Political Discussion

Chucktshoes said:
I guess it’s a good thing none of those people are in this conversation, eh?
Click to expand...

I’m open to having conversations with almost anybody, if they are respectful. I find the people in the camp above just unwilling to listen to anything that they don’t believe in already anyway. I just got into an argument about the whole ridiculousness over Dr. Seuss. “But the first amendment!” 🙄
 
Biden may have cognitive decline but he also has a sense of duty and I'm sure plenty will debate his honor. I have little doubt he'd step down with dignity if he could no longer handle the job to the best of his ability. I'll gladly take however many years of his cognitive decline to the utter destruction 4 more years of his predecessor would've made this country endure.
 
I'm dipping back into this thread. This week in my American Gov class, our lecture and reading is over the presidency. My professor is really good about inserting media, both real news media and fictional stuff like TV and movies. We went over a selection of important presidents, from Washington to Lincoln, Wilson to both Roosevelts, Reagan and GWB, and ending with Obama. I've always had this super severe aversion to Regan, but watching the clips was an interesting and eye opening experience. The dude was fucking charming. He was funny and hella witty. I can see why so so so many people voted for him and supported him and still look to that as the golden age now. Don't get me wrong, I have tons of issues with his legacy and still don't like him, but I finally get why he is the GOP's golden goose and their standard for republicanism.

Random ramble complete. SFP out.
 
Worker's rights issues, namely those who are labeled "care givers", they are usually women and are underpaid and overworked.

About 8 percent of New York State’s 240,000 home care workers are assigned twenty-four-hour shifts, many of them consecutive back-to-back shifts. Rest is intermittent, and real sleep is near impossible. The workers, almost all women of color and immigrants, are responsible for the health and safety of those needing round-the-clock care.

That this kind of time and wage theft is allowed to continue — and has actually increased during the pandemic — is a testament to the decrepit state of US labor law. But it also reflects an unfortunate cultural truism. The work of caregiving is invaluable — and so we simply do not value it at all.

So how did 24 hour shifts that they only get paid 13 hours for happen? Because these workers are supposed to have time off to sleep and eat, but routinely, they don't really get that time. Many places telling them that if they want to care for a patient during night time hours, it's something they choose to do with that time, but they do not get compensated for it.

But over the last four years, more than a hundred forty-five class action complaints have been filed on behalf of home care attendants seeking pay for deducted sleep and meal hours, and in 2017, the New York Supreme Court sided with workers in their demand to be compensated for every hour on the job. In response to the ruling, Governor Andrew Cuomo’s Labor Department issued an emergency regulation that stated bona fide meal periods and sleep times may be excluded from hours worked by home care aides. The regulation remains in effect today, and Cuomo has shown no interest in changing it. More surprisingly, the caregiver’s union, SEIU-1199, hasn’t made it a priority either.

Historically, unions were the primary means by which workers chipped away at the length of the workday. Yet as organized labor’s power plummeted — today only about 11 percent of US workers carry a union card — so did their ability to moderate the metronome of American capitalism. The result: the slow return of a long-hours economy that has barely been registered as a complaint among the largest official labor organizations.
www.jacobinmag.com

The Fight for Free Time Is a Feminist Issue

Thousands of home care workers in New York are forced to work twenty-four-hour shifts while being paid for only half the time. That’s outrageous — and on International Women’s Day, we should heed their call in taking up the struggle for control over our time.
www.jacobinmag.com www.jacobinmag.com

The assault on worker's rights will continue until workers organize.
 
Also really, really interested in where this is going...

Senator Mitt Romney (R-Utah) on Thursday released a plan to provide families with a monthly cash benefit of as much $350 for each child, embracing calls by President Joe Biden and Democrats to increase the child care tax credit to help low-income Americans struggling during the pandemic.

Romney’s Family Security Act would replace the Child Tax Credit with a $3,000 yearly benefit per child — $4,200 for kids under the age of 5 — spread out in monthly installments that begin four months before a child’s due date, according to a summary of the proposal.
www.politico.com

Romney proposes child care benefit for families, fueling Democrats' push

The proposal is likely to get bipartisan backing.
www.politico.com www.politico.com
 
I am really loathe to use whataboutism, but I am 100% not going to ever, ever, ever take any complaints about Biden's speech fluency when Trump spent 4 years in literal visceral decline; unable to complete sentences, making poor and erratic choices and bragging about, of all the fucking things, acing a test for cognitive functions. If you didn't complain about 'man woman camera tv', and being unable to drink water with one hand, I really don't want to hear about some partisan hack worry because Biden had a spoonerism or stuttered or whatever.

It's like hearing Republicans on TV being shocked, shocked I tell you, and something must be done, that Cuomo was a sleazy dirtbag to women, after giving a complete pass to Bret 'I like beer!' Kavanaugh and Trump grabbin' 'em by the pussy.

There is not a "meh" big enough and disinterested enough for me to fully express how little I believe those disingenuous arguments are in good faith.
 
sarcasticfairyprincess said:
[...]I've always had this super severe aversion to Regan, but watching the clips was an interesting and eye opening experience. The dude was fucking charming. He was funny and hella witty. I can see why so so so many people voted for him and supported him and still look to that as the golden age now. Don't get me wrong, I have tons of issues with his legacy and still don't like him, but I finally get why he is the GOP's golden goose and their standard for republicanism.
Click to expand...

This is also why Bush the Lesser won so readily -- however dumb he may have looked to the left, he has a genuine charm and likability that had broad appeal, and not just to those on the right. It's why Bill Clinton and Obama won and, if you look back, it's why Dukakis lost to Bush the Elder -- not that GHWB was charming, but Dukakis was just so, so unlikeable. Hillary's public persona did not do her any favors in this regard.
 
yukbon said:
I am really loathe to use whataboutism, but I am 100% not going to ever, ever, ever take any complaints about Biden's speech fluency when Trump spent 4 years in literal visceral decline; unable to complete sentences, making poor and erratic choices and bragging about, of all the fucking things, acing a test for cognitive functions. If you didn't complain about 'man woman camera tv', and being unable to drink water with one hand, I really don't want to hear about some partisan hack worry because Biden had a spoonerism or stuttered or whatever.

It's like hearing Republicans on TV being shocked, shocked I tell you, and something must be done, that Cuomo was a sleazy dirtbag to women, after giving a complete pass to Bret 'I like beer!' Kavanaugh and Trump grabbin' 'em by the pussy.

There is not a "meh" big enough and disinterested enough for me to fully express how little I believe those disingenuous arguments are in good faith.
Click to expand...
If you are loathe to use partisan hackery and whataboutism, then why would you use it to make partisan defenses? You don’t get to claim moral high ground against those who engage in loathesome actions by engaging in those very same loathesome actions.
 
I said I'm loathe to do it, not that I'm above doing it. Bad faith arguments get bad faith responses.

I really don't mean this as a personal attack on you and I hope that you don't take it as such -- although I can see why you might; I am just really tired of the disingenuous "rules are for thee and not for me" attitude that backs a lot of conservative/GOP/MAGA arguments against liberalism/the left/democrats.
 
yukbon said:
I said I'm loathe to do it, not that I'm above doing it. Bad faith arguments get bad faith responses.

I really don't mean this as a personal attack on you and I hope that you don't take it as such -- although I can see why you might; I am just really tired of the disingenuous "rules are for thee and not for me" attitude that backs a lot of conservative/GOP/MAGA arguments against liberalism/the left/democrats.
Click to expand...
Bad faith arguments and responses are the norm from both camps as blind partisan hackery is the ruling cultural norm when it comes to the political realm. It helps no one to engage in that behavior at any point.

I will say that while some may make a specific critique in bad faith, not everyone making that critique (whatever it is) does so in bad faith. Writing every instance off as being done in bad faith does not help make one’s case. Especially if there turns out to be merit in the critique on down the road



B57A0889-CC9D-4B74-AA01-668902CE75B2.jpeg
 
While I don't think I'm ever going 100% @Chucktshoes , lol, I am sitting firmly in his camp of "They're all full of shit and could care less about WE THE PEOPLE".

Politics have been about business for a long time now, it has nothing to do with the people. As it's been said, it's not about policy and change, it's about who can present themselves the best, who can sell you shit on a stick with a smile on their face convincingly. It's like my wife picking the winning team in a football game based on the uniforms. When voting became a "Lesser of two evils" proposition, the writing was on the wall.

Call me when the majority of the old white guys are dead and gone and I'll start paying attention again. My uncle in Italy works for Fiat, I remember when I lived there that they always seemed to be on strike for one reason or another. I would see him and he'd tell us all the chaos and shouting and dirt being kicked up, all the chanting, demanding, just a major dust up, EVERY TIME. But after the dust settled, every time, things didn't really change, they were always appeased with the most minimal possible "bone". That's our government, that's how they function, but not for US, but for their agenda's.
 
Chucktshoes said:
Bad faith arguments and responses are the norm from both camps as blind partisan hackery is the ruling cultural norm when it comes to the political realm. It helps no one to engage in that behavior at any point.

I will say that while some may make a specific critique in bad faith, not everyone making that critique (whatever it is) does so in bad faith. Writing every instance off as being done in bad faith does not help make one’s case. Especially if there turns out to be merit in the critique on down the road
Click to expand...
If someone spends 4 years ignoring a particular issue (or series of issues) on their candidate of choice and then suddenly that same issue is a Big Worry and Important Issue We Need To Address when it pops up on an opponent, I am going to glibly dismiss that as "not a real concern that you care about".

To be clear: cognitive decline is a dire, dire issue, especially in a national leader. It was a big deal with Reagan in the 80's, it was a big deal with Wilson when he caught the spanish flu in 1918, and it was a huge deal with Trump and his petty and volatile responses to well, everything. But 4 years of that caused not a peep from the right. Covfefe, hamberders, Tim Apple, the time he stared straight into the sun after being repeatedly told not to, trouble drinking water, trouble speaking clearly, "In 1775 our army took over the airports" -- nothing, no 'hmmm, something's not right here'.

But Biden's slower as an old man than he was when he was in his prime, that's cause for concern! It's disingenuous and cheap and shameless and anyone making that argument should feel cheap and ashamed.
 
The guy with the cognitive decline surely is doing his best to get vaccines out to people. He's about to announce an additional 100M doses to be purchased today from J&J and Merck. So I'll take his cognitive decline and an actual plan to get us out of this mess over the alternative any day.
 
Indymisanthrope said:
It may not ultimately change anything substantially about the Senate‘a composition, but it seems notable that Shelby, Burr, Toomey, Portman, Blunt, and possibly Grassley and/or RonJohn, will all retire rather than run again. That’s up to a third of the 20 open R seats robbed of an incumbent’s momentum.

Anybody wanna read the tea leaves on this?
Click to expand...

it’s either going to be the increasing irrelevance of the Republican Party or the increasing irrelevance of the US.
 
Indymisanthrope said:
It may not ultimately change anything substantially about the Senate‘a composition, but it seems notable that Shelby, Burr, Toomey, Portman, Blunt, and possibly Grassley and/or RonJohn, will all retire rather than run again. That’s up to a third of the 20 open R seats robbed of an incumbent’s momentum.

Anybody wanna read the tea leaves on this?
Click to expand...
People much further to the right will run in their place. Will be a bit harder for them without incumbent advantage, but multiple states are working to squash voting rights for this very purpose. Could potentially be very, very bad, and preparation should start right now.
 
yukbon said:
If someone spends 4 years ignoring a particular issue (or series of issues) on their candidate of choice and then suddenly that same issue is a Big Worry and Important Issue We Need To Address when it pops up on an opponent, I am going to glibly dismiss that as "not a real concern that you care about".

To be clear: cognitive decline is a dire, dire issue, especially in a national leader. It was a big deal with Reagan in the 80's, it was a big deal with Wilson when he caught the spanish flu in 1918, and it was a huge deal with Trump and his petty and volatile responses to well, everything. But 4 years of that caused not a peep from the right. Covfefe, hamberders, Tim Apple, the time he stared straight into the sun after being repeatedly told not to, trouble drinking water, trouble speaking clearly, "In 1775 our army took over the airports" -- nothing, no 'hmmm, something's not right here'.
Click to expand...
To reiterate something I said to someone else earlier, it’s a good thing those people aren’t in this discussion. If they were, then your next point might apply to them.
But Biden's slower as an old man than he was when he was in his prime, that's cause for concern! It's disingenuous and cheap and shameless and anyone making that argument should feel cheap and ashamed.
Click to expand...
But it doesn’t. Biden is much more than just “slower than he was in his prime”. He is absolutely in serious cognitive decline and that is a problem. I don’t feel cheap or ashamed for noticing what is blatantly obvious to anyone with eyes and ears not blinded by partisanship.

The nation elected a senile old man because they felt he was the better option over another senile old man. Sad state of affairs all around.

We seem to be circling the drain of “uh huh” and “nuh uh” without any actual debate or discussion here, just repetition of the same thoughts in different words. Combined with the “I’m not saying you’re bad, but the people who hold views like you are bad” plausible deniability style potshots, I’ll step out at this point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top