The Politics Thread (PLAY NICELY!)

"I stopped being progressive because I felt uncomfortable when people challenged me on my anti-progressive views."

"left the left" in a nutshell

"Microwaves can be turned into cameras. Obviously to spy on Trump ordered by Obama"

Can we blame them ? Reps are just applying what economical fordism (the idea of taking out a loan for the entire nation and paying it with another loan) taught them, to politics : cover up one big goof with another even bigger goof : the theory being if you can keep this rolling indefinitely they'll never have time to get to you.

Might want to rewatch.

Progressive, was supposed to be liberal, who's actually liberal. What I normally call liberals out on, is the fact that Libertarians have to use such a silly word for their title, because "liberal" apparently made "liberty" optional, when it suits them. The idea that "if 50% of ignorant americans are racist misogynistic xenophobes, they can all be jailed, and we can make anything we don't like illegal, put prohibitions on ownership, prison sentences on words, and public lynchings and employment termination at-will if someone supports a different ideal" is very totalinarian and fascist.

That last one strikes the most sensitive chord. A lot of people are losing their jobs over social media posts. It's illegal, yet liberals don't mind persecution if it cuts at their enemy. A progressive understands that employment is in fact a necessity, you can't just go being petty basic-b**ch on everyone who like a different color than you yourself do.

In reality, Libertarians are liberals, Progressives are just left-leaning Libertarians, and "Liberals" and "Conservatives" (particularly the alt-right) are just "oligarchical fascist authoritarians with agendas". I even like conservatives that are "moderate" or particularly "libertarian", because it's not the "left or right" of that graph that I care about, it's the "vertical axis".

Might not want to assume what I did and didn't watch

Anyhow, the news today is about those left uninsured if AHCA goes through. How many million is it again?

If ever there was a lie painted as a truth... this was it.

surely you must realize none of your claims are substantiated.

exaggerations aside...

words might hurt

words might put you back in your place

but they don't jail you.

and if the complaint is being put back in your place or laughed off the stage on your racist, (insert-ist here) remarks, I'd like to state that I (and I feel I'm speaking for most here) think that's a fair punishment and maybe even the fitting one.

it's certainly is discrediting to be complaining about this.

By the contents of the video alone, I agree with @gmase and @BroTranquilty on this in part.

I'm not familiar with the guy in the video, and I don't necessarily agree with his idea that all of his claims constitute the entire left. I also don't believe for a second that the republican party stands for any of the values they want. But you can absolutely be frustrated with the democratic party on some of the issues to the point where you no longer identify with them.

Tasty, tasty projected statistics.

http://www.wsj.com/graphics/compare-aca-vs-gop-healthcare/

you can't see anything without an account.

would you mind sharing screenshots?

I highly disagree with subscription-based news even though the main argument is revenue I feel it's actually in truth maintaining bubbles.

I don't disagree with that
I don't think any of the anti-trump people in this thread identify as democrat since we're mostly European and in europe it's really hard to tell reps and dems apart seeing how narrow that political spectrum is to our wide.

it's like using a X10000 microscope.

that's..... aside from the gay-hating, gun-wielding, self-serving, women's-rights-barring madness of course...

Weird, I saw it fine the first time around. Image viewable on the right of the article headline is as follows:

wow this even helps explain why reps were pissed. perfect! now I have a better understanding!

Bonus round:

How's that wiretapping scandal, the worst thing since Watergate, guaranteed to ruin Trump's enemies forever, going?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/13/trump-wiretapping-claim-quotation-marks-obama

I'm guessing not very well. And do your own Googling if you don't like the source

No. It's not.

Check out this post, where a typical liberal calls for someone's dark humor, completely victimless in and of itself, and not illegal in any way, to cost him his job. The concept of "if you don't like someone, you can still ruin their life", is stupid. Laws protect people, if it's not there to protect somebody, it's not a law, it's a lynching.

Need to gtfo this mindset that everyone not on the social justice bandwagon, is a white cis male xenophobic misogynistic racist scumbag who should all be rounded up and put into internment camps. How about, actually governing based on the whole and not the half?

https://www.facebook.com/georgehtakei/posts/1919527121410065?comment_id=1919576144738496&comment_tracking={"tn":"R8"}

This is the far-spectrum, those conservatives are also douchebags... except the gun-wielding. Again, merely owning something, does not make one a criminal. Also, women's rights, you better be anti-extreme-feminist then, otherwise you're hypocritical, they don't promote women's rights, they promote women's divison and ascension over men. The good feminists, the very few, do the whole Susan B. Anthony thing and want to abolish privileges like leniency from law enforcement and priority custody. Women have almost-adamant privilege in both those categories, a gap beyond racial preference in the last 3 decades, and almost half as good as financial-class preference.

We believe in equal rights, as long as those rights extend to ourselves.

If you're going to extend gun control, don't make it prohibitive, not financially (almost guaranteed to be 500 dollar registrations, so the poor can't defend themselves but Hillary Clinton can), not without due process (the no-fly list???), by default a simple fee and a registry should enable someone the guaranteed right to own a gun and that's not dangerous in and of itself in any way. If it's not required of automobiles, in cost or prohibition, then it shouldn't be required of firearms.

Everything else is a shitstorm that'll take some sort of prodigy to figure out how to extend rights without limiting others' rights. The bathroom thing is argued as a form of "women's sexual assault protection", but limits the rights of the "trans". Women's equality always wants to advance the workplace situation, but it never wants to advance men's equality for child custody, for alimony, or for law enforcement prosecution. Minorities want equal treatment, but BLM oft sabotages their own cause, when there could be constructive suggestions like, I don't know, legalizing marijuana (my county is stopping prosecution on small quantities... in TEXAS), requiring bodycams on officers or especially to use lethal force (they can always take cover if unsure and if they don't have bodycam), requiring bodycams to stream to a federal database so the "footage isn't lost", that sort of thing. Honestly, that would help the "white trash" just as well, so a properly done civil rights should be massively bipartisan.

Their plan sounds pretty shitty to me. Sadly, you can't impeach because of "shitty", and it's disingenuous to fabricate some other reason to impeach because of something entirely different you didn't like.

There are pages describing how the ACA wasn't even "good enough for right now". It'd have won elections on it's own merit if it were.

The concern was, if the ACA continued another 8 years, especially in distrustful hands, then it'd get worse and not better, and be too deep-rooted to get rid of. It was better not-at-all and doing it right the first time, but that didn't happen, so starting over was better, sooner than later, and it looks likely we're going to have 1 more failed attempt before we get it right. It's a shame there was no "real healthcare" option on the ballot, just 2 really dangerously bad ones.

you keep pointing to stuff I (nor any liberals) don't identify with at all as if you're driving home a point.

you're not driving home any point to me or anyone here if all you're doing is screaming in a gigantic echo chamber of your creation .... you ....do understand that right?

that's all LIES!!! ...except that one thing... that's true.... obscure reference to the biggest of all french memes

Oh please. Molesting a statue might be victimless in and of itself, but these things don't happen in a vacuum. If a 20 year old is allowed to molest a statue of a pre-pubescent girl without consequences, that's normalizing it. That's a slippery slope. It's not illiberal to success that actions have consequences. He's exercised his constitutional right for free speech, but his employer can and should take action if they feel he makes a poor representative for his/her company.
Actions have consequences. Pedophilia is no laughing matter and it's up to employers to decide if those who think differently are good representatives of their organization.

But let's forget about that. Let's assume that this was actually one of those cases where we had illiberal progressivism, the types of people who call for removing statues of Thomas Jefferson because he was a rich white dude in Virginia in the late 18th century owned slaves (basically the same thing). Associating illiberal progressives with liberalism/progressivism is no different than associating the KKK/white supremacy with conservativism. You want to attack liberals for some overzealous wackos, fine, but I'll remind you that the Republicans in Louisiana had a white supremacist on the ballot for senate last November and that Congressman Steve King (R-IA) essentially advocated for white supremacy on twitter a few hours ago. If you want to attack ideologies for their most deplorable followers I'd argue that the right is in a worse position than the left.