Real or imagined threats

[Cloud_Strife]

If so, you're more gullible than I thought.

In the year 2019, you still think the GOP isn't a den of racists, homophobes, transphobes and other assorted forms of bigotry worth abandoning or disassociating with, but not only that, you STILL think that they can be redeemed and are deserving of the same dignity they routinely deny others, you STILL think that they can be appealed too in a rational manner without pushing minorities away.

Give over man, I'm not the one who is gullible here, but at least there ARE democrats that will push for it, none exist on the GOP side.

 

[rah]

In the year 2019, you still think the GOP isn't a den of racists, homophobes, transphobes and other assorted forms of bigotry worth abandoning or disassociating with, but not only that, you STILL think that they can be redeemed and are deserving of the same dignity they routinely deny others, you STILL think that they can be appealed too in a rational manner.

Please post anything where I said that. My only claim is that it's not every Republican, but have admitted multiple times that I agree that a good portion of them are. You always seem to conveniently forget that.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

Please post anything where I said that. My only claim is that it's not every Republican, but have admitted multiple times that I agree that a good portion of them are. You always seem to conveniently forget that.

The difference is that EVERY republican that votes GOP is still enabling them and are therefor, even if it's only minorly, still complicit.

A "decent" republican's vote doesn't counter a bigoted one's and it certainly doesn't do anything but advance the agenda the GOP clearly has for the country and for people like me

 

[rah]

Never said it did. But i get tired of your blind hatred of half the population just because they're not Democrats. There are some that are better people than some of the bigoted democrats that I've known. Learn people individually. You over generalize and judge people, yet don't want people to do it to you.
I will not further waste my time.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

I don't hate them, I just hold them to account for the harm they do to me, others, society and themselves, you might think it's gauche to judge others for their politics and voting record but i don't.

 

[rah]

You only know their voting record, you don't know an individuals politics. You just assume and judge. That is where I disagree with you. I know many republicans that support your rights. And your posts are very hateful or I wouldn't have spent the time attempting to persuade you differently. But it's obviously a waste of time so I'll let you wallow in it.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

How can Republicans support my rights by voting for a party that is actively intent on stripping them away/weakening them?

You are never able to answer that adequately, perhaps because you know you can't because you'd have to concede that their votes are in fact harmful.

 

[Gorbles]

I don't know. If there's really no realistic way to implement your promise, isn't that kind of dishonest?
I personally support a medicare for all who want it option, but realize it may be a long way off. Promising free health care to all is dishonest in my book, and just a simple bribe. Same thing for eliminating existing education loan debt.
I also remember our favorite Crook's promise to deliver the bestest cheapest health care plan. Still waiting. Oh yeah, now he's saying it will be after the next election. No bribe offer there.

There are plenty of realistic ways to cost various policies, I'm sure as heck not an economics expert, but "realistic" isn't the problem here. You could accuse the people who want it passed as idealistic (that the Republicans would cooperate in the best interests of the working class), but not dishonest. If there's a sensible proposal, the Democrats aren't being dishonest - the Republicans are sacrificing the wellbeing of Americans for political point-scoring. If the policy can be demonstrably be argued to be not sensible, then sure. But I don't see much of that, I just see screeching about "communism".

I understand you're speaking in more general terms, but the original criticism was levelled at the Democrats, which is why I chose the (vague) example I did.

 

[rah]

You are never able to answer that adequately, perhaps because you know you can't because you'd have to concede that their votes are in fact harmful.

Boiling it down to one issue is just silly and as I've said many times an over generalization. It's not like we have 30 different parties, there are basically only two. We're talking almost half the population in each party give or take 10%. Assuming that they're all homogeneous is laughable.
They're all not out to get you. It's probably not even on the radar for a good percentage. But go ahead and hate who ever you want, even some that support your rights. Think about all those dems that denied your rights until as little as 10 years ago.

I understand you're speaking in more general terms, but the original criticism was levelled at the Democrats, which is why I chose the (vague) example I did.

Yes, I was speaking in general. All politicians will say whatever they think will get them votes. That's why they do surveys and focus groups. I'll admit that there are many that are more honorable in their intent to work towards their promise but most will also admit the small probability that they will succeed. Yes, I still see them as bribes for votes.

BUT, as pointed out, you have to start somewhere. What seems impossible today will be tomorrow's reality. (for some of them anyway)

 

[Zardnaar]

Even if polititians are being sincere it what they want to deliver, they may not be sincere in their ability to deliver. Several of the Dems candidates are promising the moon and can't deliver.

In some ways right wing parties are more honest. They all seem to want to do tax cuts, they also generally deliver. They might not be honest on the size of the tax cut.

 

[Gorbles]

Which is a perfectly good demonstration of why "honesty" is hardly a yardstick to measure a politician's positive impact on your life. It's very easy to make a well-meaning policy sound unreasonable - heck, that seems to be the tactic these days. Don't debate the policy, just lie about it and tell you it'll cost the moon (when it won't). Happening in the UK, US and likely elsewhere too.

I'd take someone who is idealistic about good things and trying to make them happen, over someone being "honest" about they're they're going to mess you up, because the important point there is they're going to mess you up.

 

[rah]

[cynic mode]Just a different brand of Pixie Dust.[/cynic mode]

 

[Zardnaar]

Which is a perfectly good demonstration of why "honesty" is hardly a yardstick to measure a politician's positive impact on your life. It's very easy to make a well-meaning policy sound unreasonable - heck, that seems to be the tactic these days. Don't debate the policy, just lie about it and tell you it'll cost the moon (when it won't). Happening in the UK, US and likely elsewhere too.

I'd take someone who is idealistic about good things and trying to make them happen, over someone being "honest" about they're they're going to mess you up, because the important point there is they're going to mess you up.

By moon I mean when the government spends 3.6 trillion and your policies cost 3 trillion+ they're selling the moon

Imagine a right wing candidate promising an 80% cut to all races. That's the equivalent of some of these policies.
You might like them based on political views but yeah.

Realistically a few hundred billion is achievable. When the military costs around 750 billion anyone promising to spend more than that or even half if that......

I think someone said free university costs 60 billion. That's not a stupid promise.

 

[Gorbles]

By moon I mean when the government spends 3.6 trillion and your policies cost 3 trillion+ they're selling the moon

Imagine a right wing candidate promising an 80% cut to all races. That's the equivalent of some of these policies.
You might like them based on political views but yeah.

Realistically a few hundred billion is achievable. When the military costs around 750 billion anyone promising to spend more than that or even half if that......

I think someone said free university costs 60 billion. That's not a stupid promise.

If there's anything I've learned, is that there's plenty of money available. It's not a matter of "liking them based on political views". It's just about costing it accurately.

I mean, if you have any serious, concrete example involving trillions that we could actually discuss, that'd be great. As it is, I'm chalking it up to the "imagined threats" in the thread title, and not the "real" ones.

 

[rah]

Student loan debt 1.4 trillion
https://www.investopedia.com/studen... of outstanding,total debt was $1.06 trillion.

 

[Traitorfish]

Trump is also an entertainment product as you put it.

The way people carry on you'd think he was carrying out millions of extrajudicial killings like Duterte, rescinding gay marriage and resegregating schools.

This administration has done horrible things but the hand-wringing gets old. Go get stuff done for your candidate of choice. If we end up w Biden we'll probably get another trumptype in 2024.

Ironically calling Republicans fascist who need to be rounded up and reeducated is fascist. Don't have all the Lex posts on hand but there's been a number of these (a lot of ageism thrown in for good measure as well)

I have yet to see such wishes for death, incarceration and pain towards their opponents from any right wing posters (although I don't generally follow these types of threads very closely)

This feels a lot less like you responding to my post than it does you changing the subject to something you feel more comfortable grandstanding about.

 

[Gorbles]

Student loan debt 1.4 trillion
https://www.investopedia.com/student-loan-debt-2019-statistics-and-outlook-4772007#:~:targetText=The total amount of outstanding,total debt was $1.06 trillion.

I'm assuming that you're referring to the suggested act of absolving student debt, but this is still nowhere near the aforementioned ballpark of 3 trillion dollars. Is there a supporting argument that dictates this money can't be made-up, or otherwise costed effectively?

Additionally, if there is no reasonable way this is going to get paid off, what good does holding onto it do? All it does it contribute to a lack of growth in the working and middle classes, and debt companies continue to collect profits. That seems like a loss-loss, to me.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Even if polititians are being sincere it what they want to deliver, they may not be sincere in their ability to deliver. Several of the Dems candidates are promising the moon and can't deliver.

In some ways right wing parties are more honest. They all seem to want to do tax cuts, they also generally deliver. They might not be honest on the size of the tax cut.

Or whos going to get the tax cut and how much or that efficiency savings mean less people doing the same job for less money.

 

[Traitorfish]

Please, I am not making a judgement of either. And yes Gorbles, all politician's promises are essentially bribes. regardless of who makes them.

If a candidate promises not to rub his or her genitals on the Declaration of Independence, is that a bribe?

 

[rah]

I'm all up for taxing the rich but even they can't cover absolving all student debt, free education, health care for all, UBI, homes for the homeless. Resources are limited but listening to the Dem debates, you'd never know it.
I just would like a little reality from whichever side they're on.

If a candidate promises not to rub his genitals on the declaration of independence, is that a bribe?

I'll concede that one isn't except for a few really disturbed individuals.