***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[Mark Antony]

I need to see more of this, you can't just be allowed to lie about people.

 

[wr]

So really it is just using a bad objective

She passed a massive stimulus bill in May that had another round of $1200 checks. If it was up to Pelosi well would probably be on the 3rd of 4th round of $1200 checks.

The GOP wanted no more direct payments, her putting her foot down lead to the compromise of $600. Throughout these negotiations, it is clear that the faith actor was Mitch McConnell. Even worse than Trump. Hell he only seemingly warmed up to the entire of more stimulus because lack of it is hurting the GOP Senate candidates in Georgia

This is just some more both sides steez famb, that breeds apathy. It is just finding a way to blame Pelosi for the GOP's ****ery.

This why I really shouldn't be commenting on politics. I totally disagree with the idea that their struggle for bicameral power supercedes working on the peoples behalf. They act as fiduciaries of party instead of people. How let down are more and more people going to start feeling after holding their breath for 6 months for $600?

 

[IATT]

Two weeks ago he said the election was a fraud and Trump would be President again. They can't keep their stories straight.

 

[RustyShackleford]

This why I really shouldn't be commenting on politics. I totally disagree with the idea that their struggle for bicameral power supercedes working on the peoples behalf. They act as fiduciaries of party instead of people. How let down are more and more people going to start feeling after holding their breath for 6 months for $600?

This makes little sense, no one is arguing this.

Pelosi and the Dems wanted more things to help regular people. The passed something to help people back in May, they didn't want people to wait for pittance.

The thing is, they can do the most for people then they have power. The two and linked no matter how much you want to ignore that fact.

Like what should they have done instead in the face of Mitch McConnell's *******?

 

[wr]

This makes little sense

Pelosi and the Dems wanted more things to help regular people. The passed something to help people back in May, they didn't want people to wait for pittance.

The thing is, they can do the most for people then they have power. The two and linked no matter how much you want to ignore that fact.

Like what should they have done instead in the face of Mitch McConnell's ****ery?

Pelosi defends not speaking to Trump for almost a year

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Monday defended not speaking directly to President Trump for almost a year amid the current coronavirus pandemic and wildfire crises, maintaining that she finds i…

thehill.com

"Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Monday defended not speaking directly to President Trump for almost a year amid the current coronavirus pandemic and wildfire crises, maintaining that she finds it "in the interest of time" to speak to intermediaries."

This type of stuff.

It makes sense to me that I don't like the way politics doesn't makes sense at my expense.

 

[Wargames]

This makes little sense

Pelosi and the Dems wanted more things to help regular people. The passed something to help people back in May, they didn't want people to wait for pittance.

The thing is, they can do the most for people then they have power. The two and linked no matter how much you want to ignore that fact.

Like what should they have done instead in the face of Mitch McConnell's ****ery?

Honestly I use to be on the “DO SOMETHING!!!” Activist side myself but over time it’s clear they did do the best they could. They were dealt multiple, ****** poker hands the last four year and somehow came out with most the pot. They had no real power, and were dealing with an opponent who was openly flouting all the norms and rules they been operating with for decades.

To put it in perspective if the Dem leadership was as ineffective as most people thought we would be in the same predicament as Labor in the UK.

Even on this package people keep focusing on the lower amount when over the past few days the Dems had to remove a bunch of sloppily applied poison pills addons that the Republicans tried to sneak in out of stupidity and spite. Then after they did that they added a few things for people who have been marginalized and gave most people $600 and unemployed people ten weeks of an extra $300. Give the Dems credit.

 

[RustyShackleford]

huh, I'll take my loss on being wrong about the Kamala/Pac thing...guess now she's only wack for becoming a prosecutor.



yeah but all jokes aside the thing is we're not convincing me to keep the faith.

I guess my point is that a small slip-up (if we're gonna agree to call it that) in a 20 minute speech may not breed my apathy, but it sure will in others.

like, I care. I have hope. it's not gonna be ME out on the streets next month, dumpster diving behind Panera and moving in with a Tinder date while working up the courage to stick up a 7-11 with my $600 stimulus piece.

hell, we're both in a political thread on a sneaker website. we both give more ****s than most, and have an idea of who to give them to.

...but does someone whose life is falling apart want to hear "significant" even once? did even one blue vote slip away with that careless phrase?

inspiring hope is definitely part of the job description...maybe I put a lot of weight on that, but I believe it is.

It is gonna breed apathy if folk use a 17-second clip and misrepresent it as Pelosi's general position, so people think both sides are more the same than they actually are.

Maybe the joke went over my head, but there seems to be some goal post moving in other to make this criticism work. So it is not about you want, not what can help you convince others, it is what a desperate person might have a negative reaction to a sentence in a 20 min speech?

Well, that is unfortunate that someone in a desperate situation might hear that word and get pissed. Maybe Pelosi should be more extra extra extrta careful about her word choice, and maybe people on the left might be more considerate about what complaints they signal boost and if it is truly a good faith criticism that takes all info into conisderation. Because this doesn't come off as one.

I certainly think ignoring hours of other evidence to signal to boost this without any context, will do damage as well.

 

[dtb00201]

Dude wants a financial system based on Krugerrands and IOUs issued by small town banks without a website. In his mind, using fiat currency to get idle resources into use is crazy.



Let’s get Rene reading some Kelton.

I mean not all of us are lucky like him to piss off a neighbor so bad that they break our ribs so that we can sue them and get half a million dollars.

 

[biggie62]

Funny how you go from....


Then I mention the servers and it is....

I learned from the best. dwalk31

 

[RustyShackleford]

Pelosi defends not speaking to Trump for almost a year

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Monday defended not speaking directly to President Trump for almost a year amid the current coronavirus pandemic and wildfire crises, maintaining that she finds i…

thehill.com

"Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Monday defended not speaking directly to President Trump for almost a year amid the current coronavirus pandemic and wildfire crises, maintaining that she finds it "in the interest of time" to speak to intermediaries."

This type of stuff.

It makes sense to me that I don't like the way politics doesn't makes sense at my expense.

How is not talking to Trump at the expense of regular people?

How would she talking to him change anything?

 

[RustyShackleford]

Honestly I use to be on the “DO SOMETHING!!!” Activist side myself but over time it’s clear they did do the best they could. They were dealt multiple, ****ty poker hands the last four year and somehow came out with most the pot. They had no real power, and were dealing with an opponent who was openly flouting all the norms and rules they been operating with for decades.

To put it in perspective if the Dem leadership was as ineffective as most people thought we would be in the same predicament as Labor in the UK.

Even on this package people keep focusing on the lower amount when over the past few days the Dems had to remove a bunch of sloppily applied poison pills addons that the Republicans tried to sneak in out of stupidity and spite. Then after they did that they added a few things for people who have been marginalized and gave most people $600 and unemployed people ten weeks of an extra $300. Give the Dems credit.

This is generally the view of my sister over the past year. She has lived in the US and UK.

She has a lot of complaints about the Democratic Party, but he always says that liberals in America should at least realize that their party is not completely incompetent like Labor

Even more, if the US had the UK's parliamentary system, the Dems would be in power, and probably stay in power for a while. The downstream effect of American's corrupt electoral system, is that all political discussions get corrupted.

 

[Nike Jordan]

Dude wants a financial system based on Krugerrands and IOUs issued by small town banks without a website. In his mind, using fiat currency to get idle resources into use is crazy.



Let’s get Rene reading some Kelton.

Accidental Left.

 

[Nike Jordan]

 

[cosmiccoffee9]

It is gonna breed apathy if people use a 17-second clip and misrepresent it as Pelosi's general position, so people think both sides are more the same than they actually are. [1]

Maybe the joke went over my head, but there seems to be some goal post moving in other to make this criticism work. So it is not about you want, not what can help you convince others, it is what a desperate person might have a negative reaction to a sentence in a 20 min speech? [2]

Well, that is unfortunate that someone in a desperate situation might hear that word and get pissed. Maybe Pelosi should be more extra extra extrta careful about her word choice, and maybe people on the left might be more considerate about what complaints they signal boost and if it is a good faith criticism. Because this doesn't come off as one. [3]

I certainly think ignoring hours of other evidence to signal to boost this without any context, will do damage as well.

[1] it´s on her to watch her language...there are plenty of Congressfolk we hear nothing from. if she can speak on behalf of a party and the people it represents, it´s fair to expect precision in her ideas when she does so.

[2] I think we both know that what I believe, what I espouse to others, and how their experience will shape their interpretation of the ideas I endorse are somewhat related. same goal with different, connected posts.

[3] I believe it to be a fair criticism, but I don´t expect everyone to agree. we all see things from our angle. in either case, her terrible choice of words doesn´t need any boost in signal from me...and honestly, won´t get it.

yeah tho to loop it all the way back to my original post on the subject, it looks stupid and bad for Gavin Newsom to be holding private parties at his winery while (justifiably) shutting down most events in his state.

sure he did many positive things and is a good actor overall, but that is a wack thing to do. that can be said.

it looks stupid and bad for Nancy Pelosi to say that anything about this bill was ¨substantial¨ or ¨significant¨ when those you are relying on to help push your agenda forward are entirely dissatisfied with the outcome.

that specific development, in my opinion, is wack.

I don´t see why that can´t be said.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Covid watching Joey getting vaccinated like...

 

[Wargames]

Quick question when is the $600 supposed to hit people’s accounts?

 

[RustyShackleford]

[1] it´s on her to watch her language...there are plenty of Congressfolk we hear nothing from. if she can speak on behalf of a party and the people it represents, it´s fair to expect precision in her ideas when she does so.

[2] I think we both know that what I believe, what I espouse to others, and how their experience will shape their interpretation of the ideas I endorse are somewhat related. same goal with different, connected posts.

[3] I believe it to be a fair criticism, but I don´t expect everyone to agree. we all see things from our angle. in either case, her terrible choice of words doesn´t need any boost in signal from me...and honestly, won´t get it.

yeah tho to loop it all the way back to my original post on the subject, it looks stupid and bad for Gavin Newsom to be holding private parties at his winery while (justifiably) shutting down most events in his state.

sure he did many positive things and is a good actor overall, but that is a wack thing to do. that can be said.

it looks stupid and bad for Nancy Pelosi to say that anything about this bill was ¨substantial¨ or ¨significant¨ when those you are relying on to help push your agenda forward are entirely dissatisfied with the outcome.

that specific development, in my opinion, is wack.

I don´t see why that can´t be said.

It can be said, not is telling you can't say it

But

I don't I have to agree it is a good take though, especially given the ignoring of the larger context. And the fact your complaint hinges on people ignoring a ton of other things, even stuff she said in the same speech.

But since we are circling back to the original post on the subject, I think I was right about the beef with the 17 second clip...

What are people supposed to take from this?

That she used a bad adjective?

 

[fargin]

 

[elpablo21]

Quick question when is the $600 supposed to hit people’s accounts?

Supposedly next week at the earliest and will stagger into January

 

[cosmiccoffee9]

It can be said, not is telling you can't say it

But

I don't I have to agree it is a good take though

But since we are circling back to the original post on the subject, I think I guess right about the beef with the 17 second clip...

you don´t think it´s as telling as I do, that´s fine.

I get that I´m way further out left than most of the thread and public.

I just believe the time for soft talk and mealy mouths is past...could be wrong about that.

what we agree on is that Team Blue is our only viable electoral option, so I guess that´s where it ends.

 

[IATT]

 

[ccastro02]

Sorry if posted already.

 

[8pm at msg]

This fool really pressing people on a scooter with a vest on

 

[IATT]

 

[Based Jesus]

I hate that such a big deal was made out of Nancy not talking to Trump. Why? He's not a member of congress and congress controls the purse. It doesn't matter what Trump says if Mitch doesn't agree. Keep the convo amongst the adults.