Forums / Discussion / General

2020 was so awful that I am just happy that 2021 is simply just as bad instead of worse

Investigators are looking into communications between US lawmakers and Capitol rioters.

No wonder they were nervous over Garland.

Doesn't that imply that Democrats stand to gain an advantage by expanding the vote as much as possible?

And why should that stop Republicans from trying to actually compete, if their ideas weren't considered terrible by the majority of the country.

The GOP is a party that is only against things, and not for actually good things, like national parks and infrastructure.

The absolute state of warmongers
this who you're in bed with sjws

An ignoble career forgotten in the face of brainddead pandering.

Oh god, it's Bush and McCain all over again.

After 16 years enacting no-excuse absentee voting, Georgia State Republicans have repealed it.

And all because Biden won Georgia.

Don't ya'll love the 2000 dollar checks we were promised
oh wait

Half the voters out there voted for a Republican. That implies they support Republican ideas.
And there is no competition of ideas. Just a competition of promises. And it's so damn easy to get people who have way more to gain than to lose to vote for the promises that benefit them. Expansion of welfare and government handouts? Expansion of state-bureaucracy in the name of some "social good"? You bet your sweet ass that sounds good to people who aren't going to be the ones on the hook for paying for it.

The game is about getting voters. Voters mean wins in the election, and a legitimization of power and authority. The Democrats know very well that the less restrictive the voting is, the more likely they will get someone to vote for them. That's not because Democrat ideas are better, but because the Democrats can promise them things in the short term. Both parties rely heavily on the low-information voter, but to me, at least, it seems the Democrats are the party to gain the most from low-information voters since they don't have to discuss actual long term policy – but instead short term promises.

There is no longer any sanctity in the vote. There is no longer any meaning to it. Low-Information voters are the biggest threat to long-term Democracies. What is even the point of any of us having deep conversations about policies – the pros and cons, the long term ramifications, etc, if our vote is canceled out by some illiterate voter? According to National Center for Educational Statistics 21% of adults in the US are functionally illiterate. Our vote is competing with that. And I do mean, our, as in, the regulars on this thread since I figure we're all putting a lot more thought and nuance into big issues, even if we disagree with one another.

Can anyone explain how any of this is bad?

Not unless you were to somehow lose your well drilled convictions that voter fraud is an impossibility.

I still dont care if other people are having or not having sex so I find this superstraight shit stupid.

I dunno, while clearly designed to offend the trans community it does reveal, how insidious it is because it delves deep into an unspeakable truth that highlights, in extreme clarity, the outright limitations that people have towards the end-goal of the idea that a trans-woman is a woman, and a trans-man is a man. It's one thing to acknowledge this from the perspective of civil rights, and ridding of social stigma, it does force one to have to ask a deeper question: Are you comfortable dating, sleeping, and forming a deep relationship with a transwoman as a straight cisgenders man? Or a transman as a straight cisgendered man?
If the trans community ultimate goal is to be whatever gender they decide, in it's entirety, then the idea of "superstraight"'s implication is a severe road block. Just go through the comment section here on the KYM entry and you'll see many people actively support the idea of preferences while simultaneously support the rights of the trans community. But there are also some advocates who are, rightfully, pointing out that if a trans-woman is a woman, then there should be no stigma or preference in dating one from someone who would prefer to date women. They aren't wrong.

I think the percentage of people who support trans rights on a civil/societal level is far far greater than the people who would also take it to the level where they would have no discomfort or problems forming long lasting relationships with one. And that forces a deeper question of well how far are they a male or a female.

This cuts deep into the trans identity question, and no matter what, it will always boil down to the fundamental question: Are trans-women and trans-men, actual women and men?

This is why it's so horrifically offensive. Because it cuts into the heart of an issue that even allies of the trans community must ultimately face.

As everyone expected

They were drowning before Trump, he gave them a temporary life line, and now that he's gone, and all the drama with him, they are floundering. Good riddance. Their entire model for the last 4 years was orange-man bad, and now that orange man is gone, they have nothing to create outrage porn out of.

Biden skipped his state of the union and isnt even taking softball sessions with the press.

Insert obligatory "imagine media if Trump did this" line here.

I wonder if they'll turn on him after the honeymoon period to try and regain an audience or if they'll just cement the partisanship.

They certainly will not. They are absolutely okay with this.
Because they know what's coming down the line. They just need to hold Biden for two years, once the mid term elections are through they will most likely see a transition from a Biden Presidency to a Harris one.

They know fully well that Biden comes off as someone who is not entirely there. They already were discussing utilizing the existing process of removing a President who they felt was not fit to serve.

They know fully well how fragile the win was in November, they are also quite aware that there is a high potential for a major GOP sweep in mid terms, risking to highlight anything negative of the Biden administration is a big no no. They already admitted they will not scrutinize him like they did with Trump.
Having Kamala Harris take over too soon would be a huge risk to the mid terms and would make her presidency utterly impotent.

Wait two years, after the mid terms, then conclude that Biden is increasingly unfit, and give him an opportunity to resign with dignity.

Until then they will find new outrage porn to deliver. Methinks Cuomo may be the next big one, but I got to hand it to him for resisting the demands for resignation for sexual harassment.

They desperately want him gone on that issue than the fact that he's being investigated for knowingly lying about deaths in elderly care homes. That would be far, FAR more disastrously for the narrative than sexual harassment. Sexual Harassment gives the party a win, they get to remove a liability while being viewed as noble.
But let's not pretend he is not a liability

I was actually thinking of means; whipping up a frenxy over everything Trump wasnt just pushing party interest; it was putting food on the table.

So many lived off the products of a single cow and Zuckerburg stupdily shot that cow. How many can continue regardless and for how long?

Ultimately, how many have owners willing to prop them up past the point of sustainability? How many are willing to downsize or even go out of business? Just to cover a president not even his own party really likes?

Very few, will go out of business. They'll downsize, while keeping the people in upper positions earning the same. When it comes to major news-channels, any loss they incur will be subsidized by the parent companies. Why would NBCUniversal and it's parent company, Comcast, give up the MSNBC even if it is a net loss in upkeep? There are more to money and ratings. Having the ability to heavily influence people is a lot of power for these companies. Not to mention, they all know it's temporary. Or why AT&T would give up on CNN, when it knows what influence CNN still has.
Besides, losses can be offset by layoffs of journalists, or lowering their wages. After all there is a huge glut of journalists desperate for jobs.

There may be some damage done to smaller outlets like Vox, which has had a rough year, losing tons of money and laying off it's journalists. But the entire endeavor is funded by large corporations as it is, NBC Universal, for example, invested 200 million into the company. Vice may also suffer, after Disney admitted it's 400 million dollar invested was utterly worthless.

I feel like we will need more anti-monopoly laws because man are we going to have many monopolies moving forward after this whole pandemic

No matter how much anti-monopoly laws you make, as long as they are selectively enforced, it won't matter.

Remember how on Wednesday President Biden promised that he wouldn't raise taxes on people making under 400,000 a year?

"Yes, anybody making more than $400,000 will see a small to a significant tax increase,” adding a promise that “If you make less than $400,000, you won’t see one single penny in additional federal tax.”"

It didn't even last a full day.

Same day , "White House press secretary Jen Psaki on Wednesday clarified that President Biden’s proposed tax hike would apply to people who earn $200,000 per year if they are married to someone who makes the same amount.

Psaki said at her daily press briefing that the proposed $400,000 threshold for tax increases applies to “families” rather than individuals."

Oh BOI! Did that cause a rukus in the stock market as Psaki tried to play it off, saying it would only impact 2% of taxpayers, but the market was flattened, as there was a race for the exits.

During the election, there was a rumor of a major tax hike being made retroactive, but everyone blew that off as nonsense. And yet, after the bait and switch move, the administration will have to be viewed through a lens of skepticism about taxes.

Sedition charges likely for Jan. 6 Capitol insurgents.

yeah but right now the goverment does needs the money to deal with this whole covid thing

The government does not need the money the middle, and lower class has
if it needs the money then it should take it from those who wouldn't even notice it

True but doing so is hard, the cowards keep running away to other countries or to islands with their money to not pay

jesus fuck

"It's MY money, not yours!!" -The average billionaire.

It kind of already does, in terms of income taxes. The top 1% percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes 38.5% than the bottom 90% combined 29.9%. The top 20% of the US pays 87% of taxes. The top 50% of US pay for 97% of all income taxes. The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid a 26.8% average individual income tax rate, which is more than six times higher than taxpayers in the bottom 50 percent 4.0%.

https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1375450468382564354?s=20

The Arkansas republicans are poised to criminalize trans health care.

People are still dying from covid and this is the shit they spend their time on, shows their priorities

The GOP deserve to dissapear, they do no longer pretend to represent any people, outside of a few loonely complete disconnect ot reality.

While they should dissapear they do represent the views of a significant amount of morons

Significant it's kind debatable, honestly outside of a fex crazy millionaires and a handfull of stéréotypical red-neck, who the Republican represent ?

Borderline reactionaries are at the very least a quarter of the population that actually votes, regardless of how much of the total population they are

Georgia governor signs into law measures to take control of the election process, allowing State Legislature to override election officials, and criminalizing efforts to give voters food and water.

The Minnesota State Supreme Court has ruled that if you were willingly intoxicated, you can't be raped.

The case was a he-said/she-said fight over consent. The defense argued that being intoxicated meant that she was mentally incapacitated and thus incapable of consent. State law is that mental incapacitation only applies to intoxication when it was unwilling and/or unwitting.

As this defendant had willingly intoxicated herself the law could not rule out the ability to consent in her state. Problem I see is to remove the law would open the floodgates to an endless argument over what level of willful intoxication renders you incapacitated.

Hard enough before you also have to establish if the other party knew they were over this line.

Huh, you'd think those 4+ people would be glad that there is in fact not a law saying a woman isnt capable of self determination when she chooses to get drunk.

Or maybe they're just annoyed that I showed them up by actually reading past the headline.

I wonder if there has ever been a point in history where racism accomplished anything good, probably not.

If (and this is a massive, massive if) racism has ever accomplished anything good, all the negative shit it's caused vastly outweighs such a thing if it exists

I'll repeat myself, being a cunt to other people because of their deterministic characteristics (as in, those determined without the individual's conscious choice that cannot be effectively changed) is inexcusable. Judge a person by their actions and willful ideals, not by skin tone or regional ancestry

Define racism and good.

"To whom" on both.

Every President has promised infrastructure spending, but failed to deliver.
I am extremely excited that Pres. Biden has proposed a 2 Trillion dollar spending on infrastructure in this country. Could it be better? yes. But it is actually a really good plan. Unlike frivolous government expenditures that I rail about constantly there is an actual realized return on major infrastructure spending.

The internet infrastructure upgrades a lone make it an extremely good investment. This could be a massive life line to more rural areas who could seriously benefit from low-cost environment, but powerful tech infrastructure to siphon away major corporations and wealth that is concentrated in the more metropolitan areas such as San Francisco. Especially now as more companies are embracing remote-working could really give opportunities to people of my generation who are stuck in a situation where they are forced to live an expensive area because their work demands it.

Road and Bridges infrastructure will help inter-state commerce tremendously. Investment in renewable energy systems – while I think ought to be focused on nuclear energy – still will accelerate the transition to EVs – a reality I never thought possible in such a rapid fashion.

So…Kudos to the Biden Administration for pushing this in. This is where my tax dollars ought to go.

I give it a week before that optimism dies in the face of politics as usual.

Bow chicka wow wow

kek

According to the Smithsonian, the Amazon is FUBAR'd enough to make more greenhouses gases rather than absorbing them.

Thanks Bolsonaro.