics
There's two Dems running. I forgot that CA does that. Still, I don't have a major issue with Nancy Pelosi.
Bandwagon fan of the 2023 STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS!
- Pruitt
- The Dude
- Posts: 18105
- Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:02 am
- Location: North Shore of Lake Ontario
Re: Random Politics
Not in her district - but the GOP has tried to demonize her repeatedly. Trump's posted two tweets about this and retweeted another one.
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
Re: Random Politics
Fuck that. Explain or defend publicly chastising AOC et all for supporting leftists who had primaried incumbent Dems then endorsing Kennedy.
Re: Random Politics
She works for the whole party, not just the left-most faction. I agree the Democrats aren't as far left as I'd like but she makes a useful foil for Trump. If she gets beat in her district, who is the next Speaker going to be? Because it isn't going to be AOC or Ayanna Pressley as much as you'd like that to be so.
Bandwagon fan of the 2023 STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS!
- Nonlinear FC
- The Dude
- Posts: 11025
- Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 2:09 pm
Re: Random Politics
I've been relatively OK with Pelosi, but the shit up in MASS is pretty inexcusable to me. WTF with going after Markey? Total bullshit.
BTW, the fact that Neal wasn't knocked off by Morse up in Wester MA is a bummer. Neal is a corporate piece of shit.
BTW, the fact that Neal wasn't knocked off by Morse up in Wester MA is a bummer. Neal is a corporate piece of shit.
You can lead a horse to fish, but you can't fish out a horse.
Re: Random Politics
Agree on both.Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 1:41 pm I've been relatively OK with Pelosi, but the shit up in MASS is pretty inexcusable to me. WTF with going after Markey? Total bullshit.
BTW, the fact that Neal wasn't knocked off by Morse up in Wester MA is a bummer. Neal is a corporate piece of shit.
Bandwagon fan of the 2023 STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS!
Re: Random Politics
Doesn't overly matter; Pelosi has become an active roadblock in the party even inching left. And a lot of very wise people here have told me that just because I can't have my first choice, it doesn't mean I shouldn't strive for a lesser choice that's better than the current situation ; )
Re: Random Politics
It'll never happen, but I'd love to see AOC move to SF and successfully primary her. That would be hilarious.
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
Re: Random Politics
That's my problem. It's not like she's ideologically worse than McConnel but she's a hell of a similar politician in the grand scheme of anything remotely seen as progressiveness.mister d wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:11 pmDoesn't overly matter; Pelosi has become an active roadblock in the party even inching left. And a lot of very wise people here have told me that just because I can't have my first choice, it doesn't mean I shouldn't strive for a lesser choice that's better than the current situation ; )
Dances with Wolves (1) - BSF
"This place was rockin'," said BSF21.
"There is nothing ever uncommon about BSF21."
"This place was rockin'," said BSF21.
"There is nothing ever uncommon about BSF21."
- Steve of phpBB
- The Dude
- Posts: 8635
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
- Location: Feeling gravity's pull
Re: Random Politics
"anything remotely seen as progressiveness." JFC. Yeah, all the bills the Dem House passed this year are identical to what McConnell has allowed.BSF21 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:17 pmThat's my problem. It's not like she's ideologically worse than McConnel but she's a hell of a similar politician in the grand scheme of anything remotely seen as progressiveness.mister d wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:11 pmDoesn't overly matter; Pelosi has become an active roadblock in the party even inching left. And a lot of very wise people here have told me that just because I can't have my first choice, it doesn't mean I shouldn't strive for a lesser choice that's better than the current situation ; )
Pelosi pushed through the CARES Act, which was so effective it appears to have lowered the poverty rate - during the pandemic. Then she pushed through the HEROES Act.
But yeah, she's not progressive.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Re: Random Politics
The vote on the CARES Act was 419-6 in the House and 96-0 in the Senate, so that’s a strange example to use of Pelosi “pushing through” legislation that would not otherwise be law.
Re: Random Politics
I'll never understand your "this person hasn't done literally nothing as a Democrat so how can you complain" as a rebuttal strategy. Just unbelievably low standards. And it could, again, very easily be used to prove I should be all-in on Romney.
Re: Random Politics
If anything, Pelosi dropped the ball on the CARES Act by not getting more relief for vulnerable groups like small businesses, low-income tenants, and people stuck with healthcare bills. The fact that the bill got 419 votes in the House and 96 in the Senate would seem to indicate that Pelosi had a lot more room to work with both her own caucus and with the Senate GOP.
Re: Random Politics
She's an absolute monster and has to be stopped at any cost. Totally a pedo.
Bandwagon fan of the 2023 STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS!
Re: Random Politics
No. She’s not a progressive. That’s my exact point. You know, that there’s this political spectrum and she falls on the “been there too long and likes things the way they are so let’s not upset the apple cart” Democrat side. I don’t care for it.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:31 pm"anything remotely seen as progressiveness." JFC. Yeah, all the bills the Dem House passed this year are identical to what McConnell has allowed.BSF21 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:17 pmThat's my problem. It's not like she's ideologically worse than McConnel but she's a hell of a similar politician in the grand scheme of anything remotely seen as progressiveness.mister d wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:11 pmDoesn't overly matter; Pelosi has become an active roadblock in the party even inching left. And a lot of very wise people here have told me that just because I can't have my first choice, it doesn't mean I shouldn't strive for a lesser choice that's better than the current situation ; )
Pelosi pushed through the CARES Act, which was so effective it appears to have lowered the poverty rate - during the pandemic. Then she pushed through the HEROES Act.
But yeah, she's not progressive.
But yeah, I basically think she’s identical to McConnel like I said up there.
Dances with Wolves (1) - BSF
"This place was rockin'," said BSF21.
"There is nothing ever uncommon about BSF21."
"This place was rockin'," said BSF21.
"There is nothing ever uncommon about BSF21."
- Steve of phpBB
- The Dude
- Posts: 8635
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
- Location: Feeling gravity's pull
Re: Random Politics
I'm not arguing that she's progressive because she hasn't done literally nothing. I think it's more accurate to say that you are defining her as non-progressive because she hasn't done literally everything. The CARES Act, like the ACA, Dodd-Frank, and countless other bills and laws, wasn't simply "not literally nothing." They were both massive progressive achievements - the problem was that they weren't literally everything.
The bill got all those votes *after* McConnell and Trump were forced to agree on it, which was *after* Pelosi held firm and forced them all to agree to supposedly non-progressive things like massive employment subsidies and massive unemployment insurance benefits, both of which kept millions out of poverty.Joe K wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:52 pm If anything, Pelosi dropped the ball on the CARES Act by not getting more relief for vulnerable groups like small businesses, low-income tenants, and people stuck with healthcare bills. The fact that the bill got 419 votes in the House and 96 in the Senate would seem to indicate that Pelosi had a lot more room to work with both her own caucus and with the Senate GOP.
Those benefits went to small businesses and low-income tenants and people stuck with healthcare bills. But if you think she could have gotten more, can you tell me which 51 Senators would have voted for more?
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Re: Random Politics
Why don’t you instead name the 45 Senators who voted forSteve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:01 pmI'm not arguing that she's progressive because she hasn't done literally nothing. I think it's more accurate to say that you are defining her as non-progressive because she hasn't done literally everything. The CARES Act, like the ACA, Dodd-Frank, and countless other bills and laws, wasn't simply "not literally nothing." They were both massive progressive achievements - the problem was that they weren't literally everything.
The bill got all those votes *after* McConnell and Trump were forced to agree on it, which was *after* Pelosi held firm and forced them all to agree to supposedly non-progressive things like massive employment subsidies and massive unemployment insurance benefits, both of which kept millions out of poverty.Joe K wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:52 pm If anything, Pelosi dropped the ball on the CARES Act by not getting more relief for vulnerable groups like small businesses, low-income tenants, and people stuck with healthcare bills. The fact that the bill got 419 votes in the House and 96 in the Senate would seem to indicate that Pelosi had a lot more room to work with both her own caucus and with the Senate GOP.
Those benefits went to small businesses and low-income tenants and people stuck with healthcare bills. But if you think she could have gotten more, can you tell me which 51 Senators would have voted for more?
the bill that were at their absolute breaking point and wouldn’t have agreed to any further relief efforts?
Re: Random Politics
Or business distribution oversight beyond media investigations and public shaming. Or an end-date tied to economic conditions and not the calendar.
- Steve of phpBB
- The Dude
- Posts: 8635
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
- Location: Feeling gravity's pull
Re: Random Politics
You're asserting she could've gotten more. I'm simply asking for the basis of that assertion.
Anyway, I'll name one who was not going to agree to any more - Mitch McConnell.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Re: Random Politics
Basic logic? If you get a surplus of 45 votes beyond what’s needed to pass, it seems highly unlikely that you couldn’t have added a single thing more without losing all 45. Even if you think a veto-proof majority is needed, you still have 29 votes to spare.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:12 pmYou're asserting she could've gotten more. I'm simply asking for the basis of that assertion.
- Steve of phpBB
- The Dude
- Posts: 8635
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
- Location: Feeling gravity's pull
Re: Random Politics
But that's not how Congress works. McConnell controls what comes up for a vote, and he doesn't let a bill come up for a vote unless he either wants to or has to. Then, once it comes up for a vote, basically everyone votes for it because it's popular and no one wants to go on record as voting against pandemic reliefJoe K wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:17 pmBasic logic? If you get a surplus of 45 votes beyond what’s needed to pass, it seems highly unlikely that you couldn’t have added a single thing more without losing all 45. Even if you think a veto-proof majority is needed, you still have 29 votes to spare.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:12 pmYou're asserting she could've gotten more. I'm simply asking for the basis of that assertion.
The bill that McConnell was going with wasn't nearly as good or generous - or progressive - as the one that Pelosi forced him to accept. Could she have forced him to accept more? You're arguing she could have, that McConnell would have been willing to allow a more progressive bill. I've been following McConnell for years, and I've never seen him do anything to suggest he'd agree to anything more progressive than the CARES Act.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Re: Random Politics
So you’re assuming that Pelosi is such an adept negotiator that she got the maximum amount of concessions from McConnell, even though by your admission “no one wants to go on the record as voting against pandemic relief” and the bill passed 96-0. Agree to disagree.