U.S. Politics

[sharkyvilla]

7 hours ago, Xann said:

**** me that's brilliant

[VILLAMARV]

41 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

Delighted to see the atrocious Kamala Harris get absolutely scorched by Tulsi Goddard

This was delightful. In a brutal mis-match type of way.

 

Harris's Press Secretary there. Tweeting about how she's a Яussian bot by way of a response

Edited August 5, 2019 by VILLAMARV
tweet

[Keyblade]

4 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

But you will routinely find >40% not wanting to ditch their current (private) plans and the support for building on Obama care as opposed to Sanders' plan, which will effectively scrap Medicare all together, being generally more favourable. Lots of Americans do not want to lose their current plans, especially those in unions, Sanders' option, which I don't exactly disagree with, will mean just that and I'd wager at the crunch it won't be as big a hit with the voters.

Then you have the plans to decriminalise illegal entry into the US (putting it through civil instead of criminal courts), this will not wash at all with the electorate and Biden is playing those polls correctly. Ultimately this is about getting Trump out and Biden's policies generally are more popular.

Biden definitely isn't Republican-lite, that's preposterous and symptomatic of how the political compass is so skewed these days. He's a generally somewhat left of centre candidate by American standards. Sanders comes across as too radical, Warren will ultimately fail to sell her ideas in but is at least more capable.

Lots of Americans will lose their plans without M4A anyway, like Sanders said in the debate. If they change jobs, or if their job decides to suddenly change plans etc. Medicare for all guarantees them healthcare, and they can also just keep seeing the same doctors if they choose. They're also covered much more comprehensively on average as Sanders also mentioned in the debate. It's a no brainer for the average American. I suspect that when the questions were asked to those people they were framed in a way that made it seem like they would have no choice in their care and would lose what they have which is far from the case.

Quote

Biden definitely isn't Republican-lite, that's preposterous and symptomatic of how the political compass is so skewed these days. He's a generally somewhat left of centre candidate by American standards.

So a right winger then? It's the American political compass that is so skewed. The Overton Window is so far to the right that Joe Biden can be considered nominally on the left lol. What are some of his left wing policies?

[maqroll]

So I just spent the last hour and a half standing on the busiest street corner in my city holding a placard that read "Gun Control Now!"

Most people tapped their car horn in approval, but I had one guy in a big Ford F-350 give me the finger and yell "**** you!"

A guy on a motorcycle gave me the finger and a guy in a sedan made a shooting gesture at me.

Oh yeah, and a ten year old kid shook his head and said "No".

Even in a liberal city in a liberal region there are plenty of right wing gun nuts all around here.

 

Edited August 6, 2019 by maqroll

[villakram]

15 hours ago, maqroll said:

So I just spent the last hour and a half standing on the busiest street corner in my city holding a placard that read "Gun Control Now!"

Most people tapped their car horn in approval, but I had one guy in a big Ford F-350 give me the finger and yell "**** you!"

A guy on a motorcycle gave me the finger and a guy in a sedan made a shooting gesture at me.

Oh yeah, and a ten year old kid shook his head and said "No".

Even in a liberal city in a liberal region there are plenty of right wing gun nuts all around here.

 

Please repeat with an "repeal the 2nd Amendment", but make sure you have back up. There's way more gun support here than the obvious types.

[HanoiVillan]

I'm posting this tweet not really for the message,  but for the polling data within it:

It would be helpful, I think, to winnow this field down as much as possible as soon as possible. I'm glad to hear that the qualifying criteria for the next debates are tougher, and that only about 10 people might make it, but honestly looking at the figures here, with only 5 candidates polling above 5%, it's kind of hard to see why you would need more than those 5 debating. 

I also find it fairly amusing, given how frequently I read some variant of how strong a candidate Harris or Booker is based on their ethnicity, and the ethnic composition of the Democratic primary electorate, to note that they are on 1% and 0% with black voters respectively, while 'he has problems appealing to black voters' Sanders is at 16% and Biden at a whopping 47%. 

[Keyblade]

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

I'm posting this tweet not really for the message,  but for the polling data within it:

It would be helpful, I think, to winnow this field down as much as possible as soon as possible. I'm glad to hear that the qualifying criteria for the next debates are tougher, and that only about 10 people might make it, but honestly looking at the figures here, with only 5 candidates polling above 5%, it's kind of hard to see why you would need more than those 5 debating. 

I also find it fairly amusing, given how frequently I read some variant of how strong a candidate Harris or Booker is based on their ethnicity, and the ethnic composition of the Democratic primary electorate, to note that they are on 1% and 0% with black voters respectively, while 'he has problems appealing to black voters' Sanders is at 16% and Biden at a whopping 47%. 

Kamala in particular has been harmful to the black community, and her new pseudo-progressive shtick isn't going to make them forget it. Cory Booker is the most corporate politician you could imagine. You couldn't think up a more goofy caricature of a soulless politician if you tried  

Biden has the biggest name recognition. He'll always do the best with those who don't really follow politics. Most people will just think to themselves "isn't that Obama's VP?" and go from there. Which is why you see Biden lean heavily on Obama's legacy which isn't a particularly good one when looked at with any sort of scrutiny, but on the face of it, it represents a much better time than now. And that goes a long way for the average Democrat.

[A'Villan]

Does the U.S have any T.V shows like QandA here in Australia where there's a panel of politicians and authoritative figures on a given subject each week?

The audience is made up of the general public and represents an equal portion of people depending on their voting selection and they ask the panel questions.

It's interesting viewing and you always get a feel for how genuine a panelist is, and their level of understanding on a given issue.

[TheAuthority]

53 minutes ago, A'Villan said:

Does the U.S have any T.V shows like QandA here in Australia where there's a panel of politicians and authoritative figures on a given subject each week?

The audience is made up of the general public and represents an equal portion of people depending on their voting selection and they ask the panel questions.

It's interesting viewing and you always get a feel for how genuine a panelist is, and their level of understanding on a given issue.

No.

Sounds like Question Time in the UK which has gone very downhill in the last few years (since the Cameron Tories insisted on installing right wingers at the top of the BBC.)

In the US we have the "Sunday morning" shows. They are one on one interviews with various leading politicians (usually cabinet members) and the network's top political correspondents. Never any panel stuff. There is very little actual debate in the US (like PMQ's for example.) It's always one politician spouting rhetoric in a void. Even in the Congress.

[A'Villan]

18 minutes ago, TheAuthority said:

No.

Sounds like Question Time in the UK which has gone very downhill in the last few years (since the Cameron Tories insisted on installing right wingers at the top of the BBC.)

In the US we have the "Sunday morning" shows. They are one on one interviews with various leading politicians (usually cabinet members) and the network's top political correspondents. Never any panel stuff. There is very little actual debate in the US (like PMQ's for example.) It's always one politician spouting rhetoric in a void. Even in the Congress.

QandA is on the ABC. Which has had it's funding slashed and was actually even raided by the AFP (the feds) just a few weeks back which made headlines worldwide.

[TheAuthority]

Does ABC receive government funding like the BBC?

[LondonLax]

1 hour ago, TheAuthority said:

Does ABC receive government funding like the BBC?

It’s solely funded from general taxation (no license fee). It’s budget is set by the government in power and typically the centre right party cuts its budget whilst the centre left party restores it when they get back in. 

[A'Villan]

1 hour ago, TheAuthority said:

Does ABC receive government funding like the BBC?

 

20 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

It’s solely funded from general taxation (no license fee). It’s budget is set by the government in power and typically the centre right party cuts its budget whilst the centre left party restores it when they get back in. 

What LondonLax said.

[HanoiVillan]

6 hours ago, Keyblade said:

Kamala in particular has been harmful to the black community, and her new pseudo-progressive shtick isn't going to make them forget it. Cory Booker is the most corporate politician you could imagine. You couldn't think up a more goofy caricature of a soulless politician if you tried  

Biden has the biggest name recognition. He'll always do the best with those who don't really follow politics. Most people will just think to themselves "isn't that Obama's VP?" and go from there. Which is why you see Biden lean heavily on Obama's legacy which isn't a particularly good one when looked at with any sort of scrutiny, but on the face of it, it represents a much better time than now. And that goes a long way for the average Democrat.

I agree with everything you say here, but that's why I'm very pessimistic about the chances of anyone other than Biden winning the primary. In reality, most voters are low-information voters, not just now but also when they finally cast their ballot in the primaries, and Biden's name recognition is very high. Those voters won't be applying much scrutiny to Obama's record now, if they didn't at any point during the eight years he was actually President. 

One thing this data really shows IMO is that if Warren or Sanders are to have a chance of beating Biden, they need to be on the same debate stage as him, and they need the field to be much smaller. Low information voters will default to picking the one they'be heard of if they're presented with a large field. 

[VILLAMARV]

 

Just over an hour long

Quote

I really enjoyed listening to two intelligent and soft spoken people have a discussion without talking over one another or interrupting. It actually sounded strange, and that makes me sad.

Just one of the comments. There's rarely something that I agree so much with in the YT comments section.

And whatever you think of Rogan I always credit him with letting people speak.

Edited August 7, 2019 by limpid
fixed embed

[Dr_Pangloss]

21 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

I'm posting this tweet not really for the message,  but for the polling data within it:

It would be helpful, I think, to winnow this field down as much as possible as soon as possible. I'm glad to hear that the qualifying criteria for the next debates are tougher, and that only about 10 people might make it, but honestly looking at the figures here, with only 5 candidates polling above 5%, it's kind of hard to see why you would need more than those 5 debating. 

I also find it fairly amusing, given how frequently I read some variant of how strong a candidate Harris or Booker is based on their ethnicity, and the ethnic composition of the Democratic primary electorate, to note that they are on 1% and 0% with black voters respectively, while 'he has problems appealing to black voters' Sanders is at 16% and Biden at a whopping 47%. 

I actually really like Gabbard and Buttiigieg. I think they are potential stars of the party going forward.

[peterms]

[snowychap]

On 07/08/2019 at 21:30, Dr_Pangloss said:

I actually really like Gabbard and Buttiigieg.

I haven't paid any attention to the Democrat stampede other than catching some of Buttigieg very much earlier on. I thought he was certainly someone to take note of and like.

[El Zen]

1 hour ago, snowychap said:

I haven't paid any attention to the Democrat stampede other than catching some of Buttigieg very much earlier on. I thought he was certainly someone to take note of and like.

Buttigieg is definitely likeable, while at the same time giving off an impression of being the smartest guy in the room. That’s a good combo. 

If there is enough actual substance behind all that remains to be seen. So far, I’m more convinced by Warren and Sanders. I genuinely believe they would do a very good job if given the chance. 

[Keyblade]

Just now, Michelsen said:

Buttigieg is definitely likeable, while at the same time giving off an impression of being the smartest guy in the room. That’s a good combo. 

If there is enough actual substance behind all that remains to be seen. So far, I’m more convinced by Warren and Sanders. I genuinely believe they would do a very good job if given the chance. 

He does the Obama act better than Beto O'Rourke that's for sure.

Being the smart guy in the room is about the extent of his shtick though and there's not much beneath that.

The most disturbing thing about him really is his military history and how he basically joined the military to build up the political connections that got him to this point. Psychopathic.

There was that one tweet from him where he basically said "I didn't use assault weapons in Afghanistan so we could bring them here and kill each other" which after trying to search for it, seems like he basically repeated the other day by saying, quote: "Weapons like the one I carried in Afghanistan have no place on our streets or in our schools-least of all in the hands of white nationalists". It's crazy how much the American liberal is desensitized to war and are about as cool with it as their Republican counterparts.