Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[REDSTATEWARD]

So vote for him.

Is that your standard for voting? 

[Yankguy1]

 Go fight with yourself Socrates.

[josh]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration on Wednesday completed one of its biggest rollbacks of environmental rules, replacing a landmark Obama-era effort that sought to wean the nation’s electrical grid off coal-fired power plants and their climate-damaging pollution.

Environmental Protection Agency chief Andrew Wheeler, a former coal industry lobbyist, signed a replacement rule that gives states leeway in deciding whether to require efficiency upgrades at existing coal plants.

Wheeler said coal-fired power plants remained essential to the power grid, something that opponents deny. “Americans want reliable energy that they can afford,” he said at a news conference. There’s no denying “the fact that fossil fuels will continue to be an important part of the mix,” he said.

  - AP

Sort of weird to roll back rules that promote more efficient coal plants. 

Not all that simplistic

Obama overreached - but was re-elected for it.

By Ward's definition, that means he did not overreach.

Given the declining coal market and the dirty environment they produce, it still doesn't look like he overreached.

So, what makes it look like an overreach to you?

[josh]

Desperate Booker, Warren, and DeBlahzeeoh! Go after Joe. Why? Because he was able to work with the opposition.

https://www.npr.org/2019/06/19/734103488/democrats-blast-biden-for-recalling-civil-relationship-with-segregationists

Hmmmm. Maybe, just maybe, that's how you get things done, dummies!

Poor Joe. Too old. Too dumb. Too secict. Too white. Not woke!

And leading all the polls.

"Kick 'em, when they're up, kick 'em, when they're down...we love dirty laundry."

Between his commitment to not go after the wealthy and his commitment to work with the segregationists, he sounds like Trump-lite.

He worked with the segreationists to block school desegregation. Yeah, there's a winning concept.

[LarryBnDC]

Desperate Booker, Warren, and DeBlahzeeoh! Go after Joe. Why? Because he was able to work with the opposition.

https://www.npr.org/2019/06/19/734103488/democrats-blast-biden-for-recalling-civil-relationship-with-segregationists

Hmmmm. Maybe, just maybe, that's how you get things done, dummies!

Poor Joe. Too old. Too dumb. Too secict. Too white. Not woke!

And leading all the polls.

"Kick 'em, when they're up, kick 'em, when they're down...we love dirty laundry."

Between his commitment to not go after the wealthy and his commitment to work with the segregationists, he sounds like Trump-lite.

He worked with the segreationists to block school desegregation. Yeah, there's a winning concept.

Yikes!

https://twitter.com/boknowsnews/status/1141494728048959488?s=21

[josh]

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2019/06/what-its-like-when-your-college-shuts-down/591862/?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_source=facebook&utm_content=edit-promo&utm_term=2019-06-18T13%3A58%3A50

The 2nd half of the article discusses the demise of smaller colleges and is especially good. The first half is okay,  but not as vital.

[josh]

Desperate Booker, Warren, and DeBlahzeeoh! Go after Joe. Why? Because he was able to work with the opposition.

https://www.npr.org/2019/06/19/734103488/democrats-blast-biden-for-recalling-civil-relationship-with-segregationists

Hmmmm. Maybe, just maybe, that's how you get things done, dummies!

Poor Joe. Too old. Too dumb. Too secict. Too white. Not woke!

And leading all the polls.

"Kick 'em, when they're up, kick 'em, when they're down...we love dirty laundry."

Between his commitment to not go after the wealthy and his commitment to work with the segregationists, he sounds like Trump-lite.

He worked with the segreationists to block school desegregation. Yeah, there's a winning concept.

Yikes!

https://twitter.com/boknowsnews/status/1141494728048959488?s=21

Well, remember that Joe was active in the Civil Rights Movement.

Okay, so he wasn't active in the movement, as he reluctantly admitted. But he was alive during it!

[bodiddley]

Besides being a Democrat and not Trump, what's the case for Biden? 

All I can come up with is that he was Obama's buddy and isn't as radical as many of the other Dems running.  Is it solely electability (more or less name recognition, at this point)?

But what is the affirmative case for Biden and what he would do?

[facilitatorn]

Why Joe is fading. Liz makes a good case for herself and how she can lead us to a better America. Pete is exceptional in reaction, but it’s not as clear how he hopes to make the changes he sees that we need. Booker has great heart is no slouch on issues. Kamala is steady, real, and sharp as hell simultaneously.

I really like the Montana governor and think he’s an important voice in the race.

The field should shrink by a third come mid July, hopefully spawning some recognizable and well funded candidates for governor and senator across some states.

Trump will only make the republicans weaker, though it is still every American’s vital and patriotic duty to kick republicans while they are down, spit in their food, and bombard them with milkshakes when they take it on themselves to speak in public.

[bodiddley]

I'm a big Liz Warren booster.
Smart as hell, ready to change things.
She understands that Dem economic policies are way more popular than Rep ones.  Which is why the Reps prefer to do battle on cultural issues and fear (of gays, blacks, foreigners). 
Warren seeks to shift thew country back to a progressive tilt, something Obama never bothered to try.
Go Liz!
 

[josh]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/02/24/republican-lawmakers-introduce-bills-to-curb-protesting-in-at-least-17-states/?fbclid=IwAR0sAhERKrdt-smFR8fipEkHHcJn6VRvhspylobmHfLlYFHOkINzZmHvZOc&utm_term=.238e81167166

Just more evidence that the GOP is anti-American in their current incarnation.

They want to curb protests in at least 17 states. (They probably want to curb them in all states, but they lack the power to do it in the rest of them.)

[LarryBnDC]

I'm a big Liz Warren booster.
Smart as hell, ready to change things.
She understands that Dem economic policies are way more popular than Rep ones.  Which is why the Reps prefer to do battle on cultural issues and fear (of gays, blacks, foreigners). 
Warren seeks to shift thew country back to a progressive tilt, something Obama never bothered to try.
Go Liz!

I think Obama did what he could considering...
if McConnell is still Senate Majority leader how much do you think Warren will get done?
By the way I’m a big Warren booster.

[NeedsAdjustments]

I'm a big Liz Warren booster.
Smart as hell, ready to change things.
She understands that Dem economic policies are way more popular than Rep ones.  Which is why the Reps prefer to do battle on cultural issues and fear (of gays, blacks, foreigners). 
Warren seeks to shift thew country back to a progressive tilt, something Obama never bothered to try.
Go Liz!

I think Obama did what he could considering...
if McConnell is still Senate Majority leader how much do you think Warren will get done?
By the way I’m a big Warren booster.

Yes and no.  Obama is a true moderate, and thus gave in quickly on priorities that came more to the left of him (public option, a stimulus bill that was not big enough and over 40% tax cuts, carbon taxes...) and compromised WAY too much on budget issues (look at how quickly government spending has gone up under Trump.)

But we all know the obstruction he faced in Congress, and don't expect Warren to be in a different position.  I guess maybe, just maybe, the fact that she puts ideas and convictions behind more progressive policy proposals she has a better shot at moving the needle.

[NeedsAdjustments]

Besides being a Democrat and not Trump, what's the case for Biden? 

All I can come up with is that he was Obama's buddy and isn't as radical as many of the other Dems running.  Is it solely electability (more or less name recognition, at this point)?

But what is the affirmative case for Biden and what he would do?

It really is mostly about electability.

I do think he has an ability to sell Democratic priorities in a way that doesn't scare off the wealthy class (see recent largely misinterpreted comments to wealthy donors...he was saying taxing money they couldn't otherwise spend on anything will not effect their lifestyle.  Thats what was meant by "nothing will change.")  or scare off working class voters on cultural issues (if only because its coming from an old white guy.)

Saw a poll recently that showed Warren the clear favorite if "electability" was taken out of consideration.  Obviously, after what happened to Hillary and when four more years of Trump would be a disaster for the country, nominating another woman is unfortunately a concern.

[NeedsAdjustments]

Hey, remember all those announcements that came after the Trump Tax Cut that were timed to show the cut would lead to all kinds of increases in worker bonuses?

I said at the time it was propaganda.  I was right.  Worker bonuses are down 22% since the tax cut was signed:

https://www.epi.org/blog/worker-bonuses-slump-22-percent-after-gop-tax-cuts/

Corporate tax revenue is down to its lowest level in 50 years, corporate profits at record highs.  Bonuses down and wage increases modest, at levels you would expect to see at low unemployment.

Who would have guessed that the already wealthy would just pocket the surplus...