US Political Discussion: Trump Administration Edition (Rules in OP)

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by mongey, Mar 2, 2016.

  1. allheavymusic

    allheavymusic Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    72
    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2019
    Centrism in an Overton window heavily shifted to the right is not good for everyone. Certainly wasn't good for Iraq, or Libya, or Yemen, or any of the countries in which both parties have supported our military efforts. It wasn't good for anyone affected by the 2008 recession. It's not good for anyone who's homeless, unemployed, uninsured, or still in poverty because of the neoliberal political program. As for the Democratic party, I wouldn't worry. They're just as resolutely liberal as the GOP, if that's what you're into.

    To me those aren't examples of nuance. The existence of any private prisons (especially in cases where they can sue states if prisoner quotas aren't met) is absurd. Imprisoning people for using drugs is unethical. Merely "loosening sentencing" when we have the highest per capita incarceration rate is not a more nuanced position, it's a worse position. Anything that isn't a step towards full decriminalization is a retrograde, barbaric policy that belongs in the 20s along with Prohibition. Nuanced doesn't mean "less disruptive" when something desperately needs to be disrupted.

    By executive order, Sanders can do extremely important things Obama would never do. He could stop drone strikes and military action abroad. We all know Obama loved his drone strikes. He could force the CIA to stop assassinating people, engineering coups, torturing people, trafficking drugs, training and arming terrorists, destabilizing the Americas and the Middle East, etc. Our foreign policy has been nightmarish for a long time. He can shut down private prisons and migrant detention centers. He can legalize marijuana and end mandatory minimums. He can even take a huge chunk out of student loan debt. Admittedly, executive actions are all reversible, which is an issue. But they're also hugely important, and his track record suggests he'd follow through. Unlike Obama, who was never going to do anything that wasn't approved by both parties, regardless of popular support. And that's not even considering the idea of bottom-up pressure.

    Sanders is center-left economically. Although he describes himself as a socialist, his policies construe him as a social democrat, which is a center-left position in most countries, if not a centrist one. I don't think it's productive to have the "is he or isn't he" debate. I do think he has strong connections to American socialism. But his stated policy goals are not innately anti-capitalist, and he's not running on a socialist platform. It's bizarre to say he's trying to co-opt the Democratic Party. It's a two party system. He has no other choice. He either runs as a Democrat or as a spoiler candidate.

    As far as I understand it, he's proposed multiple possible options for financing M4A. The one I've seen most commonly is a progressive tax that would, for the vast majority of Americans, be much cheaper than paying for insurance, but would still raise taxes. Either way, it's clearly something we can fund. It's essentially emulating the Canadian system, and if Canadians can do it...

    Characterizing him as an isolationist is a bit misleading. He's openly described himself as an internationalist, but his opposition to trade deals is based on his claim that they'll negatively impact US workers. I don't know if I would agree in all cases, but it's certainly not blanket isolationism. As for his populism, backing the working class isn't a bad thing unless, again, you're Chuck Schumer.

    Ultimately, Warren is a progressive democrat. I don't think her platform is bad full stop. It's true that they agree on a lot of policy issues. But Sanders is a unique candidate in the US. He's been committed to the labor movement, activism, civil rights, and economic reform his whole career. He's proved himself over decades, and he's always been vindicated by history. Warren is a former Republican who is committed first and foremost to markets, by her own admission. She might not be a neoliberal, but she's certainly a social liberal who doesn't advocate for fundamental change. She's in no way more substantive, just more conciliatory to established powers. As for the idea that Sanders is just another angry white man, I think most people will see that that criticism is skin deep. As a bonus, Sanders has never pretended to be a minority to further his career goals.
     
    Thaeon, Randy, vilk and 3 others like this.
  2. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    5,444
    Likes Received:
    1,886
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    Actually Sanders is ethnically Jewish, and despite that his skin is white, Jewish people are a kind of minority group and have faced all sorts of racism, or I guess they call it antisemitism, and especially in the past. It's usually not as horrible as the sort of things that have happened and still happen to people of color, but I'm sick of people acting like the guy is a WASP or something just because he's not a woman or a person of color.

    If elected he would be the first openly non-Christian president in our country's history.
     
    JoshuaVonFlash, Thaeon and Randy like this.
  3. Adieu

    Adieu SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    805
    Likes Received:
    521
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2010
    Location:
    Moscow
    Lol I was surprised nobody really dared make a fuss about Obama being fairly white back in the day....

    but looks like this time around, someone actually might open the TOO WHITE/NOT WHITE ENOUGH can of worms
     
    Randy likes this.
  4. sleewell

    sleewell SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    155
    Likes Received:
    174
    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2016
    Location:
    michigan
    Mayor Pete seems to be polling #1 in Iowa. Pretty solid surge from just a few weeks ago.

    Bernie is 80 and just had a heart attack. That ship has sailed folks, sorry.
     
  5. spudmunkey

    spudmunkey SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,713
    Likes Received:
    2,765
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2010
    Location:
    Near San Francisco
    60 Minutes, the day after he announced his candidacy in 2007, asked him something along the lines of, "when did you decide you were black?"
     
  6. Randy

    Randy Sous Chef Super Moderator

    Messages:
    21,121
    Likes Received:
    5,522
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Location:
    The Electric City, NY
    Not sure those statements were meant to go with eachother, but a big point of the current conversation is that one is not easily replaceable with the other.
     
  7. Thaeon

    Thaeon Cosmic Question Asker

    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    563
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    I think the heart attack thing is a straw man argument. I understand concern. But how many people with the assistance of modern medicine live DECADES after a heart attack? Its not a heart attack, but Carter just had brain surgery, and he's going right back to his hustle at 94. In my opinion, arguing Bernie's age is a pretty lame argument. Dude has proven he's got the grit to make it happen. Don't count him out until the votes are in.
     
    JoshuaVonFlash and vilk like this.
  8. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    29,036
    Likes Received:
    4,609
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    Ok, two things here.

    First, I see eye to eye on you, but importantly so does Clinton. Again, she praised the DOJ's decision, under Obama, to phase out the use of private prisons, and wanted to see the states follow suit. I don't know how you can reconcile that with Clinton "would have no impact on limiting the use of private prisons," unless you were going to argue that merely maintaining the existing phase-out of the Obama administration technically wasn't an impact because they were going away when she came to office. Second, you may personally find imprisoning people for using drugs unethical, but in America (and in virtually all of the world) the use of at least some drugs is illegal, and cause for imprisonment. I'd like to see marijuana legalized, regulated, and taxed, too, but that's still a far cry from total legalization of all drugs, which I wouldn't support. It's also an odd example to pick here, because back in 2016 Sanders only advocated for medical marijuana legalization, so even he wasn't pushing full legalization back when he was running against Clinton. It's only in 2020 he's now making that case, and IMO I think that's in part testimony to the shift in public perception over the past 4 years.

    IMO, no president should be able or encouraged to push radical reforms through executive order. I don't want Trump doing it, I don't want Sanders doing it, and I didn't want Obama or Bush doing it. Executive order should only be used very carefully. This, IMO, would be a reason NOT to support Sanders, if he's really pledging to make these sort of changes through executive order.

    Ok, so why his refusal to join the Democratic party? He vowed to do so, win or lose, in 2016, and still hasn't followed through. He wants to run with the support of a party he won't join?
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2019
    sleewell likes this.
  9. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    29,036
    Likes Received:
    4,609
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    It's not a reason NOT to vote for him, but it's certainly a concern. He's 78 and will be 79 in January 2020 - if he serves two terms, he'll be 87 at the end of those two terms. Carter is 95 and still alive, true, but he's also not a sitting president and was 57 at the end of his term. Reagan was 78 at the end of his second term, meanwhile, the age Sanders is today, and there's speculation that he may have already been suffering from Alzheimer's while he was in the white house, before he went public with it.

    Trump was the oldest president ever elected, at 70, and Sanders would be 79 when sworn in if he were to win. It's definitely not a reason to disqualify him, but it's still a factor that needs to be taken into account, for sure, and at a minimum it would make his choice of VP extremely important.

    EDIT - same's true of Biden as well, who's only two years younger than Sanders, although whose health hasn't shown any outwardly visible issues as of yet. If youy're running for President in your upper 70s, that's definitely something where it should be taken under consideration as we evaluate candidates.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2019
    sleewell and Thaeon like this.
  10. Thaeon

    Thaeon Cosmic Question Asker

    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    563
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    Sure. As is the case for anyone that age. But most of the people with a real shot are in the 20 year age group where this stuff is an actual concern. Bernie just catches most of it cause he's the oldest. But any one of those people could drop tomorrow, or show signs of dementia.
     
  11. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    29,036
    Likes Received:
    4,609
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    Agreed. I was just coming back here to add an edit to the effect that the same would be true of Biden, who's only two years younger than Sanders (which I'll do anyway, for the sake of anyone else reading it). With Biden we don't have any additional evidence to suggest his health may be a risk - i.e., he hasn't also had a heart attack - but if you were to ask me for a list of my reservations on Biden as a candidate, his age would be towards the top of that list too.
     
  12. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    29,036
    Likes Received:
    4,609
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    *double post*
     
  13. Randy

    Randy Sous Chef Super Moderator

    Messages:
    21,121
    Likes Received:
    5,522
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Location:
    The Electric City, NY
    Answer: Stop electing fucking boomers.
     
    zappatton2, Thaeon and Ralyks like this.
  14. spudmunkey

    spudmunkey SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,713
    Likes Received:
    2,765
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2010
    Location:
    Near San Francisco
    The thing is...these people are older than the oldest boomers. Baby boomers births started after WWII. These guys are 5+ years PAST that. Obama was, technically, still considered a "baby boomer".
     
  15. Randy

    Randy Sous Chef Super Moderator

    Messages:
    21,121
    Likes Received:
    5,522
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Location:
    The Electric City, NY
    Okay, so replace "boomers" with "geriatrics"
     
    zappatton2, Thaeon and Ralyks like this.
  16. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    29,036
    Likes Received:
    4,609
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    Seems reasonable enough to me. :shrug:
     
    Ralyks likes this.
  17. Ralyks

    Ralyks The One Who Knocks Contributor

    Messages:
    4,113
    Likes Received:
    884
    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Location:
    Dutchess County, NY
    Too many boomers still around...
     
  18. Ralyks

    Ralyks The One Who Knocks Contributor

    Messages:
    4,113
    Likes Received:
    884
    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Location:
    Dutchess County, NY
    Anyone watching the hearings? Sounds like the GOP is still fixated on 2016.
     
  19. Randy

    Randy Sous Chef Super Moderator

    Messages:
    21,121
    Likes Received:
    5,522
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Location:
    The Electric City, NY
    Waste of time chasing down what the GOP is after. The leaked Stephen Miller emails to Breitbart and Trump's own history indicate the GOP is infected top to bottom with Infowaritis. Everything's about Hillary and the deep state and Crowdstrike, so on. Its their convenient excuse for everything, they're still trying it 3 and almost 4 years after the fact and the only people that appeals to are the people already drink their Kool Aid.

    I'm more interested in the testimonies themselves which so far appear to be quite damning. If the Trump impeachment is going to be 11 months of this, he's not going to survive till June.
     
  20. Thaeon

    Thaeon Cosmic Question Asker

    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    563
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    I think putting an age limit on public service isn't unreasonable at all. Mitigates some of the obvious issues with aging people's health and forces new blood into the system.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.