Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Theodarzna]

That's still not evidence you oppose privatization.

I said I oppose it. There ya go.

[Kellhound]

Instead of privatizing we need to invest appropriately. Privatizing infrastructure is pretty awful.

American and Canadian railroads show that is not always the case.

[Breccia]

I said I oppose it.

Today. You said you oppose it today. Where was the outrage four years ago? I mean, surely you were upset then, too?

But I really should give you an extended timeline. Earlier today, I said "within 3 months of June 2017" only to remember, hey, there were all those Nazis. Also there wasn't even a plan anyhow. So how about, instead of "within 3 months of June 2017" I change that to "literally any post before the 2020 election"? That should work much better for you. You know, if you feel like looking for evidence your opinion is genuine and not partisan.

[Theodarzna]

Today. You said you oppose it today.

Oh, I've always opposed it, feel free to find evidence otherwise, like some kind of post in favor of it.

As I suspected, the goal post will always shift for this strawman. Any other questions Inquisitor Breccia?

[Breccia]

Oh, I've always opposed it, feel free to find evidence otherwise,

That's still not how this works. You said it was bad when Biden was pushing it, you started posting Sept 2015, strange coincidence, that's when Trump declared he was running for office, so surely you have posted at least once when Trump was doing it, that mass privatization was bad then, too. I mean, you must have said it at least once, right? Otherwise your claims that it's bad when Biden does it now, feels a little hollow, a little disingenuous. "I always opposed it" is easier to back when you have proof, "feel free to find evidence otherwise" sounds like something someone who couldn't back their opinion would say.

Oh, and that's twice you've tried "prove I said otherwise" when asked directly "back up your opinion". It's sounding more and more like you can't back your opinion.

[Theodarzna]

Oh, and that's twice you've tried "prove I said otherwise" when asked directly "back up your opinion". It's sounding more and more like you can't back your opinion.

You're asking me to disprove an accusation and won't accept any form of evidence. I stated my opinion, how am I supposed to back that up other than stating it?

You are saying "NO! Your opinion is ACTUALLY THIS!" and asking me to prove otherwise. Which I commend you on the inquisition act, if only you could do this IRL and not on some web forum.

[Breccia]

You're asking me to

Yeah, you're not even looking, are you? I guess you answered my question, if nothing else.

[Theodarzna]

Yeah, you're not even looking, are you? I guess you answered my question, if nothing else.

I mean if you want to mill about old posts, here is me and Yvaelle agreeing about the superiority of Bernard Sanders vs. Hillary Clinton and the evils of privatization back in 2016, well before Donald Trump became the singular object of obsession, it seems, for you.

[Kellhound]

We. Haven’t. Invested. In. Railroads. When we do we wait too long before paying for their upkeep. Because buying more jets makes more fiscal sense than fixing infrastructure.

Seriously????? The railroads (especially the Class 1s) spend a huge amount on upkeep and improvements. BNSF's capital expenditure plan for 2020 alone called for $3.4 billion in spending.

[Kellhound]

You say that like it is a significant amount in the face of what they actually need to get everything up to par…

Do you even know the state of the Class 1 railroads in the US? They are not Amtrak.

[postman1782]

And their service record sucks. They need major upgrades.

Which hopefully with the infrastructure bill they are going to pass, it gets upgraded.

[Kellhound]

And their service record sucks. They need major upgrades.

Passenger rail in the US is not practical beyond the NEC and shorter range regional runs. Not a single Amtrak long distance train is profitable. There is a reason Amtrak exists...

[Attackrabbit]

Passenger rail in the US is not practical beyond the NEC and shorter range regional runs.

Why isn't it?

[Belize]

Why isn't it?

Because you still need a car in the U.S. to get anywhere. Even if you were to build rails that drop you off in the middle of Dallas, you'd be limited to where your legs can take you before your shoes melt on the pavement.

We simply don't currently have the same public transport/centralized business centers that most of Europe/Asia enjoys.

[Edge-]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57615638

Attorney General Merrick Garland said the laws were "enacted with the purpose of denying or abridging the right of black Georgians to vote".

Republicans, who control Georgia's state legislature, say the restrictions streamline voting procedures.

Mr Garland also issued a mandate to prosecute threats to election workers.

It amounts to the first major action the Biden administration has taken in response to a wave of voting restrictions passed in Republican-led states.

Hopefully this is the first of many challenges, and that the DoJ is very serious about going after people harassing/threatening election workers.

[AntiFascistVoter]

Some pro-Trump demonstrators are protesting Kamala's visit to El Paso this morning.

[Benggaul]

Some pro-Trump demonstrators are protesting Kamala's visit to El Paso this morning.

Hope they're getting a dictionary for their birthday.

[Elegiac]

Why isn't it?

Because the modern US is built for cars and the people who want it to stay that way are desperately hoping you forget the country existed before the interstate was a thing. Lol.

[Rasulis]

Fox News Poll showing Biden's approval rating went up to 56%.

The interesting part is that a fifth of Republicans say they at least somewhat approve — including 13 percent of those who also say they voted for former president Donald Trump last year. Not a peep on Fox News.

[postman1782]

Fox News Poll showing Biden's approval rating went up to 56%.

The interesting part is that a fifth of Republicans say they at least somewhat approve — including 13 percent of those who also say they voted for former president Donald Trump last year. Not a peep on Fox News.

Yeah, I think it was on Laura Ingraham that said a couple days ago that they didn't believe those numbers when it was 52%.