Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 115: Pardon the Interruption

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/politics/wp/2017/07/25/senators-on-hot-mic-trump-is-crazy-im-worried/

“Did you see the one who challenged me to a duel?” Collins asks.

“I know,” Reed replies. “Trust me. Do you know why he challenged you to a duel? ‘Cause you could beat the s— out of him.”

“Well, he’s huge,” Collins replies. “And he — I don’t mean to be unkind, but he’s so unattractive it’s unbelievable.”

This is extraordinary. "He's so unattractive it's unbelievable," is also getting worked into my daily language.
---

The headline on CNN at this restaurant I'm at right now is "Senator Heller moves to "yes" on key healthcare vote".

How many are left?
---

I think just Collins :/
---

They don't even know what they are voting for!
---

I think Murkowski is also probably a no, but then Pence just breaks the tie.

Also this vote is just to bring something to the table, so it's not the end of the world. Not that it should really be allowed to get this far, because nothing they can bring to the table in two weeks is going to be good, but I don't think an actual vote on a bill will pass.
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/politics/wp/2017/07/25/senators-on-hot-mic-trump-is-crazy-im-worried/

“Did you see the one who challenged me to a duel?” Collins asks.

“I know,” Reed replies. “Trust me. Do you know why he challenged you to a duel? ‘Cause you could beat the s— out of him.”

“Well, he’s huge,” Collins replies. “And he — I don’t mean to be unkind, but he’s so unattractive it’s unbelievable.”

This is extraordinary. "He's so unattractive it's unbelievable," is also getting worked into my daily language.

OMG that picture of Farenthold
---

As much as I don't want this health care repeal to pass, I won't be AS mad if Pence has to attach his name to it passing. He's already been quite influential in tie-breaking votes for Planned Parenthood's funding (which helps with his base) and appointing DeVos (questionable with his base...? Guessing)...but this repeal is pretty poisonous and will come back to bite him in the ass of an eventual Presidential run.

His best hope is that Pence doesn't need to vote on it and Donald steps down so he gets some time to wash his hands of Donald's reign before his first election.
---

Can you hear that sound?

It's the sound of Heller's chances of keeping his seat next year vanishing into the wind.

They're at tiebreaker, so they officially get to write a new bill as soon as Pence shows up.

So we're back at square one, if back when we were at square one, we knew that them passing a bill ranged from "literally impossible" to "theoretically possible, but they must gut everything they like about the thing in the first place".
---

I'm a little lost as to what precisely is happening.

What exactly does today's Motion to Proceed vote do and why was it so desperately important that it failed?
---

Jakyl25 posted...

I'm a little lost as to what precisely is happening.

What exactly does today's Motion to Proceed vote do and why was it so desperately important that it failed?

It's not. It's just a motion to let them talk some more. They're treating it as a victory, but it's literally back at square one, but worse for them. I guess they're treating it as a victory because they need a victory?

I assume this same vote happened back in January or whatever, but it was to no fanfare because they hadn't fully realized they were all colossal fuckups at the time.
---

It just give the Senate the option to debate things for a bit longer and then bring something to the table to actually vote on. If the MTP failed, the whole thing was pretty much dead, at least for the forseeable future.

Now that MTP passed, there's still a chance they could repeal and/or replace some or all parts of the ACA over the coming days (though I still think this is unlikely).
---

When you get down to it, the only particularly interesting parts of it is that it could've failed at all, because that's hilarious, and presumably the two no votes will remain no votes to any form of the bill, and that Heller's now basically fucked, because Nevada very specifically did not want this.

So they basically had to surrender Heller's seat to get a chance to talk some.
---

I've intentionally been taking a break from these topics because I need a little less politics in my life, and I apologize for literally just jumping to the end to post this, but...

...today I learned that when some people see the phrase "toxic masculinity", they're actually thinking it's saying "all masculinity is toxic", as opposed to "a certain subset of behaviors attributed to masculinity that is harmful".

That explains a lot of reactions I've seen which previously confused me, such as denial of such a thing existing (even though it's blatantly obvious that it exists).

Unfortunately this misunderstanding has quite the potential to be harmful, too.
---

Yeah, the whole thing doesn't really make much sense. This had to be for some kind of optics to say they 'won' something, but I'm not really sure to what end?
---

I see

So, theoretically, they're not just going to trot out the SAME BILL that already couldn't get votes, right? I mean, I get that they COULD, but that seems pointless.

So if they want some form of it to pass they're gonna have to rework some things, right?
---

The Mana Sword posted...

Yeah, the whole thing doesn't really make much sense. This had to be for some kind of optics to say they 'won' something, but I'm not really sure to what end?

Winning. Trump's obsessed with the concept. They're probably trying to stave off his rants by winning in some capacity.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

I see

So, theoretically, they're not just going to trot out the SAME BILL that already couldn't get votes, right? I mean, I get that they COULD, but that seems pointless.

So if they want some form of it to pass they're gonna have to rework some things, right?

If they trot out the same bill, short of McConnell going nuclear, they'd need 60 votes. Which they obviously can't get.

In the event that McConnell DOES go nuclear and tell the parliamentarian to piss off, he'll almost certainly alienate a solid chunk of his votes.

So, no, they almost certainly aren't tossing out the same bill again.
---

BowserCuffs posted...

...today I learned that when some people see the phrase "toxic masculinity", they're actually thinking it's saying "all masculinity is toxic", as opposed to "a certain subset of behaviors attributed to masculinity that is harmful".

That explains a lot of reactions I've seen which previously confused me, such as denial of such a thing existing (even though it's blatantly obvious that it exists).

Unfortunately this misunderstanding has quite the potential to be harmful, too.

some people don't misunderstand what it means but still deny it exists because it's impossible for them to imagine that any behaviors attributed to masculinity can be harmful.
---

SupremeZero posted...

The Mana Sword posted...

Yeah, the whole thing doesn't really make much sense. This had to be for some kind of optics to say they 'won' something, but I'm not really sure to what end?

Winning. Trump's obsessed with the concept. They're probably trying to stave off his rants by winning in some capacity.

Can't wait for Trump to come out later and say how his amazing speech yesterday convinced people to vote yes!
---

Also, apparently they can't win already even if McConnell goes nuclear.

https://twitter.com/BenjySarlin/status/889927489333678080

Plus the two no votes to MtP, that's 3.
---

The Mana Sword posted...

Yeah, the whole thing doesn't really make much sense. This had to be for some kind of optics to say they 'won' something, but I'm not really sure to what end?

The strange thing to me is that many progressives seem to be playing along? I see lots of people treating this like they "lost."

I get that it would be great if it was all just squashed but I don't see the harm in continuing to keep it on the table until it can be crafted in such a way to get broader support.
---

SupremeZero posted...

Also, apparently they can't win already even if McConnell goes nuclear.

https://twitter.com/BenjySarlin/status/889927489333678080

Plus the two no votes to MtP, that's 3.

So why didn't he just vote no on the mtp?
---

Regaro posted...

SupremeZero posted...

Also, apparently they can't win already even if McConnell goes nuclear.

https://twitter.com/BenjySarlin/status/889927489333678080

Plus the two no votes to MtP, that's 3.

So why didn't he just vote no on the mtp?

Because they can negotiate changes to the bill, which is probably what he wants.
---

I don't believe anything McCain says, but Paul is probably the 3rd no vote in most cases. He's still only in for a clean repeal, but trying a clean repeal loses a bunch of others.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

The Mana Sword posted...

Yeah, the whole thing doesn't really make much sense. This had to be for some kind of optics to say they 'won' something, but I'm not really sure to what end?

The strange thing to me is that many progressives seem to be playing along? I see lots of people treating this like they "lost."

I think that's mostly due to the fact that a lot of people don't seem to really understand what was actually just voted on.
---

The Mana Sword posted...

I don't believe anything McCain says, but Paul is probably the 3rd no vote in most cases. He's still only in for a clean repeal, but trying a clean repeal loses a bunch of others.

*shrug* McCain has absolutely fuck all to lose now. He could become Trump and shoot a guy on main street in the capitol and he'll be fine, simply because there's not a chance in hell he's ever running again, and trying to shit on someone who literally has brain cancer is going to get YOU shat on. This is McCain's happy hour, wherein he can do whatever he damn well pleases.
---

The Mana Sword posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

The Mana Sword posted...

Yeah, the whole thing doesn't really make much sense. This had to be for some kind of optics to say they 'won' something, but I'm not really sure to what end?

The strange thing to me is that many progressives seem to be playing along? I see lots of people treating this like they "lost."

I think that's mostly due to the fact that a lot of people don't seem to really understand what was actually just voted on.

personally, it's that any time is spent on this dumpster fire at all
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

BowserCuffs posted...

...today I learned that when some people see the phrase "toxic masculinity", they're actually thinking it's saying "all masculinity is toxic", as opposed to "a certain subset of behaviors attributed to masculinity that is harmful".

That explains a lot of reactions I've seen which previously confused me, such as denial of such a thing existing (even though it's blatantly obvious that it exists).

Unfortunately this misunderstanding has quite the potential to be harmful, too.

some people don't misunderstand what it means but still deny it exists because it's impossible for them to imagine that any behaviors attributed to masculinity can be harmful.

What is positive masculinity is my question though. Like what specific traits are positive masculinity? Because isnt positive masculinity something that means its primarily (or even exclusively) male? Thus disbarring women from being able to obtain it? Thus sexist?
---

It's a loss in the sense that the bill would've been dead if this vote failed, as far as I can tell.

But it's not a win for anybody, either.
---

Metal_DK posted...

Mr Lasastryke posted...

BowserCuffs posted...

...today I learned that when some people see the phrase "toxic masculinity", they're actually thinking it's saying "all masculinity is toxic", as opposed to "a certain subset of behaviors attributed to masculinity that is harmful".

That explains a lot of reactions I've seen which previously confused me, such as denial of such a thing existing (even though it's blatantly obvious that it exists).

Unfortunately this misunderstanding has quite the potential to be harmful, too.

some people don't misunderstand what it means but still deny it exists because it's impossible for them to imagine that any behaviors attributed to masculinity can be harmful.

What is positive masculinity is my question though. Like what specific traits are positive masculinity? Because isnt positive masculinity something that means its primarily (or even exclusively) male? Thus disbarring women from being able to obtain it? Thus sexist?

I think it's supposed to be Chivalry.
---

A lot of people (not here) seem to be very upset with McCain for getting out of the hospital to do this.

I get that you're disappointed in the WAY he voted but getting mad at him for going above and beyond to do the job he was elected to do seems silly.
---

its not silly

john mccain is no hero, he is human garbage

you are saying basically "i mean its wrong to kill people but hes really good at it"

Metal_DK posted...

What is positive masculinity is my question though. Like what specific traits are positive masculinity? Because isnt positive masculinity something that means its primarily (or even exclusively) male? Thus disbarring women from being able to obtain it? Thus sexist?

according to sephyg bodyslamming reporters is positive masculinity.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

A lot of people (not here) seem to be very upset with McCain for getting out of the hospital to do this.

I get that you're disappointed in the WAY he voted but getting mad at him for going above and beyond to do the job he was elected to do seems silly.

There's a bit of "what the fuck dude" to come out of a hospital where your top of the line treatment was taxpayer funded to go vote to deny not-rich people affordable access to the same top of the line treatment, I'll admit.

But yeah. I basically agree with you.
---

Metal_DK posted...

What is positive masculinity is my question though. Like what specific traits are positive masculinity? Because isnt positive masculinity something that means its primarily (or even exclusively) male? Thus disbarring women from being able to obtain it? Thus sexist?

Being a good father
Promoting work ethic
Going out of your way to assist those in need

Those are some traits that are associated with masculinity in our culture that are positive
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

Metal_DK posted...

What is positive masculinity is my question though. Like what specific traits are positive masculinity? Because isnt positive masculinity something that means its primarily (or even exclusively) male? Thus disbarring women from being able to obtain it? Thus sexist?

according to sephyg bodyslamming reporters is positive masculinity.

what do you think positive masculinity is? What do you think is a positive trait that is primarily or exclusively male?
---

beard growing
---

FFDragon posted...

beard growing

Beard STROKING.
---

Metal_DK posted...

what do you think positive masculinity is? What do you think is a positive trait that is primarily or exclusively male?

i think positive masculinity is bullshit.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Metal_DK posted...

What is positive masculinity is my question though. Like what specific traits are positive masculinity? Because isnt positive masculinity something that means its primarily (or even exclusively) male? Thus disbarring women from being able to obtain it? Thus sexist?

Being a good father
Promoting work ethic
Going out of your way to assist those in need

Those are some traits that are associated with masculinity in our culture that are positive

one of those three makes sense to me (good father). But promoting work ethic and going out of your way to assist those in need are primarily male traits? Interesting answer at least.
---

FFDragon posted...

beard growing

Not gonna lie, I don't like how facial hair feels if it grows out even just a bit.
---

Regaro posted...

FFDragon posted...

beard growing

Not gonna lie, I don't like how facial hair feels if it grows out even just a bit.

It's when it grows out just a bit that it's worst! Give it time!
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

Metal_DK posted...

what do you think positive masculinity is? What do you think is a positive trait that is primarily or exclusively male?

i think positive masculinity is bullshit.

So then all masculinity is toxic in your own eyes.

You think positive masculinity doesn't exist (im assuming thats what you mean by bullshit). Thus the only type of masculinity is toxic?
---

SupremeZero posted...

Regaro posted...

FFDragon posted...

beard growing

Not gonna lie, I don't like how facial hair feels if it grows out even just a bit.

It's when it grows out just a bit that it's worst! Give it time!

I did. It didn't improve.
---

I had a dream last night that Dwayne Johnson was personally funding single payer healthcare.

Metal_DK posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Metal_DK posted...

What is positive masculinity is my question though. Like what specific traits are positive masculinity? Because isnt positive masculinity something that means its primarily (or even exclusively) male? Thus disbarring women from being able to obtain it? Thus sexist?

Being a good father
Promoting work ethic
Going out of your way to assist those in need

Those are some traits that are associated with masculinity in our culture that are positive

one of those three makes sense to me (good father). But promoting work ethic and going out of your way to assist those in need are primarily male traits? Interesting answer at least.

They aren't necessarily "male traits" in reality but they are ASSOCIATED with men, at least in America.

When you think of someone stopping on the side of the highway to help a stranger with car trouble, you generally think of a man, for example
---

Jakyl25 posted...

I'm a little lost as to what precisely is happening.

What exactly does today's Motion to Proceed vote do and why was it so desperately important that it failed?

nothing. as others have said, it's pretty much a vote for the sake of having a vote before they vacation during the summer. "we've decided to talk about this later! let's ignore that one of the only things we've said we could do is improve health care and can't figure out how to do it." it's a vote on healthcare to be able to say they passed a vote on healthcare, even if it's literally just to talk about it. after two massive failures in the senate and one in the house, they want a win.

Jakyl25 posted...

The strange thing to me is that many progressives seem to be playing along? I see lots of people treating this like they "lost."

because many of them are stupid, abhor anything trump, and overreact to a point where anybody looking at them sees them as insane zealots. nothing strange really, happens regularly.
---

Metal_DK posted...

So then all masculinity is toxic in your own eyes.

You think positive masculinity doesn't exist (im assuming thats what you mean by bullshit). Thus the only type of masculinity is toxic?

i guess so, yes.

i don't know exactly how to define "masculinity," though. jakyl said "being a good father" is an example of positive masculinity. obviously i don't think being a good parent is a bad thing, but i don't think this is a trait exclusive to males.
---

I see Dean Heller is every bit the coward I always feared he was.

Big thanks to Collins and Murkowski. Hopefully at least one more can be pealed off of whatever bill comes up to a vote.
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

Metal_DK posted...

So then all masculinity is toxic in your own eyes.

You think positive masculinity doesn't exist (im assuming thats what you mean by bullshit). Thus the only type of masculinity is toxic?

i guess so, yes.

i don't know exactly how to define "masculinity," though. jakyl said "being a good father" is an example of positive masculinity. obviously i don't think being a good parent is a bad thing, but i don't think this is a trait exclusive to males.

I think you're falling into a bit of a language trap here.

"Masculinity" means male traits in the sense that we've ASSIGNED them to men, not necessarily that they ARE male traits.

Our perception of being a good father is different than our perception of being a good mother, even though gender doesn't really matter to either one.
---