Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 26, 2017, 12:06:32 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Cast your Ballot in the 2016 Mock Election

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 553
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Marijuana Legalization on: February 24, 2017, 10:53:45 am
Does anyone else think legalization would be the perfect wedge issue to use in 2020 to get young males to vote for the Democratic candidate? One of the reasons why Clinton lost is that she failed to inspire young people to vote for her, especially young men. This is a demographic ripe for the taking and they are not enthralled by Trump, but don't necessarily favor Democrats either. If the Democrats stop triangulating and actually take a stand, they might have a nice surprise on election night.
2  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Politico: Cotton and Trump plot crackdown on legal immigration on: February 08, 2017, 01:07:17 pm
Great to see the usual suspects blatantly promoting white supremacist garbage. Equally nice to see they've dropped their always unbelievable premise this s#!t was solely over "illegal immigrants ".

Do you think everyone everywhere has the right to live in the United States? You realize very few, if any, other countries allow people to become citizens on demand?

This isn't about allowing "citizenship on demand" you dolt, and no one but you has blithered such notions, or fails to realize the curent myriad immigration and naturalization process is a million miles from such fantastical nightmares.

Immigration brings the hardest working, most entrepreneurial , most energetic and America loving people from around the world. There isn't a single idiotic utterance you're making which wasn't bantered with equal foolishnees about Italian, Asian, and East European immigrants a century and a half ago.

No one here is fooled in believing that if most immigration came from England, Germany , and Ireland that your views would change dramatically .

I live in New York City and work a crappy job and I probably deal with immigrants much more than you do. I can tell you they don't really "love America". Why would someone from The Gambia love America anyway? They come here because the government will give them free money. Not because they are patriotic for a nation they have no connection to. They openly admit this. I don't fault them for it though. I would do the same thing if I was in their shoes. Who wouldn't? You'd have to be stupid not to. I do fault the government for letting them in though. Just because people want free money doesn't mean you should give it to them. I don't really know who this narrative about immigrants being "America loving" is supposed to appeal to. Liberals themselves do not love America. Conservatives just don't buy the argument because it's not true. Next.

Also, European (and Chinese) immigration 150 years ago took place in a much different world. The main difference being there wasn't a welfare state back then.

As to if there were European immigrants today. I wouldn't mind but my reason for not minding wouldn't be because they were White (although at this point many Europeans are non White). My reason for not minding would be because those people are rich. They aren't going to be on welfare because if they wanted welfare, they would just stay in their countries of origin, since the benefits are more generous there. Coincidentally, that's the reason people from Europe DON'T immigrate here in the first place.

The same is true about Japan. Japan is non White but they have a higher standard of living than we do, so we don't have to worry that the people are coming here just to collect benefits and drive down wages. Of course, just like Europe, them having a higher standard of living is also the reason they don't bother coming here anyway.

So what are your thoughts of people from places like India or China coming here and working in well paying jobs, obviously contributing more into the system than taking out of it. Would you be just as fine with it as people coming from Europe?
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: The Northern Strategy Explained on: February 08, 2017, 12:20:43 pm
I don't understand how the GOP executes the Northern strategy without abandoning their Southern and Interior West base, and the evangelical conservatives. I would assume there would need to be a sea change in American politics for the Northern Strategy to be effective, since it would effectively repudiate the Reagan coalition. E.g, it would shift the GOP coalition to the North, with an intent to be competitive in working class pockets of Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island, as well as New Jersey.

The big problem is that the Southern evangelicals and the cultural conservatives have an iron grip on the Party's nomination. They were among Trump's best supporters in the primaries. Trump pledged conservative judges, which is anathema to the Northern areas that may support Trump and a more moderate economically minded GOP but are turned off by the social issues.

This Northern strategy assumes the collapse of the GOP's evangelical core, which would assume they became powerless, which is not quite happening without a major event to convince the GOP to shift from the Reagan formula. I don't see that absent a sea change in American politics, on the order of say, the post-World War II political regime shifting to the left drastically in Europe and the Conservatives coping by adopting the strategy you outline.

Your Northern strategy, in other words, IMO, may make sense but it only makes sense in the context of the Democrats realigning the country and the GOP responding by adopting your strategy to stay viable.

I don't think you understand how much Christianity is declining in this country.  And thus the GOP will portray itself as the protector of secularism against religious immigrants.  This is basically what's happening in Europe.

I doubt that the shrinking base of Christian conservatives will allow this to happen. At the least they'll fight tooth and nail. Most Republican politicians and voters are very religious still, and many are just as religious as the immigrants they oppose. Democrats have been the relatively-secular party, but in the future (as they are now) I see them being a pluralist party, meaning that they accommodate different religions and ethnicity under their coalition. Republicans under Trump will continue down the path of being a white Christian party unless they change something.

Older Republicans will continue to care about social issues.  But the younger Republicans do not share their concerns.  The right-wing presence on the internet is largely focused on other issues.  Since at least 2015 anti-SJW culture has been a major part of Conservatism.  Anti-SJW culture is not very socially conservative (many who support it are atheists).  And anti-SJW culture is enormously popular with younger Republicans, the future of the party.

Many Republican politicians are publicly religious to pander for votes.  The political elite in the GOP wants to abandon social conservatism now that it isn't as useful as it was in 2004.  There will be very little resistance from them.  Just take a look at the fact that Republicans aren't exploiting the transgender bathroom issue like they did with gay marriage.  Social issues are clearly no longer a focus of the GOP.

You do realize that the SJWs are pushing for very liberal social policies, and the people who push back against it do because they realize they're insane.  Anyway, we're not going away (the youngest generation is arguably the most against abortion of any generation, for example).  Social conservatives are a HUGE voting block, and the GOP would be dead without us.

I don't support the Northern Strategy, I'm just saying it's a reality (and in some ways the logical conclusion of the Southern Strategy).

The GOP can retain social conservatives because the Democrats are always going to be at least one step ahead of them.  The GOP is rapidly moving left on social issues, just not as rapidly as the Democrats.  Religion is declining in America and it would be declining much faster if it wasn't for immigrants.  Soon enough an atheist who lives in Boston is going to realize that the biggest threat to social liberalism in America is not Joe the farmer who lives in Missouri (as it used to be), it's the immigrant who lives only a few blocks away.  When this happens in large numbers throughout America's cities and suburbs, there will be a massive wave of Middle and Upper-class xenophobia.  As much as I hate to say it, the GOP is probably going to pander to these people.  Of course, many Republicans will dissent, but their voices will be increasingly marginalized.

This would make sense in the context of European-style immigration by working class people from the Middle East and Africa. In America, however, most immigration is either by working class people from Latin America or from well educated people from Asia. Latin Americans have a culture very similar to ours so I don't think the Boston atheist is going to be concerned by that. And his friends will likely be well educated Asians so there's that.
4  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Report: Steve Bannon Had to Be Reminded He Wasnt the President Amidst Travel Ban on: February 05, 2017, 03:41:39 am
This doesn't sound like Bannon is the puppet master though. It sounds like just the opposite. Bannon tried to do something. They said "you can't do that, have Trump do it", Trump didn't do it, then everyone said what Bannon tried to do was stupid.

You got one thing right, Bannon is stupid.
5  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: WH stopped State Department Holocaust message that mentioned Jews on: February 05, 2017, 03:40:49 am
11 million people died in the Holocaust, at least. We're not special, and the Holocaust tore apart countless families, Jewish and non Jewish. No need to single us out in an attempt to make people subconsciously value the Jewish victims more than the others. I really don't see the issue here.
But if the special mention is removed purposely by a well known anti-semite?  Is that okay?
Is that why Trump's third highest ranking member of his Cabinet, Treasury Secretary Mnuchin, is Jewish? And why the people he listens to the most, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, are both Jewish?

What we are finding out, unfortunately, is that Ivanka and Jared are not the people he listens to the most. He listens most to the two Steves, Steve Bannon and Steve Miller. They both seem to be racist and anti-semite.

Steven Miller is Jewish.

Oh great, turns out they are just racist. Makes it a lot better, doesn't it?
6  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: WH stopped State Department Holocaust message that mentioned Jews on: February 05, 2017, 02:02:31 am
11 million people died in the Holocaust, at least. We're not special, and the Holocaust tore apart countless families, Jewish and non Jewish. No need to single us out in an attempt to make people subconsciously value the Jewish victims more than the others. I really don't see the issue here.
But if the special mention is removed purposely by a well known anti-semite?  Is that okay?
Is that why Trump's third highest ranking member of his Cabinet, Treasury Secretary Mnuchin, is Jewish? And why the people he listens to the most, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, are both Jewish?

What we are finding out, unfortunately, is that Ivanka and Jared are not the people he listens to the most. He listens most to the two Steves, Steve Bannon and Steve Miller. They both seem to be racist and anti-semite.
7  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Federal Judge Issues Restraining Order on Immigration EO on: February 04, 2017, 11:07:14 pm
SAD!

What's sad is the man baby that is apparently the President. And your bloodlust to keep out people who are already working and studying here. I remember when you were reasonable. What happened?

My SAD! comment wasn't a serious one, sbane.  I probably should have used an emoticon afterwards.   I favor allowing those with green cards and proper visas to come and go.......I'm all in favor of extreme vetting of those wishing to obtain visas and even a temp ban on issuing them until we get our act together, but if you have one now, you should be allowed back.

Does that sound more reasonable?  Smiley

Yeah, that's certainly reasonable. I don't think it's out of line to want thorough vetting for people coming from countries where that may be hard to do. It's just completely inappropriate to screw up people's lives who are here working or going to school already. Maybe do an internal review of them? Maybe another interview with them is fine, as well as monitoring their phone and social media. What's wrong is suddenly pulling the floor out of these people and trapping them overseas with apartments, homes, cars, pets, family members etc stuck inside this country.

What worries me with Trump is that I don't know if this incompetence/inexperience or evil. I suspect Bannon and Miller knew exactly what they were doing and including green card holders in the EO was a part of their plan. That's what worries me going forward. It's not just this EO, but what this portends for the future.
8  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Federal Judge Issues Restraining Order on Immigration EO on: February 04, 2017, 10:50:40 am
SAD!

What's sad is the man baby that is apparently the President. And your bloodlust to keep out people who are already working and studying here. I remember when you were reasonable. What happened?
9  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Federal Judge Issues Restraining Order on Immigration EO on: February 04, 2017, 12:40:57 am

This could open up a world of insanity if turned into precedent. Granting constitutional rights to non-citizens on foreign soil?

It has nothing to do with the non-citizens' rights so much as the EO directly violating the constitution in nature by targeting a group of non-citizens based on their religion.

Well actually it does. What standing does the plaintiff have in this case? How can you infringe on freedom of religion for someone who is not a citizen and not on us soil? How can you extend equal protection to visa cancellations?


There's a million reasons you may not like the EO, but if it is ruled unconstitutional on the basis of religious discrimination it opens up a can of worms like we've never seen before in our legal system.

In that sense, you have a point, but note that the EO also targeted permanent residents with Green Cards, who are protected and afforded those rights.

It's not just permanent residents, but *any* person within the jurisdiction of the US has constitutional rights by virtue of the 14th amendment, no?  But yeah, what about people who are not *yet* in US jurisdiction, but applying to get in?  Doesn't seem so obvious that the constitution would apply to them.


If they had simply applied this to any new applicants for a visa/green card, they would have saved themselves a lot of grief. No drama at airports, no stories about grandmas being stuck and students not able to continue their education. They would have still scored their political points, and there wouldn't be that same degree of backlash to it. Polling shows that a ban like this is actually mildly popular. It's only when people established in the US in one way or another get impacted that it runs into any problems.
10  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: McInnes assaulted at NYU. Pepperspayed. Professor advocated violence. 11 arrests on: February 03, 2017, 06:01:32 pm
Trump is causing a bunch of harm to people here in the United States too, most of whom are here legally. What about them?
11  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Trump halts fiduciary rule on: February 03, 2017, 03:40:42 pm
On top of trying to take out Dodd-Frank, Trump is killing the fiduciary rule requiring retirement brokers to have their clients' best interests in mind. For the life of me, I can't understand why you'd undo this other than from a crass excess of greed, malice, and selfish negligence.

He tricked you. Watch what he does with healthcare.
12  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Massive Violent Anti-Milo Protests at UC Berkeley on: February 03, 2017, 03:00:07 pm
Can you punch an ICE agent in the face? Surely, if you can assault someone for reporting an immigrant, you should be able to do far worse to someone who is actually doing the deporting?

Can't you go somewhere else, like stormfront or something? We obviously need immigration reform, and need to secure the border by instituting E-VERIFY! That being said, people who are already here and and are living their lives like any other Americans should be allowed to stay. If you disagree with that, you are a fucking racist and should leave this forum.

Also, Trump needs to be opposed at every single step of the way, even if it costs 2020. That may not be wholly relevant to this thread (I honestly don't give a sh**t about Milo lol), but it's relevant in the direction this country goes. Fascism cannot be accepted as business as usual. It must be opposed at every opportunity possible. Screw the "moderates" who don't like it. Although it must be peaceful.....except for a punch in the face for some know-nothing loser fascist.

You really think people who don't feel illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay only think so because of racism? There are plenty of other reasons

This. But apparently even complaining about visa overstays by white europeans is super dee duper secret racist code or something.

You really think he was going to out white europeans? I don't get why we can't be honest about what this is all about. There is a palpable fear on the right that the "demographics" of this country are changing. They don't care about visa overstays by white people.

Assuming that everyone thinks identically is foolish. I care about visa overstays by white europeans. I have no anger for illegal immigrants who want to come here. My unease with general immigration is not racially motivated. So 1 weird person invalidates your argument. No one is saying there aren't idiots out there who dislike only the brown immigrants. But using someones stance on deporting illegal immigrants as a full proof litmus test for racism is wrong and it encourages more of this unhelpful absolutist thinking that if someone disagrees about politics they are therefore bad.

You might not be able to tell from my posts, but I also think that immigration needs to be slowed down at this point of time (due to the economic conditions), with priority given to those who will generate income and taxes for the government. What I vehemently disagree with is how the Trumpists are starting to treat legal immigrants and people of color in general, including citizens. While I would have disagreed with the EO regarding the 7 countries, what really gets me mad is how it also targets people who are already here in the country, and for a while, green card holders.

So if you think immigration needs to be slowed down, that is fine. Or if you are against illegal immigration, that's fine too. What is going on in Trump's America is totally different. They are going to go after legal immigrants who are already here. And no, it won't be the European ones. Steve Bannon is in charge of Trump now. And I don't even think he has the country behind him. All he has to do is keep us fat, happy and misinformed and he can do whatever he wants. That's why he must be opposed at every step of the way.
13  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Significant legal immigration reduction, not likely to happen on: February 03, 2017, 02:45:21 pm
I think it might happen, but it's important to remember that people are mostly fine with the amount of legal immigrants in the country. The climate around legal immigration in the US isn't what it is in Europe.

Not really.

I think people either oppose immigration or they support it. People who say "I oppose illegal immigration but support people who come here the right way" are just 1) attempting to sound moderate 2) don't live in urban areas so don't realize they extent of legal immigration and are severely underestimating it. Conversely, the left (both the mainstream centrist Democrats and the far left) no longer make any distinction at all between illegal and legal immigration.

no I totally support that, as I support expanding the amount of green cards and visas given  to immigrants but I also support Romney E Verify Plan

Why? Frankly this is just a stupid position. It's like saying you think people who smoke pot should be put in jail because it's illegal but you also want to legalize it. Is it just fetishism for the law?

Because when you control who immigrates here, you can pick and choose who you want to come. If you choose a bunch of people who will create jobs or will have 6 figure salaries, America benefits because they pay into Medicare and Social Security without drawing on it anytime soon.
14  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Massive Violent Anti-Milo Protests at UC Berkeley on: February 03, 2017, 02:41:11 pm
When you are threatening to out someone as an undocumented immigrant, you are going beyond just "disagreeing" with someone. It's personal at that point. And we are going to stand up as group for those people. If you get punched in the face, it is you own fault for being an asshole.

So the left is officially embracing the principle of "snitches get stitches"? Because your comment totally blames the victims of crime for coming forward as witnesses to a separate crime. Im not saying tattling isnt a dick move and of course a false id might be subject to a slander suit ... but you are acting as though revealing truthful information relevant to a crime is somehow worthy of violent repression. That is disgusting. I smoke weed and I would never endorse violence against some jerk who rats out potheads to the police. Criminals assume the risk of being caught and just because the "fuk borders" crowd hates the idea that not everyone can come and go as they please doesn't mean its not still a crime.

Seriously. Reflect on what you are pushing. By your logic rightwing militias are justified in harassing those who rat on them for gun violations. Drug dealers can take out police snitches.  Pimps can beat up prostitutes who go to the police for help. Casually dismissing violence used to silence the truth is pretty damn bad.

This goes beyond snitching on Milo's part, though.  If that's all he wanted to do, he could have easily gone to the immigration authorities and reported them in private.  (This isn't something I would do as long as these people were otherwise peaceful, law-abiding citizens who might not have even entered this country on their own accord, but that's a different discussion.)  Milo specifically wanted to use his platform to target individuals and open them up to harassment and social ostracization.  That doesn't justify violence, per se, and it certainly doesn't justify destroying property or setting fires like some of these protestors were doing, but attempting to put other people's lives or reputations in danger makes you a fair target for retaliation especially by those whom you seek to destroy.

And Milo wasn't a "victim" even if the people he intended to rat on were genuinely 'guilty.'  He's a British guy with a funny hairdo who gains followers just from being a bully.  And that of course alone should be enough to question the man's own probity.

I also wonder if he wouldn't have "outed" people who weren't even here illegally. It would probably just be an enemies hit list of the right wing/alt-right at Berkeley.
15  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Massive Violent Anti-Milo Protests at UC Berkeley on: February 03, 2017, 02:39:07 pm
Can you punch an ICE agent in the face? Surely, if you can assault someone for reporting an immigrant, you should be able to do far worse to someone who is actually doing the deporting?

Can't you go somewhere else, like stormfront or something? We obviously need immigration reform, and need to secure the border by instituting E-VERIFY! That being said, people who are already here and and are living their lives like any other Americans should be allowed to stay. If you disagree with that, you are a fucking racist and should leave this forum.

Also, Trump needs to be opposed at every single step of the way, even if it costs 2020. That may not be wholly relevant to this thread (I honestly don't give a sh**t about Milo lol), but it's relevant in the direction this country goes. Fascism cannot be accepted as business as usual. It must be opposed at every opportunity possible. Screw the "moderates" who don't like it. Although it must be peaceful.....except for a punch in the face for some know-nothing loser fascist.

You really think people who don't feel illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay only think so because of racism? There are plenty of other reasons

This. But apparently even complaining about visa overstays by white europeans is super dee duper secret racist code or something.

You really think he was going to out white europeans? I don't get why we can't be honest about what this is all about. There is a palpable fear on the right that the "demographics" of this country are changing. They don't care about visa overstays by white people.
16  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Massive Violent Anti-Milo Protests at UC Berkeley on: February 03, 2017, 02:32:10 am
I'm sure the left wingers who support the actions of these rioters will be at a loss for words when Trump wins reelection with 350+ electoral votes. Keep up the good work, the democratic party is down and you guys are keeping it that way

Trump will probably win re-election. What is more important is to not legitimize Trump. The Republicans did this brilliantly with Obama.

Also, I doubt he wins the popular vote. Trump is such a fucking loser lol.
Just keep screaming "he will not divide us" and New York could be in play lol

Hell, maybe California will be in play! It doesn't matter. Fascism must be opposed! you want to support the goddamn fascist then that is your perogative. If we all survive to have kids, you will have a tough time explaining your support of Trump. You will likely lie. How did the Germans handle that in the 1950's and 60's?
17  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Massive Violent Anti-Milo Protests at UC Berkeley on: February 03, 2017, 02:26:07 am
I'm sure the left wingers who support the actions of these rioters will be at a loss for words when Trump wins reelection with 350+ electoral votes. Keep up the good work, the democratic party is down and you guys are keeping it that way

Trump will probably win re-election. What is more important is to not legitimize Trump. The Republicans did this brilliantly with Obama.

Also, I doubt he wins the popular vote. Trump is such a freaking loser lol. [Torie again, the bastard]
18  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Massive Violent Anti-Milo Protests at UC Berkeley on: February 03, 2017, 02:11:40 am
Can you punch an ICE agent in the face? Surely, if you can assault someone for reporting an immigrant, you should be able to do far worse to someone who is actually doing the deporting?

Can't you go somewhere else, like stormfront or something? We obviously need immigration reform, and need to secure the border by instituting E-VERIFY! That being said, people who are already here and and are living their lives like any other Americans should be allowed to stay. If you disagree with that, you are a fucking racist and should leave this forum.

Also, Trump needs to be opposed at every single step of the way, even if it costs 2020. That may not be wholly relevant to this thread (I honestly don't give a sh**t about Milo lol), but it's relevant in the direction this country goes. Fascism cannot be accepted as business as usual. It must be opposed at every opportunity possible. Screw the "moderates" who don't like it. Although it must be peaceful.....except for a punch in the face for some know-nothing loser fascist.
19  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Massive Violent Anti-Milo Protests at UC Berkeley on: February 03, 2017, 01:52:11 am
Are the liberals who are saying "Just let him speak, what's the big deal?" aware that Milo was planning on reading off a list of students that were undocumented immigrants?

It's true.



What an awful human being.

Okay.  Yeah.  Fck him.  Students can do whatever they want with him and I won't shed a tear.  Little Milo doesn't need a safe space.

According to the right-wing and some Democrats here it would've been better to let him expose these students to potential danger, such as harassment, than prevent him from speaking because "muh free speech!" When you threaten people and seek to incite hatred against groups of people, you have no right to that kind of speech. You should be met with resistance, as he was, barred from the university by its administration, and criminally charged with hate speech.

He did no such thing. Disagreeing with someone is not threatening or inciting violence. But rioting, making verbal threats, and silencing dissent certainly meets those qualifications, which is what liberals do all the time.

I don't expect to get through to people like you. You can't seem to comprehend the simple idea that disagreeing with someone does not make them evil - or bigoted - or racist - or phobia this or phobia that. Regurgitate. Regurgitate.

It's stupid and old. It's the politics of ignorant, hateful, spiteful know nothings. The politics of the brain washed.



I'm going to use your logic.

-I deem you, your ideas, and your speech as hateful bigotry, racist and fascist. Because I said so. No debate about it. I'm morally right and you're evil.
-I deem you a NAZI™.
-Therefor, I have the right to silence and even assault you. I can punch you in the face.
-It's you're fault, really. YOU'RE the one who incited me with your hateful rhetoric.


Of course, in reality land, the American constitution protects the public from dangerous radicals like you.

No amount of yelling NAZI™ is going to change that.

You don't get to decide what is hateful and what is acceptable. You don't get to silence people. The constitution protects us against totalitarianism.

When you are threatening to out someone as an undocumented immigrant, you are going beyond just "disagreeing" with someone. It's personal at that point. And we are going to stand up as group for those people. If you get punched in the face, it is you own fault for being an asshole.
20  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Significant legal immigration reduction, not likely to happen on: February 03, 2017, 12:52:40 am
I actually wouldn't be against wholesale legal immigration reform (disclosure: my parents immigrated from Sweden in the late 1980s before I was born)

Imitating Canada's system would be best, IMO. Figure a society that has made multiculturalism work should be closely observed

I also agree with this. Illegal immigration needs to be stopped and the legal immigration system needs to be tilted even further to allow talented people who will be productive members of society to come in first. We don't need to bring in people to end up working at Mcdonalds.
21  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Significant legal immigration reduction, not likely to happen on: February 03, 2017, 12:50:11 am
     "coalition of the ascendant" = LOL. Winning elections is a little more complicated than that.

Exactly. If Republicans/right wingers want minorities to continue voting for the Democrats, that is exactly what will happen. I support Ryan's plan on Medicare, for example, but I am not voting for a Republican in the near future unless they specifically oppose Trump. Fascism must be opposed at all costs, even if that means I pay 2% more in taxes.
22  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Massive Violent Anti-Milo Protests at UC Berkeley on: February 03, 2017, 12:47:21 am
Screw fascists. They might win for a little while but they won't win the horse race. The important thing is not to give in to these people.   [Modified by Torie}
23  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Trump considering executive order to deport legal immigrants who are on welfare on: February 02, 2017, 12:14:09 am
Can Trump even enforce this through an executive order without the help of the states, especially when it comes to Medicaid? If he wants to put pressure on them by withholding Federal funds for the state Medicaid programs, wouldn't he have to go through congress?
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will there be a election in 2020? on: February 01, 2017, 02:39:49 am
There will be an election, but if Trump loses, I could see him trying to stay in power by claiming voter fraud. Things could get interesting.
25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Ron Wyden on: February 01, 2017, 02:39:01 am
He'll be 71 in four years.  He's a career politician; in Congress since 1981, in the Senate since 1996.  He's had a substantive career in a long tenure in Congress.

If the Democrats are serious about challenging Donald Trump in 2020, they are NOT going to beat him with the flavor of the month.  Wyden is the kind of substantive liberal who can present as Presidential, and not a candidate that represents the tendency to pander.  And he'd be a first; the first Jewish President.  That would make his candidacy trendsetting.

One thing I definitely believe, as a strategist, is that if Trump is to be beaten in 2020, (A) he'll have to appear incompetent to the American people and (B) the Democrats will have to put up a candidate that oozes competence.  Wyden is such a candidate.  Tried and true was out of vogue in 2016, but it will be in come 2020 if Trump is viewed as having failed.  Wyden is the kind of candidate the Democrats should pick if they are serious in 2020.


The Democrats will have to produce their own ideas if they want to win in 2020. They can't just run against Trump, call him evil and hope the people vote for them. They will need to focus on problems, whether it be healthcare, the economy or terrorism, and tell the American people how they will do it better. The executive orders have shown that Trump's team is pretty amateurish. The  lack of a green card exception for the muslim ban was ridiculous, and they ended up backtracking on it anyways. Democrats just have to show they will be competent, and have actual ideas to solve the problems that are out there.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 553


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines