1. #11301
    Titan Lenonis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    13,846
    I do enjoy hearing about how Republicans being bad faith obstructionists is the democrats fault.
    Forum badass alert:
    Quote Originally Posted by Rochana Violence View Post
    It's called resistance / rebellion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rochana Violence View Post
    Also, one day the tables might turn.

  2. #11302
    Banned unfilteredJW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Seagrove Beach, FL
    Posts
    6,861
    “LA can become a one stop shop for the needs of many states”

    Who the fuck do you think is already carrying the leech red states @tehdang?

  3. #11303
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    69,913
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    If we’re the United States of dense metros and the coasts, then it isn’t half the country.
    You're right. But not for the reasons you think.

    Those "dense metros" make up 80% of the US population. Far more than "half the country".

    And don't tell me you were talking about statehood, here, because statehood is independent of the rural/urban divide.

    If we’re the United States, then my apologies, but not enough states are behind this project. Half the country as half the states that make up this country.
    Oh, so it's arbitrary political divisions that make the difference?

    I repeat an earlier point; if California were to divide into 20 millionish separate States, one for each household or so, that's fine? They deserve the 40 million Senators outweighing the remaining 98 for all the other States? Or is that ridiculous?

    Because once you admit it's ridiculous, you've admitted that statehood shouldn't be an arbitrary distinction, and then we get to start asking questions like "why don't we combine a bunch of low-population States into a single State to make them more comparable to other States?" And no, "because they'd lose Senate representation" is not an argument, there; that's begging the question.

    You say “disfunction and impasse,” but it sounds a lot like “when I don’t get what I want because voters reject it, that’s a problem of the system and not my message.”
    If you're insisting on talking about statehood and Senate representation, then you're not talking about voters.

    You're not even staying consistent in your own arguments.

    Then the ludicrous comparison to human rights speaks to your inability to stay on subject. Why care about the needs of small states to not be bypassed and forgotten in the national legislature, when that means urban progressives can’t force the rest of the country to conform to their moral dictums? File this under why passionate progressives are really arguing for a national divorce where cities like LA can be one-stop shops for the needs of many states.
    Denying human rights to support arbitrary political divides and their choice to infringe on human rights. That's your argument, here.


  4. #11304
    Scarab Lord downnola's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Made in Philly, living in Akron.
    Posts
    4,406
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    If we’re the United States of dense metros and the coasts, then it isn’t half the country. If we’re the United States, then my apologies, but not enough states are behind this project. Half the country as half the states that make up this country.

    You say “disfunction and impasse,” but it sounds a lot like “when I don’t get what I want because voters reject it, that’s a problem of the system and not my message.”

    Then the ludicrous comparison to human rights speaks to your inability to stay on subject. Why care about the needs of small states to not be bypassed and forgotten in the national legislature, when that means urban progressives can’t force the rest of the country to conform to their moral dictums? File this under why passionate progressives are really arguing for a national divorce where cities like LA can be one-stop shops for the needs of many states.
    It's not that we don't understand the function of the states. The problem is that you insist on using misleading and disingenuous arguments with terms like "voters" and "half the country" when you know full well conservatives don't make up anywhere close to "half the country," and United States voting turn out looks like this:

    not the imaginary 50/50 representation you're trying to make it out to be.

    It would be one thing if you just defended federalism and left it at that, but that isn't what you're doing at all. You're trying to act like this is all just representative democracy in action when it's far from it. And you know it's far from it and even try to justify it while shifting goal posts all over the place so you can insert as many sneers at Democrats/progressives/leftists as you can. Someone as shifty and dishonest in argument as you are should really keep their trap shut about others not staying on subject.
    Populists (and "national socialists") look at the supposedly secret deals that run the world "behind the scenes". Child's play. Except that childishness is sinister in adults.
    - Christopher Hitchens

  5. #11305
    Quote Originally Posted by unfilteredJW View Post
    “LA can become a one stop shop for the needs of many states”

    Who the fuck do you think is already carrying the leech red states @tehdang?
    Why do you think I included the peaceful national divorce in my post? It's clear that a vocal group of internet leftists consider the relationship to be a leeching relationship and the solution is to strip them of their power in the Senate.

    Quote Originally Posted by downnola View Post
    It's not that we don't understand the function of the states. The problem is that you insist on using misleading and disingenuous arguments with terms like "voters" and "half the country" when you know full well conservatives don't make up anywhere close to "half the country," and United States voting turn out looks like this:

    not the imaginary 50/50 representation you're trying to make it out to be.

    It would be one thing if you just defended federalism and left it at that, but that isn't what you're doing at all. You're trying to act like this is all just representative democracy in action when it's far from it. And you know it's far from it and even try to justify it while shifting goal posts all over the place so you can insert as many sneers at Democrats/progressives/leftists as you can. Someone as shifty and dishonest in argument as you are should really keep their trap shut about others not staying on subject.
    I don't know how I could've been more explicit about the need to balance small states against the larger ones bossing them around nationally, and the large states needing a somewhat greater ability to direct their greater revenue through taxation. That's a federalism argument at its core. The inability for big, progressive centers to reconcile their priorities with the rest of the country is reason enough to divest more power from the national government in general and return more of it to the states.

    But thanks for spicing up the thread with maps.

    Quote Originally Posted by Draco-Onis View Post
    That makes zero sense why wouldn't they vote for a bill their party support and take away leverage from progressives at the same time? Republicans are the reason for the leverage.
    Pelosi isn't even holding the vote, may I remind you.

    Same response as earlier: the fight is intra-Democrat and the tone is both or nothing, so no way do House Republicans have reason to sign onto such political warfare. It's not like Pelosi was asking them for input in the negotiation of a compromise.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Lenonis View Post
    I do enjoy hearing about how Republicans being bad faith obstructionists is the democrats fault.
    The trouble with winning the House, Senate, and Presidency, despite the narrow margins, is the blame on Republicans should raise some eye rolls. They had a 69-30 vote in the Senate and Pelosi's team in the House can't make it through. It's not Republican's fault that Democrats are in disarray and blaming Manchin and Sinema, or the squad, depending on which day it is.

    Pelosi: Promises a vote last Thursday, as negotiated with Senate and House Democratic moderates, calls it off
    Lenonis: Let me tell you how actions of the Democratic House Speaker, Democratic Senate Majority Leader, and Democratic President come down to Republican bad faith obstructionists

    (Cue Politico's "The fact that the president came to the Hill and whipped against his own bill is the strangest thing I’ve ever seen")
    "I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."

  6. #11306
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    I don't know how I could've been more explicit about the need to balance small states against the larger ones bossing them around nationally, and the large states needing a somewhat greater ability to direct their greater revenue through taxation. That's a federalism argument at its core. The inability for big, progressive centers to reconcile their priorities with the rest of the country is reason enough to divest more power from the national government in general and return more of it to the states.
    I wonder if the people who think "states" are more important than citizens can name a single issue where the "priorities" of more densely populated areas conflict with those of suburban or rural populations.

  7. #11307
    Quote Originally Posted by s_bushido View Post
    I wonder if the people who think "states" are more important than citizens can name a single issue where the "priorities" of more densely populated areas conflict with those of suburban or rural populations.
    Farm subsidies spring to mind instantly. Though there are tons of related topics that impact both, like water rights and access to water. Then again, I think there's a lot of pushback against the expansive farm subsidies just as there is a lot of pushback against huge corporate welfare that benefits more urban areas.

    I think the importance of the "state" has declined considerably since the founding and the original principles don't really apply anymore. The Constitution was designed to be a malleable, living document that evolves with the times and the needs of the day. That it's viewed as sacrosanct and shouldn't ever be touched, despite the fact that it's been Amended 27 times, most recently in the 90's.

    With inter-state and global commerce impacting them all, and the increased connectivity of like...well...everyone/thing, the older notion of states as largely isolated is completely garbage. This is a future the founders never could have conceived of, and consequently could have never tried to pre-empt in their original writings and thinking. Going across states can take a few hours or less, and cross-country can be done in under 6 hours. It's not a multi-day trek just to get from your farmstead to the state capitol, and perish the thought of trying to make it from Massachusetts to Georgia, which would have been weeks if not more, rather than hours.
    Last edited by Edge-; 2021-10-06 at 07:58 PM.

  8. #11308
    Elemental Lord PfeffermintShake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Woke Mob Craft Services
    Posts
    8,262
    Heh page navigation is out of synch. Did someone connal their account?
    Everytime that happens, a SJW gets their wings.

    The Senate voted to confirm Lauren King to serve as a federal judge in Seattle, making her only the sixth Native American to ever sit on the bench in the federal judiciary's 232-year history.



    16 federal judges now confirmed to lifetime appointments by Biden/Schumer. We've now passed Nixon, who had 15 to this point in his first term.

    That makes us the fastest since Kennedy in getting judicial vacancies filled.

  9. #11309
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Farm subsidies spring to mind instantly.
    I mean...Texas has the most farms in the country, has some of the largest cities in the country, and also leans heavily Republican. Seems like that's pretty clear case-in-point that all this /wanking over states is meaningless, since regardless of the population and political makeup, these things would have to be addressed anyway.

  10. #11310
    Quote Originally Posted by s_bushido View Post
    I mean...Texas has the most farms in the country, has some of the largest cities in the country, and also leans heavily Republican. Seems like that's pretty clear case-in-point that all this /wanking over states is meaningless, since regardless of the population and political makeup, these things would have to be addressed anyway.
    I agree. The focus on the importance of states is silly at this point, as the significance of states has decreased over the past few hundred years. That's not to say they should be done away with or anything, they still serve many valuable purposes and are the best administrators when it comes to issues specific to their states, but their importance on the national scene has decreased considerably, and they're nigh inconsequential on the international scene.

  11. #11311
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    I agree. The focus on the importance of states is silly at this point, as the significance of states has decreased over the past few hundred years. That's not to say they should be done away with or anything, they still serve many valuable purposes and are the best administrators when it comes to issues specific to their states, but their importance on the national scene has decreased considerably, and they're nigh inconsequential on the international scene.
    It’s valuing land over people. If they really cared about states the way they claim they’d be fighting for every non-state part of the US to have statehood. Meanwhile, let’s keep DC, PR, Etc from having equal representation.

  12. #11312
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Pelosi isn't even holding the vote, may I remind you.

    Same response as earlier: the fight is intra-Democrat and the tone is both or nothing, so no way do House Republicans have reason to sign onto such political warfare. It's not like Pelosi was asking them for input in the negotiation of a compromise
    err she tried vote counting and all the republicans saying no so which is it? Again it's not that difficult you have stated McConnell supports the bill. You do know that house republicans are from the same party right? So I ask you why did house republicans all say no even before the bill came to the house? They are the only reason the squad has any power, Pelosi will happily screw progressives but she has no choice.

    House republicans are elected officials you seem to be cheering for them to sit on their asses doing nothing for the country.
    Last edited by Draco-Onis; 2021-10-06 at 09:18 PM.

  13. #11313
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    *snip*
    Maybe we could come up with some kind of weighting system, to reduce the voting power of these low population states? What if we made it so their senators only counted as, let's say, 3/5 of a senator?

    That might help balance things up a bit.
    When challenging a Kzin, a simple scream of rage is sufficient. You scream and you leap.
    Quote Originally Posted by George Carlin
    Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    Quote Originally Posted by Douglas Adams
    It is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it... anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.

  14. #11314
    Titan Lenonis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    13,846
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    The trouble with winning the House, Senate, and Presidency, despite the narrow margins, is the blame on Republicans should raise some eye rolls.
    Your posts generate eye rolls, sure.

    They had a 69-30 vote in the Senate and Pelosi's team in the House can't make it through.
    Because of house republicans.

    It's not Republican's fault that Democrats are in disarray and blaming Manchin and Sinema, or the squad, depending on which day it is.
    It's also not Democrats fault Republicans are obstructionist bad faith assholes who only care about optics and not policy. Should I bring up the ACA bill which was based on a republican idea, included republican authored segments, and at the 11th hour they all voted against it so they could spend the next 10 years attacking it.

    It's always the same with you people. The GOP can do no wrong and anything they do that's even slightly out of step is somehow the dem's fault.
    Forum badass alert:
    Quote Originally Posted by Rochana Violence View Post
    It's called resistance / rebellion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rochana Violence View Post
    Also, one day the tables might turn.

  15. #11315
    Quote Originally Posted by Lenonis View Post
    Your posts generate eye rolls, sure.

    Because of house republicans.
    Same as before. The Democrats knew they could pass it without a single House Republican vote, so didn't invite House Republicans in to discuss compromises. Turns out, Pelosi oversold her coalition strength and had to go back to the drawing board.

    But Republicans only exist to clean up Democrat messes, apparently.

    It's also not Democrats fault Republicans are obstructionist bad faith assholes who only care about optics and not policy. Should I bring up the ACA bill which was based on a republican idea, included republican authored segments, and at the 11th hour they all voted against it so they could spend the next 10 years attacking it.
    So Republican, it was written behind closed doors without a Republican present. Listen, next time I use your ideas, I'm not going to invite you, but tell you how much you better like it.

    It's always the same with you people. The GOP can do no wrong and anything they do that's even slightly out of step is somehow the dem's fault.
    They've done tons of wrong stuff. They're the stupid party. You're just citing the obvious things that can't be blamed on Republicans, but doing it anyways. March on!

    Quote Originally Posted by Draco-Onis View Post
    err she tried vote counting and all the republicans saying no so which is it? Again it's not that difficult you have stated McConnell supports the bill. You do know that house republicans are from the same party right? So I ask you why did house republicans all say no even before the bill came to the house? They are the only reason the squad has any power, Pelosi will happily screw progressives but she has no choice.

    House republicans are elected officials you seem to be cheering for them to sit on their asses doing nothing for the country.
    She's right to doubt it, considering how much her party is considering it linked to the massive spending bill. But she isn't bringing it to the floor for an actual vote, so don't go around saying that's Republicans fault. They never had to put their money where their mouth was (Hint: If this is all shit the country loves, and it's only the representatives that vote against their interests, then here's an easy way to get their votes recorded)

    McConnell negotiated in good faith, and progressives yanked the carpet from beneath Senate Republicans by going back for a monster bill after compromising down on the infrastructure bill. In case you forgot, Biden celebrated the bipartisan deal before reneging and declaring that he wanted both bills to pass simultaneously. So your problem here is the timeline.

    And House Republicans should reject any attempts to pass both bills simultaneously, so good on them for it. No, seriously, they suck ass so much of the time that it's important to make distinctions when it's proper. And it's so easy for them to sit pretty here, since the other side is writing their own plans and blaming everyone but themselves when their coalition can't muster the votes to pass it through.
    "I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."

  16. #11316
    Quote Originally Posted by Lenonis View Post
    Your posts generate eye rolls, sure.

    Because of house republicans.

    It's also not Democrats fault Republicans are obstructionist bad faith assholes who only care about optics and not policy. Should I bring up the ACA bill which was based on a republican idea, included republican authored segments, and at the 11th hour they all voted against it so they could spend the next 10 years attacking it.

    It's always the same with you people. The GOP can do no wrong and anything they do that's even slightly out of step is somehow the dem's fault.
    Pot, Kettle

  17. #11317
    Quote Originally Posted by EyelessCrow View Post
    Pot, Kettle
    Guess you haven't been paying to the constant criticism Dems have gotten from other Dems here. Unsurprising.

  18. #11318
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    And House Republicans should reject any attempts to pass both bills simultaneously, so good on them for it. No, seriously, they suck ass so much of the time that it's important to make distinctions when it's proper. And it's so easy for them to sit pretty here, since the other side is writing their own plans and blaming everyone but themselves when their coalition can't muster the votes to pass it through.
    They don't support the one McConnell does that's why Pelosi needs every democratic vote what part of that is hard for you to understand? This is the bill republicans voted for in the Senate yet Kevin McCarthy is not supporting it in the house. I don't know how much more I can dumb it down for you, house republicans are supposed to do their jobs.

    If it's Pelosi's fault then why aren't house republicans saying they would vote yes but Pelosi is stopping them, they flat out said no even before the bill got to the house. I refuse to believe you are this dumb I spelled it out for you but you refuse to discuss the obvious lazy Qanon filled elephant in the house doing nothing.

    Hint: If this is all shit the country loves, and it's only the representatives that vote against their interests, then here's an easy way to get their votes recorded
    Hint that's not how our system works and that's a criticism on the system not a specific party bigger hint republicans take credit for things they vote against. I already tried to discuss with you but you can't seem to comprehend anything above DEM BAD REPUBLICAN GUD.
    Last edited by Draco-Onis; 2021-10-06 at 11:22 PM.

  19. #11319
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Same as before. The Democrats knew they could pass it without a single House Republican vote, so didn't invite House Republicans in to discuss compromises. Turns out, Pelosi oversold her coalition strength and had to go back to the drawing board.

    But Republicans only exist to clean up Democrat messes, apparently.

    She's right to doubt it, considering how much her party is considering it linked to the massive spending bill. But she isn't bringing it to the floor for an actual vote, so don't go around saying that's Republicans fault. They never had to put their money where their mouth was (Hint: If this is all shit the country loves, and it's only the representatives that vote against their interests, then here's an easy way to get their votes recorded)

    McConnell negotiated in good faith, and progressives yanked the carpet from beneath Senate Republicans by going back for a monster bill after compromising down on the infrastructure bill. In case you forgot, Biden celebrated the bipartisan deal before reneging and declaring that he wanted both bills to pass simultaneously. So your problem here is the timeline.
    The first part, LOL, and the second part "McConnell negotiated in good faith" LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL. The rest is either deliberate revisionism (you know, lying) or plain ignorance / lack of curiosity as to the facts:

    "Here’s one of those things that drive me to distraction but I at least enjoy flagging to everyone’s attention when it’s so egregious. Mitch McConnell is now claiming Republicans have somehow been hoodwinked, double-crossed, done dirty by Democrats springing ‘linkage’ on them: Basically, that the White House and the Democratic caucus will support the bipartisan mini-infrastructure bill as long as they can put the rest of their plan in a reconciliation bill.

    Then I noticed an AP reporter, apparently new to the White House beat, flagged a new AP story with this: “This is the catch for the WH on the infrastructure deal right now: Senators who were part of the bipartisan group were never told of such an explicit linking of the two packages, the two people familiar with the discussions said.”

    The article itself, by Lisa Mascaro, manages to be even more credulous.

    'Livid and “blindsided” over President Joe Biden’s refusal to sign a bipartisan infrastructure deal without passage of his broader priorities, Republican senators Friday were frantically considering options as the future of the sweeping compromise appeared in doubt.'

    The pressing question here is why the Associated Press has insisted on keeping its reporters locked in sensory deprivation chambers for all of June. Linkage, as discussed above, has been an explicit condition for Democrats for a couple weeks and stated constantly and publicly. What’s more, linkage has nothing to do with Republicans. Lindsey Graham squealed, “no deal by extortion.” But Democrats aren’t asking for any Republican votes. So how is Lindsey being extorted? Linkage is all about Democrats participation in a reconciliation package. So who’s being extorted?

    Indeed, as DC reporter Edward-Isaac Dovere reminded everyone, none other than Mitch McConnell, Roy Blunt, Portman, Cassidy and probably every other Republican has been explicitly discussing their assumption that this is a linked two track process for weeks. On June 15th, McConnell said, “we are anticipating at some point getting a reconciliation bill. I guess what we will find out soon is whether there’s an additional bipartisan effort to address the subject that a lot of us would like to address.”

    Then there’s this tweet from three days ago …

    Garrett Haake
    @GarrettHaake
    "On infrastructure, Schumer says he expects the parallel tracks to continue into July, when he hopes to see votes on a bipartisan hard infrastructure bill AND a Dem-only reconciliation bill containing other priorities."
    2:23 PM · Jun 22, 2021·Twitter for iPhone

    https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog...y#more-1379073

    In other words, it was ALWAYS a two track deal, openly, publicly. Biden didn't "renege" on anything, despite all the crocodile tears to the contrary. And as noted above, Republicans have no part of reconciliation anyway so what are they whining about? They're whining about the same thing Sinema's whining about--not being able to jam up Democrats the way they'd hoped, by passing infrastructure and then banking on conservative Democrats blowing up reconciliation, which contains most of Biden's agenda (and they would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for those meddling Squads). "How dare you prevent me from screwing you!"

    Too bad House Republicans didn't whip votes for the minibill, though--that would have put Pelosi and "the Squad" in a really tough spot.
    Last edited by Levelfive; 2021-10-07 at 12:18 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Arch-Angel of Riots View Post
    Until then, I honestly don't care about anything else much. Until then it can all burn down to the ground for all I care.
    Quote Originally Posted by Levelfive View Post
    Yeah, I think it's fair to conclude that "Fuck the poor" "Arch-angel of Riots" is just in it with the hope of inflicting maximum harm for maximum chaos, and since they've shown no particular attachment to any guiding moral, ideological, or political principle, it seems to be for the sake of maximum fun.

  20. #11320
    The Insane Daelak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    15,949
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Complaining? I’m revealing what that means for other people obsessed about Manchin and Sinema. They actually aren’t a problem for clear thinkers on what a 50-50 Senate means. I don’t mind if both fail due to political ineptitude and a disunited caucus in the House. Republicans are under no obligation to rescue a bill that’s being used as leverage to pass another bill through reconciliation.

    - - - Updated - - -


    If we’re the United States of dense metros and the coasts, then it isn’t half the country. If we’re the United States, then my apologies, but not enough states are behind this project. Half the country as half the states that make up this country.

    You say “disfunction and impasse,” but it sounds a lot like “when I don’t get what I want because voters reject it, that’s a problem of the system and not my message.”

    Then the ludicrous comparison to human rights speaks to your inability to stay on subject. Why care about the needs of small states to not be bypassed and forgotten in the national legislature, when that means urban progressives can’t force the rest of the country to conform to their moral dictums? File this under why passionate progressives are really arguing for a national divorce where cities like LA can be one-stop shops for the needs of many states.
    States are a fiction. A relic of the 18th and 19th century. The real, quantifiable, and logical approach to achieving maximum enfranchisement and civic engagement is through the house of representatives. Specifically through the method that the US Census Bureau uses to analyze our population via Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs). They base it off population density, and every 10 years, at all levels of government, determine a host of disbursements, policies, grants, and studies based upon these calculations.

    Abolish the senate, have a unicameral legislature through the house, whose districts are based upon a confluence of the MSAs as well as the constitutionally-mandated lower bound of one representative per 30,000 people. No more magnified, oversized representations of fictitious boundary lines in the country, but real, quantifiable metrics to determine the dynamic sizing of a HoR district in the US.

    Your ideology hides behind the appearance of popular appeal and hero worship of the status quo at the expense of liberty and rights of other people.
    Quote Originally Posted by zenkai View Post
    There is a problem, but I know just banning guns will fix the problem.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •