Posts posted by ChiTownDoc
-
-
-
1 minute ago, lemonlime said:
I'm not sure how to have a real debate any longer, however, now that the bozos on the far right, emphasis on "bozos," not "far right," control the Senate and the executive. When you have a party who shuts down the government for an expensive, imaginary, useless boondoggle of a wall (which they aren't even really planning on building and which they lie about whose paying for), and seeks funding for things like an imaginary space force and lies about the taxes they're imposing (I'm waiting to figure out how China's paying tariffs levied on Americans) and everything else, while claiming the other side is fiscally irresponsible because gasp they would like to provide things like health insurance and food stamps, how do you debate?
It's like a debate between an enraged two year old and his preschool teacher on whether he has to take naptime. Maybe the kid is right that he doesn't need the nap today. But there's no way in hell to have a reasonable discussion on the necessity of naptime.
And now these toddlers, or giant orange toddler enablers, want to debate fiscal policy, but only "debate fiscal policy" to criticize a congresswoman who's been in office less than a week.
Lol you’re reading too much into my grammar. The far left and far right are all bozos. Happy?
-
Edited by ChiTownDoc
8 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:Giving her a pass? It's an interview on 60 minutes, not an actual bill that just says "We will pay for these things the way we pay for our military."
She has already come out with a proposal for a 70% tax rate on income over 10 million, Hugo is right in that she wasn't going to give Anderson and 60 minutes a bunch of sound bites that would be plastered everywhere throughout her term, she wants to discuss these specifics on her own terms (e.g. twitter).
Oh goody. Another Trump in terms of how she communicates... Twitter needs to be bought out by the Fed govt (with taxpayers’ money of course).
Edit: oh and it would be such a terrible sound bite ‘do we wanna pay for Space Force or education?’ Again, the cult like following of her and dipshit Bernie is disturbing. I’ll still vote for her over Trump if she’s the D pick but the standard needs to be higher.
-
1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:
I actually think it's valuable to point out that the media obsessively focuses on how we'll pay for the shit we should actually pay for while it never gives two shits about how we'll pay for shit we shouldn't pay for (which are always Republican ideas). The GOP has spent the past 30+ years working the refs so that their economic policy views are simply considered acceptable by default, despite the fact that they're complete and utter nonsense and have been concretely disproven by all available evidence.
Public framing has an enormous impact on how policy proposals are viewed by the public and even what is within the realm of discussion. Dems will never be able to pass anything they propose regardless of how much good a proposal might do if they continue to allow a Republican-cajoled media to frame the debate. They need to start working the refs. And I'm just going to preempt the "but then they're just acting like Republicans and really then I might as well vote for Trump!" that I'm sure someone wants to say by pointing out that that's really fucking stupid and there isn't some high-minded alternative that can actually be an effective political strategy.
That’s fine - I agree. Say ‘should we pay for space force or education?’ That gets the point across. Then at least give an inkling on how to fucking budget. Giving her a pass on that answer - a lot of you scare me. Going far left to combat bozos on the far right is not the solution.
-
16 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:
She literally says, "the same way we pay for <list of other things we pay for>". That's the answer, and it's the correct answer. The question was literally how do we pay for it and we pay for it the same way we pay for everything else.
If Anderson Cooper wanted to ask, "How do we make sure everything is either immediately revenue neutral?" then he should've asked that. But he didn't, and others don't, because it's a stupid question.
If he (and others) are fishing for a specific answer, then ask better questions. It's not her job or anyone else's job to imagine what the potential subtext of a question is.
They’re piling up debt so we should get ours too. No. If both sides go there, then fuck both sides. And I realize, right now, that’s where we are.
-
7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:
Taking on debt as investment can be a very sound fiscal policy. Corporations do it. Individuals do it. Nations should also do it.
The question isn't whether or not we should take on debt. That's obvious; we should. The question is whether or not the payoff at the end will be more than the debt itself. (There are other questions, of course, but I'm talking about basic fiscal responsibility.)
We should make those investments.
And absolutely no one on the Democratic side sounds like Trump. No one does.
Her policy answer is fine if she says what you did. She didn’t. She goes, ‘what about their shitty fiscal ideas?’
-
11 hours ago, F250 said:
Yeah, that was a pretty shitty answer. Part of the Blue Wave message was that Dems were going to restore some semblance of responsible governance. Saying we will pay for it the same way we pay for the Space Force doesn't sound like someone who has a plan. They sound like Trump.
This is extremely fucking annoying. Nobody needs the left’s alternative to Trump.
-
-
Apparently it was tipped.
A damn shame.
-
-
On 1/4/2019 at 5:22 AM, slorch said:
Aaron Donald is OK... I mean, it's not like he's a leading defensive MVP candidate or anything.
and your Bears' resurgence occurred all because of the offense right?
That shitty offense caught up with them. I maintain offense is going to run this league for a while. Kliff/Riley and the college guys with killer offensive pedigree will remain damn hot in the NFL...the last time NFL offenses were actually more innovative than college was the Bill Walsh era. Clowns.
-
1 hour ago, Stunns38 said:
This this this. As a Bears fan, I say the coaches lost this game for us and to leave it in Parker’s hands....we all knew what was going to happen.It' the cheapass ownership. They wouldn't cut his ass because he had 9M or so guaranteed (also stupid)...
Growing up a Dallas fan and all those Super Bowls as a kid...then not a damn thing. I guess I can live with it being that I'm not that big an NFL fan and it's always better to win when you're a kid when that shit actually means a lot to you...that being said Bears/Cowboys winning would have been pretty sweet.
-
1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:
I would be perfectly fine with Biden but honestly, he’s boring AF. He’s already run for President twice and never won a state in the primaries.
Yeah, he’d crush Trump in the debates but who wouldn’t? Biden has a slight weakness there too as he carries the perceived Obama baggage.
I kinda hold Biden/Obama responsible for the conditions that gave us Trump.
Again, I’d vote for him in a heartbeat against any Republican but I think the democrats can do better.
Im ok with all that. I wanna see some good candidates then will get behind whoever.
Can we just put Bernie on the sidelines?
-
1 hour ago, bolverk said:
It looks more and more like Uncle Joe is probably going make a run for it.
From the NYTimes:
Biden Sees Himself as Democrats’ Best Hope in 2020, Allies Say
WASHINGTON — Former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. is in the final stages of deciding whether to run for president and has told allies he is skeptical the other Democrats eyeing the White House can defeat President Trump, an assessment that foreshadows a clash between the veteran Washington insider and the more liberal and fresh-faced contenders for the party’s 2020 nomination.
Many Democratic voters, and nearly all major Democratic donors, are keenly interested in Mr. Biden’s plans because of their consuming focus on finding a candidate who can beat a president they believe represents a threat to American democracy. But there is also a rising demand in the party for a more progressive standard-bearer who reflects the increasingly diverse Democratic coalition.
Mr. Biden would instantly be the early front-runner if he ran, but he would have to bridge divides in a primary that would test whether Democrats are willing to embrace a moderate white man in his 70s if they view him as the best bet to oust Mr. Trump.
“He has the best chance of beating Trump, hands down,” said Senator Tom Carper of Delaware, Mr. Biden’s longtime friend and former colleague. “On a scale of one to 10, that’s probably about a 12 for us.”
Yet Mr. Biden’s skepticism about the field could alienate female and minority voters who are excited that several women and African-Americans are expected to run. Nominating a white man may also roil some Democrats who are already torn about whether a woman could win in 2020 after Hillary Clinton’s loss. And Mr. Biden’s preoccupation with winning back blue-collar Midwestern whites could place him at odds with Democrats who see greater potential for growth in the highly educated suburbs and across the booming Sun Belt and upper South.
More broadly, debate around Mr. Biden’s possible candidacy illustrates the dueling visions in the party and particularly the divisions between its pragmatic and liberal wing. Some Democrats are skeptical that a relatively moderate candidate like Mr. Biden, who has baggage like supporting the 1990s crime bill that is loathed on the left, would prevail in the primary with a message of unity and national healing rather than the fiery and uncompromising brand of populism that Democratic primary voters elevated in the midterm elections.
“In 2020, Biden-style centrism will become a toxic and losing brand of politics in Democratic primaries,” said Waleed Shahid, a left-wing activist.
The 76-year-old former vice president, who leads the field in initial national and Iowa polls, has not yet told his allies that he has decided to run. And they emphasize that Mr. Biden’s decision will not be final until he says it for himself, noting that family considerations are central. Mr. Biden sought the presidency twice before but he has also considered it at least as many times before bowing out.
But Mr. Biden has indicated that he is leaning toward running and will most likely make a decision within the next two weeks, according to Democrats within and beyond his inner circle who have spoken to him recently.
The former vice president told a senior Democratic official last week that he is both likely to run and that his aides have told him he must move quickly in this primary, according to two Democrats briefed on the conversation.
Mr. Biden is under significant pressure from his party’s major donors to make up his mind — no later than the end of January — or risk watching them migrate to other candidates. Mr. Biden and his advisers are highly sensitive to the criticism that in 2015, he dragged out his decision before ultimately opting out of the Democratic primary, exasperating his supporters and undermining the Democratic front-runner, Mrs. Clinton, in the process.
He spent some of his Christmas vacation in the Virgin Islands calling and texting his would-be supporters and is using this week to hold private meetings in Washington with Democratic officials.
In one of his calls over the holidays, Mr. Biden repeated a variation of a line he has used publicly: “If you can persuade me there is somebody better who can win, I’m happy not to do it,” he said, according to the Democrat he spoke to, who shared the conversation on condition of anonymity to discuss a private talk.
But then Mr. Biden said something he has not stated so bluntly in public: “But I don’t see the candidate who can clearly do what has to be done to win.”
In another possible sign that he is preparing to ramp up, an emissary from Mr. Biden recently reached out to James Smith, the Democratic Party nominee for governor in South Carolina last year, about scheduling a call with the former vice president. Mr. Smith, a state legislator and friend of Mr. Biden, said the former vice president could count on an enthusiastic reception in South Carolina if he were to run.
“In the circles that I move, I think there’s almost unanimity of support for him,” Mr. Smith said.
But Mr. Smith acknowledged that in Mr. Biden’s absence, others were making moves in South Carolina. Mr. Smith said that after his defeat in November, he had heard from several contenders, including Senators Cory Booker of New Jersey, Kamala Harris of California and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts — none of whom, he said, could count on scooping up Mr. Biden’s network.
The entry of Mr. Biden would immediately upend the still-nascent primary: Ms. Warren joined the race last week and three dozen other Democrats are considering it. Mr. Biden could crowd out other establishment-aligned contenders like former Mayor Mitch Landrieu of New Orleans and former Gov. Terry McAuliffe of Virginia, given that Mr. Biden’s donor base and supporters may overlap with some of their own. And Mr. Biden’s allies are themselves mindful of another Democrat whose blue-collar credentials could pose a challenge to their own coalition: Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio.
Most of all, a Biden candidacy would also frame the primary around the question of whether Democrats prefer a familiar face and steady continuum of former President Barack Obama’s center-left politics, or a generational change and turn to a more liberal, confrontational approach to Mr. Trump and the right.
Mr. Biden’s supporters argue that Mr. Trump’s incendiary conduct and norm-breaking presidency have so imperiled the country that only somebody with the stature and experience of a two-term vice president can bring back stability. And, they contend, Mr. Trump has diminished the importance of ideological differences within the Democratic Party.
“Variations in policy positions don’t really matter because, to paraphrase the president, we are in a national emergency — but the national emergency is him,” said Lou Frillman, who was a major fund-raising bundler for Mr. Obama’s campaigns and is close to Mr. Biden. “The vice president has all the qualities necessary to win, and I think he has all the qualities the country is going to so desperately need to bring us back from the edge.”
Most of all, Mr. Biden’s allies contend, he would be the Democrat most likely to reclaim the battleground state voters who abandoned the party in 2016.
“If you look at Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, the labor folks who voted for Trump, they love him,” former Gov. Jack Markell of Delaware said of Mr. Biden. “He has a connection with these people.”
Mr. Biden’s enthusiasts are also quick to note that he is not just popular with white working-class voters, but is also well-liked among African-Americans and millennials.
Mr. Biden has led in national and early-state polling, drawing about a third of the vote, enough to make him a solid but not overwhelming front-runner at a moment when such surveys are heavily dependent on name identification. He is viewed favorably by the vast majority of Democrats, but some surveys indicate Democrats want fresh faces and new leadership.
Mr. Biden would portray himself as a progressive, embracing priorities like free public college tuition and expanding health care, advisers say. But he would also make the case that his 36 years in the Senate and eight years as vice president make him the best qualified to repair the damage they believe Mr. Trump has done at home and abroad.
“This is a guy who actually gets along with Mitch McConnell and a number of other Republicans,” said Mr. Carper, invoking the Senate majority leader with whom Mr. Biden worked closely to negotiate a handful of agreements in the Obama years.
Yet the preferences of the party’s donor class and an ability to work in a bipartisan fashion are hardly alluring to the party’s increasingly liberal grass-roots activists and voters. And the candidacy of a Washington Democrat who fondly recalls his relationships with conservatives, and even used his speech bowing out of the 2016 race to make the case that Republicans are the opposition but not the enemy, may be ill-suited for the Trump era.
“We are at a time when we have a combative racist and often unhinged person in the White House, and that’s not going to be answered with somebody who says: Let’s come together and let’s heal and let’s all be gentle souls,” said Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington, who supported Senator Bernie Sanders for president in 2016.
Part of Mr. Biden’s challenge would be what he represents as a septuagenarian who came of age in a consensus-oriented Senate dominated by white men, some of them segregationists, a political milieu as distant to millennial Democrats as the Civil War.
Should he run, Mr. Biden would quite likely face multiple major black candidates and no fewer than three prominent women. After the Democratic base elevated diversity to a first priority in the midterm elections, Mr. Biden would have little to offer voters determined to change the face of the presidency.
He would be counting, instead, on Democrats embracing a candidate from an ideologically and culturally traditional caste as an expedient for defeating Mr. Trump.
Perhaps just as daunting, Mr. Biden would have to answer for a political record stretching back nearly half a century. He has never faced the level of criticism from his fellow Democrats that he would earn as a leading candidate for president.
Mr. Biden has steadfastly supported important liberal priorities over the years, including gun control and labor rights, but he was also a loyal ally of the credit card industry as a senator from Delaware and backed a crime bill in the 1990s that is now seen by liberals as having forged a generation of mass incarceration.
In 1991, as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mr. Biden presided over the confirmation hearings of Justice Clarence Thomas, including the interrogation of Anita Hill by a panel of all-white and all-male senators. And in 2002, he voted to authorize the invasion of Iraq.
But he has said before that he is not alarmed about the indignity of ending his storied career by losing a primary.
Invoking the 2015 death of his eldest son, Beau, Mr. Biden wrote in his book “Promise Me, Dad” that he understood “the difference between an electoral loss and real loss.”
Fuck yes. I can get behind Uncle Joe. He will absolutely destroy Fucktard in any and all debates.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2 minutes ago, Mileslong said:
I really hate the PI penalty in the pros, it’s Ricky tack to begin with an then give them the ball at the spot of the foul is absurd. 15 yards should be the penalty
Bears need to chuck it all 3 downs and hope to get a call. It’s ridiculous but in a low scoring game, that may be your best move.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
in Cloak Room
Fucking A. This is all I’m saying but any criticism of the princess is frowned upon heavily by SOME in her cabal. Sound familiar?