Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Actually, I think the framework is pretty good.  The drafting is often poor and the itemization of powers, particularly Article II, needs reworking.

The framework would be a whole lot better if Republicans would actually follow the laws and stop ignoring them. They treat it the same way modern Christians treat the Bible, they revere and worship it as a holy document ordained by god, but when it comes to actually reading and understanding how it works, they pick and choose the parts they like and ignore the parts that don't support their mission. It's a wholly self-serving ideology completely unrestrained by any moral or ethical principles. Anything can be justified by their interpretation of the ancient words, so long as they ignore details, context and historical precedents, which they enthusiastically do to their own benefit and convenience. 

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Actually, I think the framework is pretty good.  The drafting is often poor and the itemization of powers, particularly Article II, needs reworking.

The framework sucks ass, actually. There's a reason literally no people who formed democracies after us copied it. The only really good part about the Constitution is the 1st Amendment as it begun being interpreted in the 20th century, though more recent judicial interpretations have sort of fucked that up somewhat.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

What the Democratic Party needs to do is emphasize how absurd a billion dollars is.  I think most people just group all "rich" together and have no reference point to the disparity in levels of wealth between their boss's boss at work and a true, legit billionaire.

For example: If a baby was born the morning of the Seinfeld series finale and was given $100,000 (more money than the majority of Americans will ever see in a year and almost double the average annual salary in America) EVERY.SINGLE.DAY of his life and never spent a penny, he still would not be a billionaire.  These are the people that the Republicans are protecting and giving tax cuts to.

Once you put it in normal people terms, then you might start converting folks.

Yeah, I mean, I understand a billionaire being 3 orders of magnitude more wealthy than a millionaire is a fuckton, but I am used to thinking in those terms.  Proportionally, having a billion dollars compared to a million dollars is as having a million dollars is to having a thousand dollars. Once you get past 7 or 8 zeroes, it's just past what the average human can really fathom.  It's like trying to comprehend galactic-scale space or time.

I see a lot of jealousy of people at the next one or two orders of magnitude.  Meaning, someone who has a 5 figure net worth looking at the people around them with a 6 figure net worth and thinking those are the people that are holding them down.  When in reality, the people with <5, 5, 6 and 7 figure net worth are all in the same boat that the people with 9 and 10 figure net worths are shaking (down).  The people with the 8 figure net worth are in a sweet spot hoping no one notices them.

Also, Democrats standing up to Republicans by fleeing is pretty damn funny.  I know this happens from time to time in Texas, but in today's political context, it cracks me up.

Edited by Goredho
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Goredho said:

Yeah, I mean, I understand a billionaire being 3 orders of magnitude more wealthy than a millionaire is a fuckton, but I am used to thinking in those terms.  Proportionally, having a billion dollars compared to a million dollars is as having a million dollars is to having a thousand dollars. Once you get past 7 or 8 zeroes, it's just past what the average human can really fathom.  It's like trying to comprehend galactic-scale space or time.

I see a lot of jealousy of people at the next one or two orders of magnitude.  Meaning, someone who has a 5 figure net worth looking at the people around them with a 6 figure net worth and thinking those are the people that are holding them down.  When in reality, the people with <5, 5, 6 and 7 figure net worth are all in the same boat that the people with 9 and 10 figure net worths are shaking (down).  The people with the 8 figure net worth are in a sweet spot hoping no one notices them.

Also, Democrats standing up to Republicans by fleeing is pretty damn funny.  I know this happens from time to time in Texas, but in today's political context, it cracks me up.

It's hard to villainize billionaires because almost nobody has ever encountered one. People see brown and gay people all the time.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
5 hours ago, Chuckie Finster said:

What the Democratic Party needs to do is emphasize how absurd a billion dollars is.  I think most people just group all "rich" together and have no reference point to the disparity in levels of wealth between their boss's boss at work and a true, legit billionaire.

For example: If a baby was born the morning of the Seinfeld series finale and was given $100,000 (more money than the majority of Americans will ever see in a year and almost double the average annual salary in America) EVERY.SINGLE.DAY of his life and never spent a penny, he still would not be a billionaire.  These are the people that the Republicans are protecting and giving tax cuts to.

Once you put it in normal people terms, then you might start converting folks.

Most Republican voters don’t know shit about economics. They readily vote against their own interests and it’s not because “I’ll pay more if it means owning the libs.” No, it’s because they all too readily believe improbable claims from questionable sources based on insufficient information.

Everything they say they believe” about economics? They don’t actually believe it, but they’ve definitely been told to believe it by people who have a skin in the game. Trickle down economics is bullshit, tariffing the shit out of everything is bullshit, the stories they tell about “military spending is what got us out of the Great Depression” is bullshit, the idea that we need to pull crumbs away from the poors in order to save the economy is bullshit, and “taxation is theft” is utter, complete and unforgivable bullshit.

Bottom line, if you voted for Trump because he’s a “successful businessman,” even his record clearly shows he’s not, and that “he’s better for the economy” when he was steering it towards a major recession (if not depression) in his first term before the pandemic gave him cover, you are by definition a low information voter.

Explaining to them the magnitude of a billion dollars is not going to change that because most of them wouldn’t even get it and the rest are too emotionally invested in this idea that politics is a team sport and “but muh red team.”

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Posted
8 hours ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

It's hard to villainize billionaires because almost nobody has ever encountered one. People see brown and gay people all the time.

That must mean it's hard to villainize politicians.

Wait.

Posted

image.thumb.png.ce4c37fa14befb70cab7cbba97b42a80.png
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/07/nyregion/cuomo-trump-mamdani-mayor.html

Former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo has positioned himself as the only candidate in the New York City mayor’s race who can forcefully go toe-to-toe with President Trump. But in a closed-door meeting on Wednesday with some of the city’s biggest business leaders, Mr. Cuomo suggested he might adopt a more conciliatory strategy.

As he made a case for his candidacy, Mr. Cuomo said he was not “personally” looking for a fight with the president and compared their yearslong relationship to a “dysfunctional marriage.”

“I think he wants to be accepted by New York City, and I think there’s an opportunity there,” Mr. Cuomo said, according to four people who shared accounts of the private meeting with 50 corporate executives gathered at Rockefeller Center.

He added: “I know, personally, he doesn’t want to fight with me. Personally, I don’t want to fight with him, right? So I don’t think he’s going to be eager to create a conflict with us.”

Mr. Cuomo also made the case that Mr. Trump cared about his hometown and wanted to “find a way to be a hero in New York City.” Mr. Trump knew, he said, that confronting Mr. Cuomo would lead to a “nasty, ugly, drawn-out fight.”

Just hours after the Wednesday meeting, which was organized by the Partnership for New York City, The New York Times reported that Mr. Cuomo had in recent weeks spoken privately to the president about the race. Like many of the city’s business leaders, the president has expressed alarm about Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee who has proposed raising taxes on the wealthy and freezing rents for some tenants.

The remarks to the Partnership speak to the sometimes divergent stances Mr. Cuomo is adopting around Mr. Trump publicly and privately as he seeks to revive his campaign after losing the Democratic primary to Mr. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state assemblyman and democratic socialist. Mr. Cuomo has previously said the White House is working to “undermine our democracy” and has criticized Mr. Trump’s immigration policies.

Mr. Cuomo needs to court business leaders, voters and potential donors who are friendlier with Mr. Trump or fear his influence. But inching too close to him could alienate Democrats in a city where the president is overwhelmingly unpopular.

Mr. Mamdani and his allies quickly seized on The Times’s report. At a news conference on Thursday morning, Mr. Mamdani called the conversation between the two men “a betrayal” of the city by Mr. Cuomo. He held the event outside 26 Federal Plaza in Lower Manhattan, the hub for Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the city.

“The job of mayor is not to audition to be the jester for a want-to-be king,” Mr. Mamdani said. “It is to be the person who stands up for the values of this city, the fabric of this city and the people of this city."

Mr. Mamdani said he had not spoken to Mr. Trump and played down concerns that his election could put a bigger target on New York City’s back, given the president’s virulent criticism of him. He said he would fight Mr. Trump at all costs if he sought to harm New Yorkers, but was open to collaboration to help the city.

“If the president and the administration is looking to work for the benefit of New Yorkers, which is what he spent so much of his campaign speaking about, that is a different conversation,” Mr. Mamdani said.

Mr. Cuomo was scheduled to hold an event Thursday afternoon.

His meeting with business leaders was intended to make a case for why he, rather than Mayor Eric Adams or the Republican candidate, Curtis Sliwa, was the best positioned to defeat Mr. Mamdani and guide the city through a tumultuous era. The former governor is leading Mr. Adams in the polls, but has said candidly that Mr. Mamdani, the race’s front-runner, will prevail if opposition to him remains splintered.

Among the attendees were the head of Pfizer and Tishman Speyer, the real estate giant.

In a statement on Wednesday, Rich Azzopardi, a spokesman for Mr. Cuomo, did not deny that the former governor and the president had spoken, but sought to put distance between them.

He said the two men had not spoken “in some time” and that “as far as I know,” they had not discussed the race. Mr. Azzopardi suggested Mr. Trump would be more likely to prefer that Mr. Mamdani or Mr. Adams win.

“He believes Mamdani would serve as a political boon to Republicans nationwide in the midterms, symbolizing what he sees as the Democratic Party’s extremism,” he said.

He called Mr. Adams, who worked with the Trump administration to get federal corruption charges dismissed against him, as a “wholly owned subsidiary of the president.”

Mr. Cuomo said in a recent interview on WNYC that the best way to handle Mr. Trump was with a confrontational approach.

“I don’t know there is a strategy besides being very aggressive because he’s a very aggressive personality,” Mr. Cuomo said. “He comes in very strong. His tactic is just to overpower you, and you have to meet force with force.”

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
On 8/6/2025 at 11:28 AM, Chuckie Finster said:

What the Democratic Party needs to do is emphasize how absurd a billion dollars is.  I think most people just group all "rich" together and have no reference point to the disparity in levels of wealth between their boss's boss at work and a true, legit billionaire.

For example: If a baby was born the morning of the Seinfeld series finale and was given $100,000 (more money than the majority of Americans will ever see in a year and almost double the average annual salary in America) EVERY.SINGLE.DAY of his life and never spent a penny, he still would not be a billionaire.  These are the people that the Republicans are protecting and giving tax cuts to.

Once you put it in normal people terms, then you might start converting folks.

A million seconds is 11 1/2 days 

A billion seconds is 31 1/2 years

A trillion seconds is close to 32,000 years - you go back in time that far and Margorie Taylor Green's Neanderthal cousins were fooling around with one another. 

Posted
22 hours ago, hpslugga said:

No, it’s because they all too readily believe improbable claims from questionable sources based on insufficient information.

I was contemplating making a fresh post on this subject, but it'd go ignored while we rehash the latest offense from the GOP/Trump.  

Anyway, I'm convinced that the largest challenge facing the Democratic party (truly, the country) is the failure of our shared beliefs in core fundamental truths PAIRED with relatively high political engagement by low information participants.  It's like the Democrats have been pushing DEMOCRACY and expanded voting since the civil rights era, but the voters weren't sufficiently educated so that they make good choices.  

Lost in all of the abundance agenda, let's focus on populist economics, the Democratic leadership is too old, etc. conversation is that basic challenge, and it'll begat just more change elections unless the Democrats can sufficiently combat the disinformation so prevalent in the Fox sphere, social media, etc., or they need to just concede that governance by an enlightened few is preferable, if undemocratic.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, LCHorn said:

unless the Democrats can sufficiently combat the disinformation so prevalent in the Fox sphere, social media, etc., or they need to just concede that governance by an enlightened few is preferable, if undemocratic.  

This is what I've been saying.  We need to follow the playbook that works.  Lie.  Lie big, lie loud, lie often -- like, relentlessly.  Spout the lies at machine-gun pace.  And make them outrageous, outlandish, inflammatory lies.  "Donald Trump stole $500 billion from you taxpayers, and used it to pay for sex with underage girls."  Shit like that.  Seriously, not only does the truth no longer matter, the truth is an anchor tied around your waist as you plunge to the inky black depths.  Shed that fucking anchor, break free to the surface, and win under the new rules.  Lie like nobody has ever lied before, and never apologize or admit you were wrong. Instead, repeat the lie.  Inflame the people who will vote your way, and feed those fucking flames with new fuel 24/7.

TLDR; do whatever it takes to capture the gullible idiot vote, they're the only demographic that matters.

Posted
On 8/6/2025 at 8:57 AM, wildcat09 said:

The framework sucks ass, actually. There's a reason literally no people who formed democracies after us copied it. The only really good part about the Constitution is the 1st Amendment as it begun being interpreted in the 20th century, though more recent judicial interpretations have sort of fucked that up somewhat.

Well, bicameral legislature and electoral college are issues.  As is the failure to delineate executive power.

But three branches that check each other and judicial review are pretty standard good things.

Posted
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

This is what I've been saying.  We need to follow the playbook that works.  Lie.  Lie big, lie loud, lie often -- like, relentlessly.  Spout the lies at machine-gun pace.  And make them outrageous, outlandish, inflammatory lies.  "Donald Trump stole $500 billion from you taxpayers, and used it to pay for sex with underage girls."  Shit like that.  Seriously, not only does the truth no longer matter, the truth is an anchor tied around your waist as you plunge to the inky black depths.  Shed that fucking anchor, break free to the surface, and win under the new rules.  Lie like nobody has ever lied before, and never apologize or admit you were wrong. Instead, repeat the lie.  Inflame the people who will vote your way, and feed those fucking flames with new fuel 24/7.

TLDR; do whatever it takes to capture the gullible idiot vote, they're the only demographic that matters.

The problem is too many people are squeemish about such tactics, and it's never going to happen. Even if it did, you'd probably end up with a third party and a GOP supermajority of . . . everything. On the other hand, they're basically governing like that already, so why not take that shot?

Posted
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Lie big, lie loud, lie often -- like, relentlessly. 

That's basically arguing for the destruction of the republic.  

The Democrats do need to shift focus, however.  You can't gather support for social programs if half of the electorate is convinced the real problem is lazy minorities.  You can't protect public health if a significant portion has convinced themselves that vaccines explode your organs.  You can't defend against a Trump-like seizure of power if you're yelling "hey, that's against the rules!" and too much of the electorate doesn't care, it's all performative bullshit, anyway.  

There needs to be a significant crack-down, either through penalty of law of civil jurisprudence, for lying.  There are plenty of Democrat billionaires to fund lawsuits against bad actors; let the courts decide if they are frivolous.  

  • Like 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

This is what I've been saying.  We need to follow the playbook that works.  Lie.  Lie big, lie loud, lie often -- like, relentlessly.  Spout the lies at machine-gun pace.  And make them outrageous, outlandish, inflammatory lies.  "Donald Trump stole $500 billion from you taxpayers, and used it to pay for sex with underage girls."  Shit like that.  Seriously, not only does the truth no longer matter, the truth is an anchor tied around your waist as you plunge to the inky black depths.  Shed that fucking anchor, break free to the surface, and win under the new rules.  Lie like nobody has ever lied before, and never apologize or admit you were wrong. Instead, repeat the lie.  Inflame the people who will vote your way, and feed those fucking flames with new fuel 24/7.

TLDR; do whatever it takes to capture the gullible idiot vote, they're the only demographic that matters.

The truth is on our side. We don't need to lie.

Posted
10 hours ago, Disco Strangler said:

A trillion seconds is close to 32,000 years - you go back in time that far and Margorie Taylor Green's Neanderthal cousins were fooling around with one another. 

She's from Georgia. That could have been last week. 



×
×
  • Create New...