The Biden / Ukraine Scandal

[Moiraine]

12 minutes ago, Apsu said:

I call bulls#!t on your post... what alt-right sources?

Do you only accept links from CNN and MSNBC?

 

 

You should do more research on John Solomon.

 

Let me know when I use MSNBC as a source. I've probably watched 5 minutes of MSNBC since its creation, and have maybe looked at their website for total of 10 minutes. CNN isn't an ideal news source but they are not radical left.

[commando]

6 minutes ago, funhusker said:

Me and you need to go have a beer 

[funhusker]

5 minutes ago, Apsu said:

 

What most all on the left here failed to understand, is that progressives did not view Hillary as "nothing special".

Speaking for myself; my two most important issues are (1) ending our state of constant warfare, and (2) implementing single payer medicare for all.

 

1) Hillary was seen as more warlike than Trump. And as bad as he is, things could be a lot worse.

 

2) Hillary was firm;y set on for profit health care, and their would not have been any reform.

 

And then there were the twin disasters known as TPP and TPIP that she supported.

True. And Trump definitely made progress there :sarcasm

[Danny Bateman]

Alright. I'm gonna drop some thoughts. I fully expect to catch some flak because it's probably going to rustle some jimmies, and I'm fine with that.

 

First, let me spell out some political axioms about which I feel we should all agree. If we can't agree on these, I have a hard time taking you seriously because you seem unreasonable to me.

 

1. Trump is bad. Voting against Trump, irrespective of candidate, shouldn't be demonized, because again, Trump is bad.
2. Having a reasonable politician with flaws typical of politicians would be better than having Trump. Including Clinton.
3. The two-party system sucks. No one on this board, to my knowledge, has defended it. At the same time, it is the confines within which our politics occur, and it isn't very likely to change any time soon.
4. It's reasonable to be a Democrat and criticize Dems. As well as a Republican and criticize the GOP

All those positions are where I start from. You can disagree, and I'm sure some do, but if, for example, you tell me "Trump is actually better because now progressivism is more viable" I'm liable to not take you very seriously.

 

Now, this said, it seems to me progressives calling anyone who is more moderate than them or doesn't spout progressive groupthink wholesale a corporatist, neoliberal shill who loves the status quo and doesn't want to help people is counterproductive. Perhaps people hold those positions because they feel some progressive ideas are inefficient or not backed by evidence or not very feasible within the confines of our sh#tty two-party system. Having these beliefs does not make them corrupt, selfish shills standing in the way of progress.

 

Also, I think the assertion that Democrats hewing moderate or centrist somehow gave us Trump is... weird. Republicans gave us Trump because of the gradually growing extremism of their voting base. There are plenty of reasons he beat Clinton. Very few of them have to do with the Democratic party being too moderate.

 

Not trying to attack anyone in particular. I've just noticed that in most places where politics is discussed anymore it's exceedingly easy to defend progressivism and more moderate liberalism gets sh#t on quite a bit. I'm not sure why that is, because holding more moderate positions does not inherently make one ill-advised or inferior.

[Danny Bateman]

2 hours ago, Apsu said:

 

I call bulls#!t on your post... what alt-right sources?

Do you only accept links from CNN and MSNBC?

 

You posted a story from a Russian-owned news service's Ukraine branch to support your call to investigate Biden in this very thread.

[funhusker]

2 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

Alright. I'm gonna drop some thoughts. I fully expect to catch some flak because it's probably going to rustle some jimmies, and I'm fine with that.

 

First, let me spell out some political axioms about which I feel we should all agree. If we can't agree on these, I have a hard time taking you seriously because you seem unreasonable to me.

 

1. Trump is bad. Voting against Trump, irrespective of candidate, shouldn't be demonized, because again, Trump is bad.
2. Having a reasonable politician with flaws typical of politicians would be better than having Trump. Including Clinton.
3. The two-party system sucks. No one on this board, to my knowledge, has defended it. At the same time, it is the confines within which our politics occur, and it isn't very likely to change any time soon.
4. It's reasonable to be a Democrat and criticize Dems. As well as a Republican and criticize the GOP

All those positions are where I start from. You can disagree, and I'm sure some do, but if, for example, you tell me "Trump is actually better because now progressivism is more viable" I'm liable to not take you very seriously.

 

Now, this said, it seems to me progressives calling anyone who is more moderate than them or doesn't spout progressive groupthink wholesale a corporatist, neoliberal shill who loves the status quo and doesn't want to help people is counterproductive. Perhaps people hold those positions because they feel some progressive ideas are inefficient or not backed by evidence or not very feasible within the confines of our sh#tty two-party system. Having these beliefs does not make them corrupt, selfish shills standing in the way of progress.

 

Also, I think the assertion that Democrats hewing moderate or centrist somehow gave us Trump is... weird. Republicans gave us Trump because of the gradually growing extremism of their voting base. There are plenty of reasons he beat Clinton. Very few of them have to do with the Democratic party being too moderate.

 

Not trying to attack anyone in particular. I've just noticed that in most places where politics is discussed anymore it's exceedingly easy to defend progressivism and more moderate liberalism gets sh#t on quite a bit. I'm not sure why that is, because holding more moderate positions does not inherently make one ill-advised or inferior.

You can join me and @commando for a beer(s). 

[Danny Bateman]

2 minutes ago, funhusker said:

You can join me and @commando for a beer(s). 

 

I'd love to.

 

I'm not anti-progressive by any means. I share a lot of their beliefs. But like I said, I see a lot more value judgments and criticism flowing from progressives to moderates than vice-versa. It's become a pet hobby of mine to try to argue that there should be room for people to be moderate and center-left within the American left without being called bad people.

[Ratt Mhule]

2 hours ago, commando said:

i love how the center is now the evil part of the system.   

 

Not evil. But they are not on our team (progressives) and we must fight them (politically) if we want our policies passed. 

[RedDenver]

2 hours ago, commando said:

i love how the center is now the evil part of the system.   

Morality (aka good vs evil) is not a left/right/center thing. The center can be just as evil as the left or the right and of course vice versa.

[knapplc]

2 minutes ago, Frott Scost said:

 

Not evil. But they are not on our team (progressives) and we must fight them (politically) if we want our policies passed. 

 

That's the kind of thinking that will get you nowhere.

 

You don't have to defeat them, you have to work with them.

 

Ballpark, what percentage of the country do you think are progressives? And when you arrive at less than a majority, you're left with hoping for a plurality. But with a mindset of "we must fight them" rather than "we must learn to work with them," you're far less likely to build a consensus.

[RedDenver]

3 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

That's the kind of thinking that will get you nowhere.

 

You don't have to defeat them, you have to work with them.

 

Ballpark, what percentage of the country do you think are progressives? And when you arrive at less than a majority, you're left with hoping for a plurality. But with a mindset of "we must fight them" rather than "we must learn to work with them," you're far less likely to build a consensus.

Depends who you mean by "them". I fight against neoliberalism and to me the "them" are the candidates and politicians taking money from corporations and the rich. And my fight is to convince more people to join me so that we will have the plurality and then majority.

[Danny Bateman]

4 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

That's the kind of thinking that will get you nowhere. 

 

You don't have to defeat them, you have to work with them.

  

Ballpark, what percentage of the country do you think are progressives? And when you arrive at less than a majority, you're left with hoping for a plurality. But with a mindset of "we must fight them" rather than "we must learn to work with them," you're far less likely to build a consensus.

 

Couldn't have said it better.

 

I get the impulse to "fight," because anymore in politics it seems like that's what everyone wants - a fighter.

 

But progressives cannot do it on their own. They've got to build coalitions and win people over instead of disparaging allies.

[Ratt Mhule]

23 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

That's the kind of thinking that will get you nowhere.

 

You don't have to defeat them, you have to work with them.

 

Ballpark, what percentage of the country do you think are progressives? And when you arrive at less than a majority, you're left with hoping for a plurality. But with a mindset of "we must fight them" rather than "we must learn to work with them," you're far less likely to build a consensus.

 

Most of the progressive platform is popular. People just dont like putting labels on themselves. I always considered myself independent before I started following politics. When I actually started getting into the policies, I was like “holy s#!t Im actually considered a progressive”. 70% of the american people support medicare for all when the polls word it the right way. When they word it like “do you support a govt. run healthcare program when you lose your private health insurance” it still polls well into the upper 50s. Legalizing marijuana is popular. Making public colleges tuition free is at 60%. These positions are supported by the majority. So why dont we get them? Because politicians take money from all these interest groups and thats why we must fight them. 

 

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-election-progressives/

 

Polling is towards bottom of article. 

[Ratt Mhule]

23 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

Couldn't have said it better.

 

I get the impulse to "fight," because anymore in politics it seems like that's what everyone wants - a fighter.

 

But progressives cannot do it on their own. They've got to build coalitions and win people over instead of disparaging allies.

 

We are not fighting against the people like you. We are fighting the politicians that take money from these groups and in turn fight tooth and nail for their donors and big money interests. When you go policy to policy, the progressive policies are popular and we already have the majority in most cases. s#!t, you dont consider yourself progressive but you said youself, you agree with some of the policies. Even bigredbuster, a conservative, has said he supports medicare for all for the most part. 

[Apsu]

5 hours ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

You posted a story from a Russian-owned news service's Ukraine branch to support your call to investigate Biden in this very thread.

 

That does not make Interfax Ukraine "alt-right", nor RT or Sputnik.

And as I asked... "Can you name a better source from Ukraine?"