Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 257: "Donald the Dove"

(+) Yeah! (+)

Can't believe that the guy who said "you have to take out their families" is actually a warhawk!

---

If he were a warhawk he wouldn't say things like that! You can't just say what you mean!

---

Correction: You mean chickenhawk.

---

SephG said...

It seems the consensus here is that Nazi Germany should have been left alone had they not invaded Poland. A very telling reminder of what the world would be like with pacifists in charge.

If pacifists were in charge then Hitler wouldnt have been in charge

Checkmate
---

https://twitter.com/faithnaff/status/1213845488702808064?s=21

A+
---

https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/1214061268740558848

---

Thread from a New Yorker writer that's more a reminder than anything - the original report was in 2017.

https://twitter.com/adamdavidson/status/1213873920400605187

When sanctions against Iran began Soleiman tasked an ally with setting up front companies to launder money so they could obtain missile systems to threan the US and Israel. In 2010, one of the biggest and most successful of the front companies tried to establish business ties with US companies. Despite spending a bunch he got only one American business to bite (because of his well known connection to Iran and that it was a laundering front)

The Trump Organization. Specifically, Ivanka worked closely with them on a tower in Azerbaijan. In 2015, the Trump Organization acknowledged they knew it was likely a laundering front for the Revolutionary Guard but kept working with them through the 2016 elections.

The original 2017 New Yorker article on the deal (that he notes the Trump Organization acknowledged was entirely true): https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/13/donald-trumps-worst-deal

---

Very telling that the right gets Very Angry when you call their fascist actions "fascist" and they scream and whine that if you call everything a Nazi then it loses its meaning, but then they're Very Willing to pull out the "what about ww2 huh libs" every time pacifism comes up!

---

Peace___Frog posted...

Very telling that the right gets Very Angry when you call their fascist actions "fascist" and they scream and whine that if you call everything a Nazi then it loses its meaning, but then they're Very Willing to pull out the "what about ww2 huh libs" every time pacifism comes up!

What

---

xp1337 posted...

Thread from a New Yorker writer that's more a reminder than anything - the original report was in 2017.

https://twitter.com/adamdavidson/status/1213873920400605187

When sanctions against Iran began Soleiman tasked an ally with setting up front companies to launder money so they could obtain missile systems to threan the US and Israel. In 2010, one of the biggest and most successful of the front companies tried to establish business ties with US companies. Despite spending a bunch he got only one American business to bite (because of his well known connection to Iran and that it was a laundering front)

The Trump Organization. Specifically, Ivanka worked closely with them on a tower in Azerbaijan. In 2015, the Trump Organization acknowledged they knew it was likely a laundering front for the Revolutionary Guard but kept working with them through the 2016 elections.

The original 2017 New Yorker article on the deal (that he notes the Trump Organization acknowledged was entirely true): https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/13/donald-trumps-worst-deal

I guess if he could hoodwink Ivanka he must be a real threat.

---

2024 GOP Frontrunners!

https://twitter.com/politics_polls/status/1213688315213471744?s=21
---

Jakyl25 posted...

2024 GOP Frontrunners!

https://twitter.com/politics_polls/status/1213688315213471744?s=21

Nikki Haley for sure.

Surprised Tulsi wasn't on the list.

---

Of the following Republicans
---

Early call: Tulsi's got this. First female president!

---

The Democrats are nowhere near contrition. They still don't understand that they are in the wrong.

---

red sox 777 posted...

Early call: Tulsi's got this. First female president!

lol republicans are too sexist to ever elect a woman.

---

Judge Judy is on The View right now to endorse Michael Bloomberg

What a big get!
---

lol

in more relevant endorsement news, Castro has endorsed Warren

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

lol

in more relevant endorsement news, Castro has endorsed Warren

In a sane world, this would knock her down several points

---

Trumps actions make even less sense* when combined than they do separately:

https://twitter.com/richardengel/status/1214146678241951744?s=21

*unless correctly viewed as purely driven by a combination of self interest and impulsiveness rather than as an honest attempt at a policy that puts, as one might say, America first

---

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1214148318307205121

When even Boris is calling you out...

---

I feel like Iran might just attack us to see if Trump would follow through with that. I would hope Trump wouldn't. And iran won't escalate further.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfcHUkHGsLI

Uh oh Yang

---

I don't see the benefit to attacking cultural and historical sites. There's no military benefit to that. I'll presume that Trump is bluffing for now.

---

So uh, I'm hearing that (according to the Iraqi PM) Solemani was literally in Iraq on the day he was killed at the US's request to help negotiate/mediate a deescalation between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

A) What are the odds this is accurate?
B) If it is accurate, isn't it kind of a massive war crime on its own?

perfidy, yes

---

Reg posted...

So uh, I'm hearing that (according to the Iraqi PM) Solemani was literally in Iraq on the day he was killed at the US's request to help negotiate/mediate a deescalation between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

A) What are the odds this is accurate?
B) If it is accurate, isn't it kind of a massive war crime on its own?

He was in Iraq to talk about de-escalation with Saudi Arabia. Not at the US request.

However, his trip to Iraq was literally reported about days prior, and he was openly traveling around Iraq at that point.

To be noted, he was killed along another Terrorist who bombed the Kenyan Embassy and such as well. Who happened to be a member of the Iraqi Parliament I think.

---

Potentially big: John Bolton has now stated that he will comply with a Senate subpoena, which

a) makes it harder for McConnell to justify not calling him (though Im sure hell try)

b) if McConnell doesnt, it presumably makes it very hard for Bolton to justify why he would comply with a Senate subpoena but not a House subpoena

---

https://mobile.twitter.com/janearraf/status/1213823941321592834

This appears to be the source of the Iraqi PM is claiming Soleimani was in Iraq at Trump/The US's request. The person who tweeted this works for NPR.

What are the odds the House will even formally submit the articles to the Senate? Less than 50% at this point?

---

https://twitter.com/katiephang/status/1214263563486932995?s=21

hope this piece of shit spends the rest of his life in prison

---

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1981-1988/lebanon

interesting read

---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

What are the odds the House will even formally submit the articles to the Senate? Less than 50% at this point?

The Senate may force their hand. I think there is already discussion afoot about holding the trial without receiving the articles. It's not like it isn't public record what they say. If the House refuses to participate in the trial the Senate can appoint a prosecutor to represent the House in its absence. Or just declare the House in default and acquit on the basis of no evidence being presented by the prosecution.

---

Little Marco living up to his nickname:

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1214269985004163073

---

No new evidence! We don't want the whole truth, just the portion of the truth we knew about before!

---

I'll let Marco speak for himself:

https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1214271082812919809

There's a lot to unpack there, which would probably require several pages to do properly. But it seems rather disingenuous to me.

---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

No new evidence! We don't want the whole truth, just the portion of the truth we knew about before!

Fd your boy yang looking like a liar.

---

But definitely I applaud Marco for managing to write something so obfuscatory in only 140 characters.

---

is this "lie" going to be some guy with a mic on youtube talking about M4A...
...yep, it is.

yang's approach to healthcare is entirely different, it's an interesting long-game option that focuses on industry specifics. cut down RX costs with the option of the US actually making generics, new licensing for doctors, changing the way doctors are paid to salary instead of per use, standardizing payment systems, loan forgiveness to any who become a primary care doctor...

when you add up all the specific things he's going for you end up with a system where, even with private insurance, doctors get paid the same way, can work anywhere in the country (very important for telehealth advancements), have a similar payment system, drug costs are going to be mostly the same nationally, and despite these changes you'll have a supply of doctors since their loans are forgiven.

all together this ain't that far from a government run insurance since the backend is now heavily government regulated, meaning it's a pretty quick hop that only messes with specific industries. def one of the more creative ideas and absolutely not Bernie's M4A plan since it likes the existence of private insurance, it just ropes in private companies and private practices.

---

Um, first off, the guy with a mic is someone whom I respect to report the news fairly.

Secondly, his new ad says he is for M4A. He is not. The ad speaks for itself, guy just reporting the obvious.


---

if your position of M4A necessitates the removal of the private industry like Bernie's asking for, then no, he's not.
if it's more conceptual and running off the ideas behind it then yes, it is. it targets specifics remarkably well.

---

The name of the bill is Medicare 4 all, Wang. It is a bill. That is a name. If you want to say "complete health coverage through blah blah blah." Yang's plan doesn't even include a public option. Of course I say this when to be fair any democrat is better than comic book villainy republicans on this issue so it isn't like he is the devil, but he doesn't support M4A. Pretty simple!

---

right, you're firmly in the camp of it's either Bernie's plan/a minor tweak of it or nothing. problem is that as a term M4A is getting xerox'd or google'd right now. if your idea is wanting to cover everyone your options are 1) massive overhaul of the system (e.g., remove private insurance), 2) various in between plans (more Australian model in Tulsi, Pete/Warren share a similar in between), 3) expand what's currently there (Biden), or 4) targeting specific industries in the system (Yang).

bear in mind, i already know you don't like Yang's plan. as you phrased it it gave you "big yikes." of the options though, def is my favorite due to its focus as it'd completely change the industry and evolve it within two generations while creating the smallest fallout.

---

Right, and using it when not referring to Bernie's plan is a lie. I can give Pete a bit of a pass because at least he added some words on the end to his!

I mean sure I don't like Yang's plan, but I wouldn't be calling him a liar if his ad hadn't said he supported M4A. He does not. It's really simple!

---

Wanglicious posted...

problem is that as a term M4A is getting xerox'd or google'd right now. if your idea is wanting to cover everyone your options are 1) massive overhaul of the system (e.g., remove private insurance), 2) various in between plans (more Australian model in Tulsi, Pete/Warren share a similar in between), 3) expand what's currently there (Biden), or 4) targeting specific industries in the system (Yang).

This was true months ago but not so much anymore as the major candidates have moved away from doing this in order to attack single payer, and have put forth more defined plans. Harris tried co-opting it and she's gone now. You'll notice that Biden never used "M4A" for his plan, Pete has added "for all who want it" to clarify it's a different plan for a long time, and Warren only still uses it because she claims she'll implement single-payer during her term. If anything, Tulsi and Yang are now the odd ones out for trying to get away with doing this.

---

M4A was intentionally used as a vague term for "expand health care beyond what the ACA did" by the entire Democratic party before the 2018 election. It's only since then that it's been more definitively "claimed" to refer only to Bernie's plan.

(And indeed, that's why support for M4A fell so much in polls when it was specified what it actually meant: a lot of people never realized they were being asked about single payer specifically).

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

(And indeed, that's why support for M4A fell so much in polls when it was specified what it actually meant: a lot of people never realized they were being asked about single payer specifically).

No, this still depends entirely on framing. You can frame single-payer positively and it'll have high support. The polls are kind of useless because people just want better healthcare and are easily swayed.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

M4A was intentionally used as a vague term for "expand health care beyond what the ACA did" by the entire Democratic party before the 2018 election. It's only since then that it's been more definitively "claimed" to refer only to Bernie's plan.

(And indeed, that's why support for M4A fell so much in polls when it was specified what it actually meant: a lot of people never realized they were being asked about single payer specifically).

This is 100% wrong btw


---

Andrew Yang should run as a Republican in 2024. In the Republican Party he will find an audience willing to listen to and consider ideas, rather than deciding everything based on labels. One of Trump's children running to be his immediate successor would also be a really bad look for the republic.

---

For that matter - Bernie - if you haven't retired by then and feel up to it - I would invite you to run as a Republican in 2024 also.

---