Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 233: Kashmir Outside, How 'Bout That?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I'll support reaching across the aisle when a Republican ever negotiates in good faith.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

I dont think Tulsi is a Russian asset so much as shes just Russias favored Democrat, so some of their disinformation campaigns will be designed to benefit her, but without her involvement

Kind of like Trump pre-Manafort

She is not a foreign asset but her foreign policy is basically lets not have one. Russia is trying to expand their global influence(this is bad) and by ceding all foreign involvement you are simply playing in to Russias hands. They are sending out the Vlados of the world to promote nationalism so that they can maximize their own global agenda.

I'll support reaching across the aisle when Republicans stop caging children.
---

Passing gun reform for the low low price of endorsing white supremacy. What a bargain!
---

Peace___Frog posted...

I'll support reaching across the aisle when Merrick Garland is on the supreme court.

Live in agony of the past or thrive in the present. This is sorta why bipartisan stuff never happens. There is always a past situation when someone got fucked.

No one ever just wants to drop it all and say fuck it let's start fresh from today and do things in compromise of both parties for the American people.
---

The Republican party of the modern era has shown themselves to be incapable of being bipartisan any time they hold any power. It would be beyond foolish for Democrats to extend a hand to them.
---

Peace___Frog posted...

Republicans telling the left to reach across the aisle is so rich because every time in the last two decades when that has happened, the Republicans still stuck their nose up at it.

There's no negotiating with political arsonists.

You'll find you have much more bargaining power if you bring firefighting equipment and maybe a helicopter with firefighting capabilities. Otherwise, be prepared to pay up!
---

Peace___Frog posted...

The Republican party of the modern era has shown themselves to be incapable of being bipartisan any time they hold any power. It would be beyond foolish for Democrats to extend a hand to them.

You can refuse to show faith and try while complaining it is the other side. Or you can try to and show it is actually the other side.

McConnell said he is willing to do bipartisan gun reform now. Take him up on the offer with an immigration reform compromise or keep your nose up in the air rebuffing while blaming the other side.
---

Peace___Frog posted...

I'll support reaching across the aisle when a Republican ever negotiates in good faith.

^^^^^

They have repeatedly shown that they have zero interest in doing this, and trying to approach them in good faith only results in bad things happening.

Look at the fucking ACA and how that went.

Fuck them, fuck Mitch McConnell and fuck Newt Gingrich. And fuck anybody who supports them.

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Passing gun reform for the low low price of endorsing white supremacy. What a bargain!

I am sure you can be less radical and admit immigration reform does not equal white supremacy.
---

Republicans negotiate like rational agents. Democrats bargain like crazed lunatics. The truth is that for anything bipartisan to get done Democrats need to get some better negotiators.
---

Reg posted...

Peace___Frog posted...

I'll support reaching across the aisle when a Republican ever negotiates in good faith.

^^^^^

They have repeatedly shown that they have zero interest in doing this, and trying to approach them in good faith only results in bad things happening.

Look at the fucking ACA and how that went.

Fuck them, fuck Mitch McConnell and fuck Newt Gingrich. And fuck anybody who supports them.

The American people were strongly against ACA nationally. And vehemently via Republicans. Immigration laws and gun reform are both well received by the American population as a majority of at least closer split.
---

The ACA is a great example. Republicans said no and Democrats negotiated with themselves and passed a worst of all worlds disaster of a bill. Their ability to magically find the worst possible approach even when left completely free of Republican interference shows how utterly incompetent they are.
---

Corrik7 posted...

McConnell said

You have to be a fool to take the word of a man who has consistently shown that his word means nothing.
---

Corrik7 posted...

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Passing gun reform for the low low price of endorsing white supremacy. What a bargain!

I am sure you can be less radical and admit immigration reform does not equal white supremacy.

Sure I can. But Trump's goals on the matter are textbook xenophobia.

Also, the Democratic House (and Democrats in the Senate) has already acquiesced to the Republicans on this issue by passing the Senate's $5 billion funding plan. If anything, Democrats are now owed a victory on an agenda of their own.
---

red sox 777 posted...

Their ability to magically find the worst possible approach even when left completely free of Republican interference shows how utterly incompetent they are.

Yeah it's a good thing the Republicans were able to reform and pass a new plan when they controlled the house and the senate. Really digging the new plan they passed!
---

red sox 777 posted...

Republicans negotiate like rational agents. Democrats bargain like crazed lunatics. The truth is that for anything bipartisan to get done Democrats need to get some better negotiators.

Which party was able to pass a health care plan?

The Republicans passed health care, really.
---

The republicans don't have to pass a healthcare plan - Obama passed their healthcare plan for them

Peace___Frog posted...

Corrik7 posted...

McConnell said

You have to be a fool to take the word of a man who has consistently shown that his word means nothing.

So call his bluff. Or show yourself unwilling to negotiate and be bipartisan. Nobody can make you not negotiate besides yourselves.
---

Lol hi cyclo
---

Mitch McConnell brought up the Green New Deal for a vote without conditions. It was the Democrats who submitted 40+ votes of "present."
---

Right. Because McConnell cares about scoring political points, not passing legislation.
---

Listen, if Democrats are so scared of their own legislation that not one of them will vote for it when no strings are attached whatsoever, you really can't blame Republicans.
---

The House passed gun control back in February and McConnell has sat on those bills this whole time. He can bring them up for a vote any time he pleases.
---

I'm just making the point that Mitch McConnell considers making his political adversaries look bad to a legitimate - nay, desirable - use of the Senate's time.
---

red sox 777 posted...

Listen, if Democrats are so scared of their own legislation that not one of them will vote for it when no strings are attached whatsoever, you really can't blame Republicans.

But the person who instructed them to vote this way was the author of the legislation. Why are you disparaging this remarkable show of unity and political maneuvering by the Democratic party? McDonnell's plan failed.
---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

red sox 777 posted...

Listen, if Democrats are so scared of their own legislation that not one of them will vote for it when no strings are attached whatsoever, you really can't blame Republicans.

But the person who instructed them to vote this way was the author of the legislation. Why are you disparaging this remarkable show of unity and political maneuvering by the Democratic party? McDonnell's plan failed.

It succeeded. The Democrats looked like complete fools in voting down their own legislation. The Democrats should have just voted for it.
---

Corrik7 posted...

Peace___Frog posted...

The Republican party of the modern era has shown themselves to be incapable of being bipartisan any time they hold any power. It would be beyond foolish for Democrats to extend a hand to them.

You can refuse to show faith and try while complaining it is the other side. Or you can try to and show it is actually the other side.

McConnell said he is willing to do bipartisan gun reform now. Take him up on the offer with an immigration reform compromise or keep your nose up in the air rebuffing while blaming the other side.

Whats he offering?
---

red sox 777 posted...

It succeeded. The Democrats looked like complete fools in voting down their own legislation. The Democrats should have just voted for it.

I'm sorry, but only the Republicans voted against the bill. Democrats did not vote one way or the other, and are still considering the issue. If I was from a midwestern state impacted by climate change, I would consider voting out my Republican senator who clearly opposes the GND.
---

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-bill-for-stronger-background-checks-on-guns-mitch-mcconnells-stalls-senate-vote/

Heres an article about the Bipartisan Gun Control bill that Mitch wont approve
---

red sox 777 posted...

It succeeded. The Democrats looked like complete fools in voting down their own legislation. The Democrats should have just voted for it.

Zero voters who don't pay very close attention to politics even know that that vote took place

---

Jakyl25 posted...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-bill-for-stronger-background-checks-on-guns-mitch-mcconnells-stalls-senate-vote/

Heres an article about the Bipartisan Gun Control bill that Mitch wont approve

Bipartisan how if 8 Republicans voted for it out of like almost 200?
---

Thats the name of it, I didnt make the name
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik7 posted...

Peace___Frog posted...

The Republican party of the modern era has shown themselves to be incapable of being bipartisan any time they hold any power. It would be beyond foolish for Democrats to extend a hand to them.

You can refuse to show faith and try while complaining it is the other side. Or you can try to and show it is actually the other side.

McConnell said he is willing to do bipartisan gun reform now. Take him up on the offer with an immigration reform compromise or keep your nose up in the air rebuffing while blaming the other side.

Whats he offering?

I do not know. I would assume stronger background checks, but I am curious to find out.
---

Not to mention, Mitch McConnell made a big miscalculation (as did Democrats) in assuming that the Green New Deal would be unpopular. It turns out that climate change action is broadly popular, and the mainstream Democratic party has even begun to embrace it to win coveted swing voters with concerns about the environment. I be Mitch feels pretty foolish now that only Republicans are on the record as opposing action on climate change!
---

Also apparently the Senate is not due to be in session until September anyway, so theres plenty of time to play this out in the court of public opinion
---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Not to mention, Mitch McConnell made a big miscalculation (as did Democrats) in assuming that the Green New Deal would be unpopular. It turns out that climate change action is broadly popular, and the mainstream Democratic party has even begun to embrace it to win coveted swing voters with concerns about the environment. I be Mitch feels pretty foolish now that only Republicans are on the record as opposing action on climate change!

No, Mitch got it right. He knew the Democrats would vote it down. And really, voting present is way more embarassing than voting no.
---

It should also be mentioned that the popular immigration reform - comprehensive immigration reform was killed by the then-Republican House when Ryan refused to bring it up for a vote.

The things Trump wants on immigration are not popular with the general public.

Like if someone brought up the 2014-or-whenever-it-was immigration bill that passed with strong bipartisan support in the Senate and paired it with gun control sure. But with "Wall" crap? No thanks. Hell, Trump already started taking some gun control options off the table when talking to the press this morning when he basically eliminated an assault weapons ban.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Also apparently the Senate is not due to be in session until September anyway, so theres plenty of time to play this out in the court of public opinion

They could come back if they felt it was important enough!
---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Not to mention, Mitch McConnell made a big miscalculation (as did Democrats) in assuming that the Green New Deal would be unpopular. It turns out that climate change action is broadly popular, and the mainstream Democratic party has even begun to embrace it to win coveted swing voters with concerns about the environment. I be Mitch feels pretty foolish now that only Republicans are on the record as opposing action on climate change!

The actual GND as proposed by AOC is bad and would likely be unpopular if Dems actually pushed it. That's because it tacks on essentially the entire DSA wishlist (single payer, a job guarantee, etc) to the unrelated task of combating climate change.

---

xp1337 posted...

It should also be mentioned that the popular immigration reform - comprehensive immigration reform was killed by the then-Republican House when Ryan refused to bring it up for a vote.

The things Trump wants on immigration are not popular with the general public.

Like if someone brought up the 2014-or-whenever-it-was immigration bill that passed with strong bipartisan support in the Senate and paired it with gun control sure. But with "Wall" crap? No thanks. Hell, Trump already started taking some gun control options off the table when talking to the press this morning when he basically eliminated an assault weapons ban.

Well, if you want Republicans to vote for something that their base is somewhat against, you gotta offer something that your base is somewhat against in return. How compromise works.

You can't expect everything in your own favor.
---

https://www.politico.com/story/2010/10/the-gops-no-compromise-pledge-044311

Republicans can shut the fuck up forever until they give up something first.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

The actual GND as proposed by AOC is bad and would likely be unpopular if Dems actually pushed it. That's because it tacks on essentially the entire DSA wishlist (single payer, a job guarantee, etc) to the unrelated task of combating climate change.

This is because the process of making meaningful action on climate will cause coal miners and oil workers etc. to lose their jobs. Everyone knows this. That's literally in there to protect the working class that Republicans have been trying to convince climate action will be the end of. Railing against these "socialist" clauses shows a fundamental lack of understanding as to what will be necessary to meet climate goals.
---

Corrik7 posted...

Well, if you want Republicans to vote for something that their base is somewhat against,

By base you mean donors right?
---

Like even Biden's plan involves creating jobs for people. Come on.
---

Creating some fixed number of jobs that need doing in areas that will experience heavy job loss due to shifting energy production is very different than providing a job guarantee (particularly as the legislation demands they be jobs with decent pay/benefits). The latter provides a strong incentive for people with low paying private sector jobs to jump to the guaranteed government jobs, massively increasing the cost of the guarantee. This becomes even worse if the government jobs arent actually things that need to be done (which becomes more likely as the number of people employed by the guarantee increases) as this saps labor from the private sector.

---

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/07/iraqi-man-dies-deportation-trump-administration-1643512

ICE deports a man who was born in Greece and moved to the US as a child to Iraq. He's a diabetic and subsequently died in what appears to be an inability to obtain insulin. He never lived in Iraq and doesn't speak Arabic.

A family friend also said he suffered from schizophrenia.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Creating some fixed number of jobs that need doing in areas that will experience heavy job loss due to shifting energy production is very different than providing a job guarantee (particularly as the legislation demands they be jobs with decent pay/benefits). The latter provides a strong incentive for people with low paying private sector jobs to jump to the guaranteed government jobs, massively increasing the cost of the guarantee. This becomes even worse if the government jobs arent actually things that need to be done (which becomes more likely as the number of people employed by the guarantee increases) as this saps labor from the private sector.

Well, these people in low-paying jobs will also be massively affected by the plan, climate change itself, and the shift in infrastructure. The poor will be affected the most, so you have to account for them, too. It's not just the workers, but the communities that will need taken care of. This is also a staple of every climate plan!
---

Im saying that its fine to account for the specific jobs lost by killing coal etc, but that the government shouldnt make it an open ended commitment that anybody can upgrade to from their current job even if theyre unaffected by the transition to clean energy. Even if that were a good idea (which I dont think it is), it would massively expand the scope of the program and make it harder to pass. Similarly, achieving universal health coverage is a laudable goal, but is unrelated to solving global warming and should be dealt with separately. Combining all of your goals into one piece of legislation makes it much more likely that you can all away with nothing.

The other fact thats very important if one wants actually stop global and warming is that the US only produces something like 15% of all emissions, so any solution is going to require other nations to massively reduce CO2 regardless of the progress that the US makes. This means that pumping a ton of money and other resources into research and sharing that technology with the rest of our be world should be the centerpiece of any serious plan.

---