DescentBB

Anyone know who the President pro tempore of the Senate will be after inauguration?

Best case is some ghoul who makes mendacious, bad faith arguments about liberty and responsibility in an effort to expand corruption and accelerate the distribution of wealth upwards. Worst case is some ghoul who makes mendacious, bad faith arguments about how our blood is being poisoned by dark people and how teachers must face consequences for teaching civil rights in an effort to expand corruption and accelerate the distribution of wealth upwards.

I'm guessing it'll be someone who doesn't mind male leaders who have have sex with underage girls, which is statutory rape in most jurisdictions, or have an illegal drug habit, or both.

Vander wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 10:12 am Best case is some ghoul who makes mendacious, bad faith arguments about liberty and responsibility in an effort to expand corruption and accelerate the distribution of wealth upwards. Worst case is some ghoul who makes mendacious, bad faith arguments about how our blood is being poisoned by dark people and how teachers must face consequences for teaching civil rights in an effort to expand corruption and accelerate the distribution of wealth upwards.

Careful there, you are describing both heads of the Hydra that lords over us.
Next thing you know you’ll be calling for a third party or some other disrupting change that will threaten its masters.

Tunnelcat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 11:53 am I'm guessing it'll be someone who doesn't mind male leaders who have have sex with underage girls, which is statutory rape in most jurisdictions, or have an illegal drug habit, or both.

That’s better…staying line behind the hydra. Following the assigned role. You will be allowed to continue providing for its masters.

What? Asking that my country's leaders should NOT be sex offenders, drug users, conspiracy theorists, greedy billionaires, and general criminal asswipes is just staying behind the hydra? No thanks. There are better ways to change a government than destroy it from within, taking us with it. I hope you like what a Trumpian government will look like and do to the American people because I sure won't. I'm betting a LOT of people won't either once the Orange Turd is inaugurated.

Who hasn't had sex with a 17 year old?

Will Robinson wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 12:00 pm Careful there, you are describing both heads of the Hydra that lords over us.

Yes, because Elizabeth Warren and Marsha Blackburn are basically the same.

Statutory rape Spidey. Do you have a daughter?

The heads of the hydra aren't really the problem Will. It's the rich overlords who have their puppet-controlling hands up it's ass directing it's heads.

Tunnelcat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 2:38 pm Statutory rape Spidey. Do you have a daughter?

The heads of the hydra aren't really the problem Will. It's the rich overlords who have their puppet-controlling hands up it's ass directing it's heads.

That was my point actually. As long as you pick one of two they can deal with they are happy. They don’t give a damn about the scoreboard of the contest they staged to keep you in line. They sponsor both teams…they win regardless.

Thus why I purposely misconstrued Vander’s comment to imply much of the same thing. He, I’m assuming, was describing two variations of republican but truly both parties are guilty of the wealth and power being transitioned upwards. The politicians/ puppeteers use rhetoric designed to pull at camps concentrated around one or the other poles so it looks like diametrically opposed sides in a fight but regardless of the final scorecard the money and power is always delivered to the same asshats at the top.

To use some verbiage you are likely to feel comfortable with, it’s time to actually get woke to understand how we lost. How we *all* lost.

They don’t have actual oligarchs with murderous thugs to shut you down. Not yet anyway. So a bloodless revolution is possible but it requires waking up and shaking up the process. Maybe the next 4 years can be bad enough to cause it.

There's so much acrimony in this country, I don't see a peaceful resolution. There will eventually be violence because neither side wants to work with the other to solve problems. Trump himself is driven by the lust for power and will work to cement his authoritarian agenda at all costs, abandoning the people who helped elect him and trashing the Constitution to do it. Most empires last around 250 years before falling. Our 250th anniversary is in 2026. Will we fall?

Will Robinson wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 8:31 pm truly both parties are guilty of the wealth and power being transitioned upwards.

When was the last time Republicans proposed to raise taxes on the rich, or to provide some meaningful benefit/support/service to the poor? Raise minimum wages? Or really anything to attempt to rein in instead of exploit the disproportionate power of wealth?

I don't believe Democrats are pure as the driven snow, or that they did not play a part in the neoliberal hollowing out of the country over the last 50 years, or that they're not beholden to wealthy interests. But it's only Democrats that ever attempt to distribute wealth downwards, however ineffectual and limited, and then get called communists for it.

Only one party nominated the justices that gutted campaign finance laws and effectively legalized political corruption. 7 people spent almost a billion dollars on this past election. I don't think it's a coincidence that it all favored that same party.

Vander wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2024 12:00 am

Will Robinson wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 8:31 pm truly both parties are guilty of the wealth and power being transitioned upwards.

When was the last time Republicans proposed to raise taxes on the rich, or to provide some meaningful benefit/support/service to the poor? Raise minimum wages? Or really anything to attempt to rein in instead of exploit the disproportionate power of wealth?

When was the last time democrats delivered on what they proposed? I’m sorry but citing what one half of the problem makers ‘say’ as proof they are worse than the other half when the net result is always the same regardless of what either half has ‘said’ is not much of an argument.

Vander wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2024 12:00 am I don't believe Democrats are pure as the driven snow, or that they did not play a part in the neoliberal hollowing out of the country over the last 50 years, or that they're not beholden to wealthy interests. But it's only Democrats that ever attempt to distribute wealth downwards, however ineffectual and limited, and then get called communists for it.

I think you are making far too much of a distinction without any significant realized difference.

Vander wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2024 12:00 am Only one party nominated the justices that gutted campaign finance laws and effectively legalized political corruption.

And the democrats, with a Super Majority and the Presidency passed those laws, but made sure it passed in a form that maintained the major financial institutions were protected and smaller banks were left hanging out to dry. So even with what appeared to be ultimate absolute authority what they said and what they actually did was the result of their puppet masters not the democrats proclaimed virtuosity. The same dirty details are in that devils work in the affordable care act from that time…
The money flowed to the top during that time just as it always does.

Vander wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2024 12:00 am 7 people spent almost a billion dollars on this past election. I don't think it's a coincidence that it all favored that same party.

Harris spent over a Billion and managed to lose every demographic compared to the Alzheimer’s patient she dethroned. So I find myself once again pointing out that money doesn’t always solve problems when it is thrown around to make yourself feel/look good instead of cause real change. She had a billion dollars, Obama team and the mainstream media propping her up and couldn’t beat ★■◆●ing Donald Trump for fucks sake!

A partisan view is the micro view. You can focus in on stated intent, which rhetoric is more offensive etc and see great differences.
A non partisan view is the macro view, where you stand back and see the net results are the same with either team in charge.
Look at the stock market index over time. Trending upward always. It doesn’t change direction during times of democrat power.

The real power has fixed the game, picking a team to root for is ridiculous. Buying a ticket to go to the stadium is suicide.

I gather you voted for the authoritarian. What do you expect in return for your vote Will? Unfortunately, I will lose something very important to me if any of Agenda 47 or Project 2025 is implimented.

And unless the Dems grow a pair and use the power they don't seem to realize they have in the next 2 months, and quit being a bunch of pantywaste whining losers sulking in the corner playing by the old rules, they will never again regain any power. I mean Biden hosting Trump shaking hands at the White House like they're old friends. Geezus. If I were Biden, I would've taken the opportunity to knife the fat bastard in the gut and then claim dementia and presidential immunity AND gotten away with it. The Dems need to stop playing by the Marquess of Queensbury rules and fight dirty. Losers.

Will Robinson wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2024 9:24 am When was the last time democrats delivered on what they proposed?

Off the top of my head: The biggest recently in terms of impact was probably the medicaid expansion in the ACA. The most recent was the IRA which included large health subsidies, and also would've kept in place the Covid era expanded Child Tax Credit if not for 2 Democratic Senators who aren't Democrats anymore. The Build Back Better plan would've kept in place a lot of the Covid era support, but failed because of the same 2 Senators. All with minimal to no Republican support.

Yes, these efforts had to make it through the gauntlet. They get hacked and sliced and carved out, and end up inexplicably weird, complex, means tested bull★■◆● that needs to be known about and applied for instead of easily accessible universal benefits. It's not great, but it's meaningful, and certainly not nothing.

*edit, I should also mention that Biden's FTC has been the most proactive in terms of anti-trust as well. This won't produce a flashy number, but it directly challenges the accumulation and consolidation of corporate wealth and power.

And the democrats, with a Super Majority and the Presidency passed those laws

I don't know what "those laws" are. My comment was in regard to Citizens United and Snyder v. US. The first invalidated parts of laws from 2002 and 1971. (McCain/Feingold, Federal Election Campaign Act). The second invalidated a change to the federal bribery law in 1986. (now only a bribe if you receive it before you do the act, if you receive it after it's a legal reward/gratuity)

Harris spent over a Billion and managed to lose every demographic compared to the Alzheimer’s patient she dethroned. So I find myself once again pointing out that money doesn’t always solve problems when it is thrown around to make yourself feel/look good instead of cause real change.

This seems to be a different discussion about the efficacy of what the candidates are buying instead of what the people funding them are buying. IMO it's probably too soon make definitive statements on what Harris did wrong, they're still counting votes. She lost, but from what I've seen, she did better on average in the places she targeted (PA/MI/WI) relative to across the board. (lost less relative support) I'm not convinced she didn't overperform in a 'throw the bums out' wave that wasn't limited to just the US. But like I said, probably too early to draw strong conclusions.

The real power has fixed the game, picking a team to root for is ridiculous. Buying a ticket to go to the stadium is suicide.

I don't disagree that the game is fixed, and that the rules are continuously re-written by those already winning the game. The problem is that we're all in the stadium whether we bought tickets or not. I'm not an optimist, but I'm not yet an accelerationist. I don't believe a quicker collapse will lead to some better future. I've flirted with such ideas in the past regarding climate change, but things are just as likely to end up being even worse.

10-15 years ago, I would've been more agreeable to the 'two sides of the same coin' argument, but the GOP has jumped the tracks, and their differences have only gotten more stark.

Will Robinson wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2024 9:24 amWhen was the last time democrats delivered on what they proposed?

Jumping in to say the Biden Administration promised to cancel student loans and one of my loans got cancelled. That's a good thing because the school I went to was later determined to be a scam. I dropped out halfway through and most of my credits didn't transfer, which of course means the school failed the accreditation they claimed. I continued to make payments though. The feds closed the school down years ago, it no longer exists. In my opinion canceling that loan is a just action.

Democrats have frequently promised to do things and then actually done them. Most of the time they come up short is when they invariably try to work across the aisle with Republicans in the name of bipartisanship and end up passing some half-ass measure filled with conservative poison pills everyone hates.

On the same token, Republicans regularly promise government waste, wanton destruction, dysfunction, and corruption, and to nobody's surprise they also pretty much always deliver on their promises. The issue is conservatives are ★■◆●ing idiots who buy into the idea that destroying the government will produce some kind of magic utopia when in reality it is entirely for the benefit of the already wealthy and powerful interests who want even less government oversight as they rob you and the rest of the planet blind.