Read 49235 times

  • Mr C
  • The Legend

    • 3023

    • October 17, 2012, 03:00:40 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #240 on: January 08, 2021, 01:51:36 pm »
Personally my top 3 asks are Medicare for All (or something similar, he can call it Bidencare or whatever if he wants), reduced presence in the Middle East, and abolish ICE (replace it with something else if they must, but ICE is corrupt to the point you need to at least rebuild from the ground up).

I doubt we'll see much improvement on the first two if only because of the massive pharma lobby and the military-industrial complex. I do think there will be a return to Obama-era policies as regards migration, but I'd like to push for something a bit nicer than that. Interestingly enough I think that M4A-esque plans and reduced military presence actually flies with a significant enough amount of Republicans since a few of them will continue to model Trump and play at populism.

Ooh, an actual policy discussion on waygook.  I'm out of practice, hang on a sec. ... Okay, so M4A as you say has a large hurdle of Pharma, but also it will be labeled socialism and the Americans who depend the most on socialism really really hate things called socialism.  I think highway funding should be withheld from states that don't adopt state-wide rigorous standards for police officers, including ongoing training.  And everyone in jail over a dime bag should be released and their records expunged.

But policies come and go.  In my mind, the biggest matter of a presidency is actually SCOTUS.  I'm hoping Breyer will resign on Jan 21 or 22 and we'll some young blood in there, while Senate GOP is still on their back heels.  Next out is presumably Thomas (and I mean to retire, of course) but it's a long time until the next chance, unless something unfortunate happens.


Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #241 on: January 08, 2021, 02:27:26 pm »
Personally my top 3 asks are Medicare for All (or something similar, he can call it Bidencare or whatever if he wants), reduced presence in the Middle East, and abolish ICE (replace it with something else if they must, but ICE is corrupt to the point you need to at least rebuild from the ground up).

I doubt we'll see much improvement on the first two if only because of the massive pharma lobby and the military-industrial complex. I do think there will be a return to Obama-era policies as regards migration, but I'd like to push for something a bit nicer than that. Interestingly enough I think that M4A-esque plans and reduced military presence actually flies with a significant enough amount of Republicans since a few of them will continue to model Trump and play at populism.

Wouldn't hold out much hope for the reduced Middle East presence. We'll probably get a watered-down Obamacare update. Biden MIGHT try some big show about tearing down the wall and defunding ICE, but I'm not sure. That seems really risky, politically. Most likely it would be some moderate action.

I wonder if 6 months to a couple of years from now, people will ever stop and notice how worked up they got over Trump and if they were ever in a bit of a panic.

Also, will there be different factions in the Biden White House? You gotta think that some of Harris' people are looking at Biden as almost a lame duck.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2021, 02:30:42 pm by Mr.DeMartino »


  • 745sticky
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1855

    • March 26, 2020, 01:52:57 pm
    • Korea
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #242 on: January 08, 2021, 02:32:18 pm »
Ooh, an actual policy discussion on waygook.  I'm out of practice, hang on a sec. ... Okay, so M4A as you say has a large hurdle of Pharma, but also it will be labeled socialism and the Americans who depend the most on socialism really really hate things called socialism.
M4A definitely has some tricky waters to navigate. Honestly, I think it's sort of screwed, the people who really really hate things called socialism were willing to swallow the idea of "TrumpCare" or whatever but now that Trump's successfully set up Biden as some sort of election thief that ship has sailed. Plus even if Biden were theoretically interested in ramming a plan through still have to contend with a few of his fellow Democrats and we'd probably end up with another Obamacare.


I think highway funding should be withheld from states that don't adopt state-wide rigorous standards for police officers, including ongoing training.  And everyone in jail over a dime bag should be released and their records expunged.
I would love a national overhaul of the police system but that'd be pretty hard to pull off, all the red states will be crying about their states rights all the way to court. I guess withholding highway funding could maybe work, but in terms of actually achieving meaningful police reform it's probably best pursued at the local level. I mean sure Minneapolis didn't completely defund but at least they managed to shift 8 mil off the police force, which is something.


But policies come and go.  In my mind, the biggest matter of a presidency is actually SCOTUS.  I'm hoping Breyer will resign on Jan 21 or 22 and we'll some young blood in there, while Senate GOP is still on their back heels.  Next out is presumably Thomas (and I mean to retire, of course) but it's a long time until the next chance, unless something unfortunate happens.
It would be nice if Breyer would retire. I feel like after what happened with Ginsburg he'll probably feel pressured enough to do so. Thomas probably isn't going to retire if he can help it.

Personally I don't like the SCOTUS much in the first place, but it's here to stay. The best we can hope for is Biden actually goes ahead and expands it but I doubt that's happening.


Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #243 on: January 08, 2021, 02:33:14 pm »
well, had it been a BLM protest, they would identify the man from his personal effects ... once they got them from the morgue.
If there's one thing that characterized the BLM protests of the past 6 months, its how the cops mowed everyone down and they were quickly snuffed out.


Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #244 on: January 08, 2021, 02:35:48 pm »
No, there was and is serious concern about trump's connections to putin.
No, there wasn't. Anyone in the know was aware it was just a domestic political stunt to smear Trump.

If there were real concerns we would have seen a MUCH different response.


  • Adel
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1608

    • January 30, 2015, 12:50:26 am
    • The Abyss
    more
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #245 on: January 08, 2021, 02:37:53 pm »
No, there wasn't. Anyone in the know was aware it was just a domestic political stunt to smear Trump.

If there were real concerns we would have seen a MUCH different response.
Do you consider Antifa an insurrection? Was that Redifa ?


Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #246 on: January 08, 2021, 02:37:57 pm »
Missing from this perspective is the fact that yesterday's 'rebellion' was performed in pursuit of a hopeless delusion, in service of anti-democratic goals, initiated and primed by the President.
Missing from the perspective is that we'll move on the second some celebrity does something dumb or James Harden gets punched by Russell Westbrook.


Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #247 on: January 08, 2021, 02:38:28 pm »
Do you consider Antifa an insurrection? Was that Redifa ?
Antifa and the Proud Boys are glorified LARPers, more akin to soccer ultras.

I mean when your gang looks more like the Baseball Furies or the Mimes or some other gang from 'The Warriors' or whatever, you're not a serious threat.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2021, 02:42:25 pm by Mr.DeMartino »


  • Mr C
  • The Legend

    • 3023

    • October 17, 2012, 03:00:40 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #248 on: January 08, 2021, 02:39:27 pm »
M4A definitely has some tricky waters to navigate. Honestly, I think it's sort of screwed, the people who really really hate things called socialism were willing to swallow the idea of "TrumpCare" or whatever but now that Trump's successfully set up Biden as some sort of election thief that ship has sailed. Plus even if Biden were theoretically interested in ramming a plan through still have to contend with a few of his fellow Democrats and we'd probably end up with another Obamacare.

I would love a national overhaul of the police system but that'd be pretty hard to pull off, all the red states will be crying about their states rights all the way to court. I guess withholding highway funding could maybe work, but in terms of actually achieving meaningful police reform it's probably best pursued at the local level. I mean sure Minneapolis didn't completely defund but at least they managed to shift 8 mil off the police force, which is something.
Highway funding has worked to push states several times, for example raising the drinking age.  Training could be done by whatever entity but meet certain benchmarks from the state level, like say, teachers and nurses.
Quote

It would be nice if Breyer would retire. I feel like after what happened with Ginsburg he'll probably feel pressured enough to do so. Thomas probably isn't going to retire if he can help it.

Personally I don't like the SCOTUS much in the first place, but it's here to stay. The best we can hope for is Biden actually goes ahead and expands it but I doubt that's happening.

It won't.  Nine has been a good number that spread vacancies pretty well across presidential terms, until the turtle cum-sock played that bullshit with Merrick Garland.


  • Mr C
  • The Legend

    • 3023

    • October 17, 2012, 03:00:40 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #249 on: January 08, 2021, 02:42:52 pm »
If there's one thing that characterized the BLM protests of the past 6 months, its how the cops mowed everyone down and they were quickly snuffed out.
Judging from your sniveling excuses and apologia for an attempted armed insurrection against the US government, you have lost whatever little sense you used to have.

The device has yet to be created with the sensitivity to determine the minuteness of a **** I could give about anything you have to say about anything. 


Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #250 on: January 08, 2021, 02:43:36 pm »
Highway funding has worked to push states several times, for example raising the drinking age.  Training could be done by whatever entity but meet certain benchmarks from the state level, like say, teachers and nurses.It won't.  Nine has been a good number that spread vacancies pretty well across presidential terms, until the turtle cum-sock played that bullshit with Merrick Garland.
It was gamey, but then it was Reid who decided to do away with the filibuster. The chickens came home to roost on that one.


  • 745sticky
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1855

    • March 26, 2020, 01:52:57 pm
    • Korea
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #251 on: January 08, 2021, 02:44:26 pm »
Wouldn't hold out much hope for the reduced Middle East presence. We'll probably get a watered-down Obamacare update.
"watered-down Obamacare update" is a pretty good way to describe what'll probably happen.


Biden MIGHT try some big show about tearing down the wall and defunding ICE, but I'm not sure. That seems really risky, politically. Most likely it would be some moderate action.
Trump only got like 450 miles of it up, right? And it isn't particularly impressive either. Biden will probably halt construction like he promised, but I doubt he'll be tearing stuff down.

At the very least I'd hope that Biden could keep ICE confined to the border and quit letting them run around randomly hunting people down.


Also, will there be different factions in the Biden White House? You gotta think that some of Harris' people are looking at Biden as almost a lame duck.
Honestly, I doubt it. Now that the corporate Dems have their epic centrist victory they're going to try and hold strong so they can shove as many leftists out of the party as possible (while probably keeping AOC around for optics). The Democratic primaries have already shown that the party is remarkably united when it feels the need to be.


Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #252 on: January 08, 2021, 02:47:45 pm »
Judging from your sniveling excuses and apologia for an attempted armed insurrection against the US government, you have lost whatever little sense you used to have.
ARMED INSURRECTION ARMED INSURRECTION ARMED INSURRECTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you say it loud enough and with enough conviction, it will make it true.

Dude, people were more interested in selfies and social media follows than actual overthrow.

Calling this an "Armed insurrection" is an insult to REAL armed insurrections in 3rd world countries where thousands of people get killed and the government gets slaughtered and civil war breaks out. Stop trying to add unnecessary drama in your life just to make a point or make things interesting.

This is like when 1st worlders go without food for 18 hours and claim they're "starving."  "OMG MY HAGWON BOSS KEPT US WORKING FOR 8 HOURS STRAIGHT AND I COULDN'T GET LUNCH. HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES!!!!!!!!!!!"

Get a grip. Stop dialing everything up to 11.


Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #253 on: January 08, 2021, 02:50:43 pm »
Honestly, I doubt it. Now that the corporate Dems have their epic centrist victory they're going to try and hold strong so they can shove as many leftists out of the party as possible (while probably keeping AOC around for optics). The Democratic primaries have already shown that the party is remarkably united when it feels the need to be.
Oh I don't think it will be ideologically driven, just more personal camps. Biden's people vs. Harris. Biden people have to know the clock is ticking and the Harris loyalists from the getgo will definitely be trying to knock them off.


Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #254 on: January 08, 2021, 02:53:51 pm »
Quick question- Which is worse? Rioting and smashing the Capitol and attacking politicians or rioting and smashing a local small business and attacking your neighbors?

If you think the former is worse than the latter, that shows deep down whether or not you truly are an authoritarian.


  • 745sticky
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1855

    • March 26, 2020, 01:52:57 pm
    • Korea
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #255 on: January 08, 2021, 02:54:09 pm »
Highway funding has worked to push states several times, for example raising the drinking age.  Training could be done by whatever entity but meet certain benchmarks from the state level, like say, teachers and nurses.
Improved training would help but honestly they need to change the entire ethos. Put a social worker in the police chief position, or at the very least quit hiring retired army sergeants. Also, teach them to value human life more than private property. Don't get me wrong, people don't deserve to have their shit stolen, but personally the only reason I'd shoot a home invader or whatever is if it were clearly necessary for self-defense.


It won't.  Nine has been a good number that spread vacancies pretty well across presidential terms, until the turtle cum-sock played that bullshit with Merrick Garland.
Unfortunately the aforementioned turtle cum-sock has more or less changed the game, I have no doubt that him and whatever Republicans follow him will continue to play that game at any given opportunity.


  • Adel
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1608

    • January 30, 2015, 12:50:26 am
    • The Abyss
    more
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #256 on: January 08, 2021, 03:00:43 pm »
Quick question- Which is worse? Rioting and smashing the Capitol and attacking politicians or rioting and smashing a local small business and attacking your neighbors?

If you think the former is worse than the latter, that shows deep down whether or not you truly are an authoritarian.

Sounds like a question posed to justify an insurrection that someone was trying downplay as  quickly forgotten.  Funny how quickly Trump threw them under the bus.


  • Mr C
  • The Legend

    • 3023

    • October 17, 2012, 03:00:40 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #257 on: January 08, 2021, 03:03:34 pm »
Quick question- Which is worse? Rioting and smashing the Capitol and attacking politicians or rioting and smashing a local small business and attacking your neighbors?

If you think the former is worse than the latter, that shows deep down whether or not you truly are an authoritarian.
Which one is being incited by the President?


  • Mister Tim
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1806

    • September 08, 2013, 10:33:54 am
    • SK
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #258 on: January 08, 2021, 03:07:46 pm »
Quick question- Which is worse? Rioting and smashing the Capitol and attacking politicians or rioting and smashing a local small business and attacking your neighbors?

If you think the former is worse than the latter, that shows deep down whether or not you truly are an authoritarian.

Hmmm...



  • 745sticky
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1855

    • March 26, 2020, 01:52:57 pm
    • Korea
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #259 on: January 08, 2021, 03:08:20 pm »
Oh I don't think it will be ideologically driven, just more personal camps. Biden's people vs. Harris. Biden people have to know the clock is ticking and the Harris loyalists from the getgo will definitely be trying to knock them off.
I could be wrong, but I don't really see Harris as someone who has "loyalists" lol. I mean she basically sold out all her positions to get the job in the first place.