Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 231: The Sleepy One

(+) Yeah! (+)

Moscow Mitch does that anyway, even without the rule!
---

if you're talking to red sox please quote him
---

If you don't want to read my posts I recommend finding another topic to post in.
---

NFUN posted...

if you're talking to red sox please quote him

My how the times have changed.

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

NFUN posted...

if you're talking to red sox please quote him

My how the times have changed.

Change is beautiful
---

Politics topic where the creator has topic ignore for vlado and red sox.

Leafeon13N posted...

Politics topic where the creator has topic ignore for vlado and red sox.

---

Trump explicitly saying the obvious fact that he wants Ratcliffe to politicize the intelligence agencies to protect himself:

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1156272729731076096
---

Man Chris Matthews is really bad at hiding his hateboner for Bernie, and I'm not even a Bernie stan. Was pre-debate guest commentating on The Beat a bit ago and just nonstop railing Bernie as a socialist that's completely anti-market and wants the government to have complete control of the economy.
---

https://twitter.com/_sjpeace_/status/1156049011058597893?s=21

A new incident where officers use excessive force against someone who happens to be black

Youre being arrested for speeding lol okay

Cop #2 in particular is psycho
---

Grimlyn posted...

Man Chris Matthews is really bad at hiding his hateboner for Bernie, and I'm not even a Bernie stan. Was pre-debate guest commentating on The Beat a bit ago and just nonstop railing Bernie as a socialist that's completely anti-market and wants the government to have complete control of the economy.

no different from muffin saying "EVERYONE ON THE LEFT IS A COMMUNIST" or trump saying "ACCORDING TO OMAR EVERYONE IS A RACIST." when you know you can't win a debate with your opponent with arguments, you deliberately misrepresent their positions or overexaggerate them to the utmost to make them seem insane. disgusting tactic.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

https://twitter.com/_sjpeace_/status/1156049011058597893?s=21

A new incident where officers use excessive force against someone who happens to be black

Youre being arrested for speeding lol okay

Cop #2 in particular is psycho

Both of these complete and total shitstains need to be fired at a bare minimum

If anybody wonders why people distrust and despise cops, shit like this is exactly why

I personally have no reason to distrust cops, because Im white. If I was pulled over for speeding this would not happen to me.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

I personally have no reason to distrust cops, because Im white. If I was pulled over for speeding this would not happen to me.

Knowing that the color of my skin is literally the only factor protecting me from this if I get pulled over myself is super unsettling, personally. And I live in the major city that, by basically all accounts I've seen, has the best police/community relationship in the fucking country. I'm among the last people that will ever have to worry about this on an individual level, and I'm still thoroughly disgusted by it.

Just about every time one of these videos come out it is the same thing. If you get pulled over for whatever reason, do what the cop says and fight it after the fact if they do something. You are not going to win fighting about it in the moment, you are only going to justify it and whatever happens later like here. The guy technically resisted arrest and continued to do so after the 2nd officer got there and nothing will come of it because of it.
---

PSA that the US Supreme Court has ruled that if you are arrested for speeding, you can be strip searched.
---

hockeydude15 posted...

Just about every time one of these videos come out it is the same thing. If you get pulled over for whatever reason, do what the cop says and fight it after the fact if they do something. You are not going to win fighting about it in the moment, you are only going to justify it and whatever happens later like here. The guy technically resisted arrest and continued to do so after the 2nd officer got there and nothing will come of it because of it.

We understand that from a legal perspective

We are upset at it morally
---

Also that doesnt work if the cop murders you which thankfully didnt happen here, because first cop was a joke and clearly profiling but at least not looking for literally any excuse to get violent
---

This CNN debate intro is so bad

---

hockeydude15 posted...

Just about every time one of these videos come out it is the same thing. If you get pulled over for whatever reason, do what the cop says and fight it after the fact if they do something. You are not going to win fighting about it in the moment, you are only going to justify it and whatever happens later like here. The guy technically resisted arrest and continued to do so after the 2nd officer got there and nothing will come of it because of it.

What would he have been able to do after the fact? He'd more than likely be completely screwed out of real justice then. At least here the absolute ridiculousness is highlighted. Plus, he's an activist. He's probably willing to take the L here if it helps somebody else down the line.
---

Re: CNN discussion about Trump and racism.

I think it "makes sense" when you realize that the right has pushed the idea that calling something out as racist is worse than actually being racist. And the media plays along with that framing because they're terrible/are afraid to alienate the right/"moderates" who think the same. Like it triggers them, and I use "trigger" in a completely straight, non-sarcastic manner, regardless of the underlying facts of the case.

As for Trump himself, even if I intellectually understand the case of "Well actually he's just so narcissistic that the real driving motive is people who criticize/disagree with him" this argument just falls completely flat for me and is betrayed by, among other things, even the most cursory glance at his word choices. Even Fox's Chris Wallace pointed out that Trump breaks out word choices like "infested" when it comes to people of color. You can also see it with where he usually brings out "low IQ" and even his "no u" accusations like calling Cummings the real racist. He consistently uses diction like that when his targets of attack are not white. So even in the framing that he's "just" attacking people who disagree/criticize him it's demonstrable that the manner in which he attacks them changes based on race.

To say nothing of bringing up the pattern recognition and history such as his housing discrimination patterns or echoing arguments like "the real racists are the people calling out racism!" that we've seen previously from people like George Wallace.

And looping back to the media, because of this reticence to use the word racist they contort themselves into "it's all a planned strategy!" because without that they have no other explanation than "Well, he's racist, and America voted for a racist, and a solid 35-40% continues to support him" and again they're afraid it'll alienate/trigger the right and "moderates" to say so. Polling has consistently shown the majority of people think the attacks have gone too far and it'll tun off the suburbs.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

This CNN debate intro is so bad

oh right. that. i'll probably watch it later. i'm dvr'ing it. >_>
---

Lmao every candidate is now shitting on unelectable leftism
---

xp1337 posted...

I think it "makes sense" when you realize that the right has pushed the idea that calling something out as racist is worse than actually being racist.

noting, of course, that the right is actually perfectly fine with accusing people of being racist (see: trump having done this tons of times with the squad). apparently, the "IT'S HORRENDOUS TO ACCUSE SOMEONE OF RACISM" rule only applies to the left.
---

xp1337 posted...

Re: CNN discussion about Trump and racism.

I think it "makes sense" when you realize that the right has pushed the idea that calling something out as racist is worse than actually being racist. And the media plays along with that framing because they're terrible/are afraid to alienate the right/"moderates" who think the same. Like it triggers them, and I use "trigger" in a completely straight, non-sarcastic manner, regardless of the underlying facts of the case.

As for Trump itself, even if I intellectually understand the case of "Well actually he's just so narcissistic that the real driving motive is people who criticize/disagree with him" this argument just falls completely flat for me and is betrayed by, among other things, even the most cursory glance at his word choices. Even Fox's Chris Wallace pointed out that Trump breaks out word choices like "infested" when it comes to people of color. You can also see it with where he usually brings out "low IQ" and even his "no u" accusations like calling Cummings the real racist. He consistently uses diction like that when his targets of attack are not white. So even in the framing that he's "just" attacking people who disagree/criticize him it's demonstrable that the manner in which he attacks them changes based on race.

To say nothing of bringing up the pattern recognition and history such as his housing discrimination patterns or echoing arguments like "the real racists are the people calling out racism!" that we've seen previously from people like George Wallace.

And looping back to the media, because of this reticence to use the word racist they contort themselves into "it's all a planned strategy!" because without that they have no other explanation than "Well, he's racist, and America voted for a racist, and a solid 35-40% continues to support him" and again they're afraid it'll alienate/trigger the right and "moderates" to say so. Polling has consistently shown the majority of people think the attacks have gone too far and it'll tun off the suburbs.

Did you watch him attack Jeb Bush? Bill and Hillary Clinton?
---

Delaney's right here

---

Delaney with the kamikaze attack against Bernie and Warren, sad!

edited

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Hickenlooper with the kamikaze attack against Bernie and Warren, sad!

that's been his raison d'etre for running the whole time
---

Good on Warren calling out that the notion of the middle class having to pay more to have medicare for all is bullshit

Boo on this moderator trying to completely disregard it and phrase it as a strict tax increase

LordoftheMorons posted...

Delaney's right here

not in the slightest, his rhetoric is misleading garbage
---

Grimlyn posted...

not in the slightest, his rhetoric is misleading garbage

Call it what it is

a fucking lie

Reg posted...

Good on Warren calling out that the notion of the middle class having to pay more to have medicare for all is bullshit

Boo on this moderator trying to completely disregard it and phrase it as a strict tax increase

It's a fair question given that Harris recently claimed that her plan would be payed for completely by taxing the rich (which is impossible)

---

Oh wait, was I right the first time? I can never figure out who is who between those guys.

anyway, getting rid of private insurance isnt taking insurance away from anybody like the last guy just said. By definition you are getting coverage.

---

seriously Tapper fuck off with this stupid "you will raise taxes" soundbite on everyone
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

It's a fair question given that Harris recently claimed that her plan would be payed for completely by taxing the rich (which is impossible)

holy shit

are you actually buying the absolute fucking idiocy that medicare for all would drive up costs on the middle and lower classes

are you fucking stupid

Reg posted...

Call it what it is

a fucking lie

No it isn't

A lot of people don't want to gamble on the government run program being better than their private insurance. With a public option there's a fallback if they fuck it up.

---

If the media were a quarter as liberal as the right seems to think it is, they would NOT be phrasing things in right-wing terms like they do.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Oh wait, was I right the first time? I can never figure out who is who between those guys.

anyway, getting rid of private insurance isnt taking insurance away from anybody like the last guy just said. By definition you are getting coverage.

But what coverage are you getting? (Probably better if we can actually get to single payer, but it's possible to imagine worse).
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

A lot of people don't want to gamble on the government run program being better than their private insurance. With a public option there's a fallback if they fuck it up.

and "a lot of people" don't know what that even means, you shouldn't develop policy about what ignorant masses believe, you should be trying to teach them
---

Grimlyn posted...

seriously Tapper fuck off with this stupid "you will raise taxes" soundbite on everyone

thank bernie
---

Ashethan posted...

If the media were a quarter as liberal as the right seems to think it is, they would NOT be phrasing things in right-wing terms like they do.

Bernie literally just called this out and got a good crowd reaction when they told him his time was up.

---

Reg posted...

holy shit

are you actually buying the absolute fucking idiocy that medicare for all would drive up costs on the middle and lower classes

are you fucking stupid

You're not reading what I'm saying. There is at least one candidate (Harris) who is claiming that middle class people will pay nothing for health insurance. Not less total, nothing.

Furthermore, people very well could be paying more under Bernie's plan because it covers literally everything besides like cosmetic surgery 100% without copays or deductibles.

---

Ashethan posted...

If the media were a quarter as liberal as the right seems to think it is, they would NOT be phrasing things in right-wing terms like they do.

It's CNN. Their priorities are: 1) pandering, and 2) globalist centrism. Clinton News Network is accurate.
---

---

Reg posted...

LordoftheMorons posted...

It's a fair question given that Harris recently claimed that her plan would be payed for completely by taxing the rich (which is impossible)

holy shit

are you actually buying the absolute fucking idiocy that medicare for all would drive up costs on the middle and lower classes

are you fucking stupid

holy shit

are you actually reading that as saying that taxing the middle and lower classes for public healthcare would increase net costs

are you fucking stupid
---

red sox 777 posted...

2) globalist centrism.

omg vlado hacked red sox' account
---

Grimlyn posted...

LordoftheMorons posted...

A lot of people don't want to gamble on the government run program being better than their private insurance. With a public option there's a fallback if they fuck it up.

and "a lot of people" don't know what that even means, you shouldn't develop policy about what ignorant masses believe, you should be trying to teach them

If you want to ignore the "ignorant masses" again, let the consequences fall on you when you lose again.
---

Lmfao at all of the buttfury here if someone dare insinuate that "Medicare for all" won't even out the additional taxes most people will be paying.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

You're not reading what I'm saying. There is at least one candidate (Harris) who is claiming that middle class people will pay nothing for health insurance. Not less total, nothing.

Furthermore, people very well could be paying more under Bernie's plan because it covers literally everything besides like cosmetic surgery 100% without copays or deductibles.

We've literally been over that exact line. Harris said something really stupid with that one, nobody's going to deny that.

But if you actually think the taxes necessary to pay for public healthcare like any first-world country on this planet are going to be more than the extortionist premiums that health insurance companies currently charge, you're ignorant or lying.

Grimlyn posted...

and "a lot of people" don't know what that even means, you shouldn't develop policy about what ignorant masses believe, you should be trying to teach them

It's not an unreasonable fear! It would be a huge shock to the system, and that's a big risk. Tons of countries have universal coverage without single payer. It's not clear at all that single payer is the best way to achieve universal coverage given our current system when there are alternatives.

---