President Donald Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
Without the support of LBJ and liberal democrats it never would have been passed. Furthermore it destroyed the party that they had because it alienated Southern Democrats, who were quite powerful at the time.
I don’t think either of those two points are controversial.
LBJ himself said that he knew that his signing of the Civil Rights Act would give power to the Republicans for a generation.
Johnson wanted to outshine his predecessor (Kennedy), so he wanted a legacy-making legislative achievement.
Of course, it didn't destroy the Democratic Party:
The Dems held the Senate for another 15 years and the House for another 28 years!
Putin is never using nukes lol He's too much of a wuss and afraid to die--which firing nukes would guarantee for him.
also he doesnt need to bc his army is dominating the West. but I am just going by the assessment of the Biden admin according to the Jake Tapper book so probably bullshit or senility anyway.
I think you guys should focus more on not ****ing up all the layups youve been given instead of arguing what degree of leftism is best.
Because arguing over running a campaign on "the lesser evils" or going full lefty are both dogshit strategies.
Focus on policies and execution. Without those it don't matter a hill of beans
Because arguing over running a campaign on "the lesser evils" or going full lefty are both dogshit strategies.
No matter who runs, someone is going to say they won't vote for the lesser of 2 evils. It's not a strategy, it's just what people who think about elections the same way as a 13 year old are going to say every cycle.
I’m following your idiotic line of reasoning so if you don’t like it you can blame yourself.
p1: Lesser evil voting helps extremists
p2: Socialists are extremists
C: Lesser evil voting helps socialists
I mean yeah your premises are clearly false but if we assume it’s true that’s what we come out with.
The argument isn't even logically valid!
Even if the premises were true, the conclusion doesn't logically follow.
Fallacy of Undistributed Middle Term
I think you guys should focus more on not ****ing up all the layups youve been given instead of arguing what degree of leftism is best.
Because arguing over running a campaign on "the lesser evils" or going full lefty are both dogshit strategies.
No one is running a campaign on lesser evils, unless you mean strategically appealing to certain voters that don’t like either candidate that you would be more in line with their interests
The argument isn't even logically valid!
Even if the premises were true, the conclusion doesn't logically follow.
Fallacy of Undistributed Middle Term
Obviously he meant Lesser evil voting helps all members of {extremists} and socialists are in {extremists}. The conclusion doesn't make much sense but not for the reason you claim.
I’m following your idiotic line of reasoning so if you don’t like it you can blame yourself.
p1: Lesser evil voting helps extremists
p2: Socialists are extremists
C: Lesser evil voting helps socialists
I mean yeah your premises are clearly false but if we assume it’s true that’s what we come out with.
P1: LEV helps E
P2: S are E
C: LEV helps S
Would be logically valid if P2 read 'E are S'.
But I don't think anyone is claiming that Extremists are Socialists. (That is, nobody believes that all extremists are socialist)
I was evaluating the argument as formally presented.
It may even be Fallacy of Four Terms though.
The post was hopeless. He might as well as said that hitler was an extremist so if we vote least worse then hitler will gain.
But the silliness aside the worst aspect to me was thee assertion that i was saying that socialist are extremists.
you guys had your hillary and your kamala. they couldn't win. why does this keep getting ignored over and over?
Huh, I guess there was nothing else those two candidates had in common?
i've never agreed with this mentality
if you do not have any state id, passport, or driver's license you simply chose to not participate in society and i have no sympathy if that means you don't get vote
That didn't win any way address the comment you quoted, which was about how checking IDs for voting would be slower.
That didn't win any way address the comment you quoted, which was about how checking IDs for voting would be slower.
people were griping about "the difficulties" of obtaining id etc which is oddly only ever made by people who miraculously managed to get an id
you can't go to a bar without one
you can't fly without one
you can't buy weed without one
you can't get credit cards, bank accounts, etc etc without id
you do not exist in our society - we shouldn't cater to those when it comes to voting - they are the very last people we want to vote anyway
No matter who runs, someone is going to say they won't vote for the lesser of 2 evils. It's not a strategy, it's just what people who think about elections the same way as a 13 year old are going to say every cycle.
No one is running a campaign on lesser evils, unless you mean strategically appealing to certain voters that don’t like either candidate that you would be more in line with their interests
My point is that if you want to take down the GOP, both the shitlibs and the lefties are going to have to find a way to shake hands - because neither alone are going to be enough to beat them. But we are probably going need a recession or maybe WW3 before that happens with how stubborn you people are because you had all the artillery needed but decided to shell it at each other and threw a tantrum out of idiotic purity tests. I mean, the right wanted you guys to get divided up and discouraged and you actually did it on your own behalf.
But on a softer tone, I think the people who are voting for the "lesser evils" are already engaged enough to vote. But those who don't care enough are going to need something motivating outside of that, something concrete that gets people who aren't tuned into politics a reason to come out and vote (like Mamdani's strat) and I think that favors what lefties are asking for - even if their policies aren't optimal. But the friendly fire between you two did actually **** things up. But if anything, it's entertaining to watch.
Formula democrats had a trifecta as recently as 2021-22.
You talk as if republicans currently had an unsurmountable advantage.
Republicans control the house by the slightest margin ever or close to it (only 218-215), and while the 53-47 in the Senate is more solid, with what we saw in defections over the bill, republicans have their own "manchin and sinema" so even the Senate majority is very fragile.
Even if trump with the trifecta governed decently, the midterms would probably give the house to democrats because of the classic push back against incumbents that happens in midterm.
Given Trump popularity is nosediving and they just passed a divise Bill which doesn't play well in purple areas, the house is basically going to be democratic automatically come 2026. And that without any need for normal center left people to pander to the deranged radical leftists.
Btw there is no "friendly fire". Center left types are normal people, radical leftists are domestic enemies of western civilization, not friends of anyone.
Lucy, at some point, you're going to have GOP candidate that isn't Trump, who isn't going to hand away every possible error to their opponents like he does.
people were griping about "the difficulties" of obtaining id etc which is oddly only ever made by people who miraculously managed to get an idyou can't go to a bar without oneyou can't fly without oneyou can't buy weed without oneyou can't get credit cards, bank accounts, etc etc without idyou do not exist in our society - we shouldn't cater to those when it comes to voting - t
None of that addresses the argument being made against having to show voter ID, which is that it would make things slower. In the case of some Republican proposals, much slower. This penalizes people who don't get time off to vote, and those who live in poorer districts whose voting locations which are sometimes deliberately understaffed and many locations have deliberately been removed in order to discourage people there from voting. Already a lot of people had to file "provisional ballots" which were possibly never counted. This problem would get much worse if voting were slowed further. And if the extended hours, advance voting, voting by mail, etc. were cut back, which is exactly what Republicans did over the last 5 years. It may have made the difference in the last presidential election. All these Republicans who still think the 2020 election was rigged for the Democrats ask where all the Biden votes went (as Kamala didn't get them). Of course a major reason is that Biden wasn't black, or a woman. But the actions of Republicans at the state level is the other reason.
Regarding your arguments; I agree that it's not particularly difficult for many people to get an ID, but really plenty of poor people would have no reason to get one for any of the reasons you list apart from a bank account. Bank accounts can be very helpful for poor people, but many of them still don't bother to get one; even those who have government IDs.
I used to be a supervisor at a small company where I did some of the interviewing of new hires. We never hired anyone without an ID, but there were still quite a few of our employees who didn't have bank accounts. They would get our paper check and take it to a check-cashing places where they were charged a fee, instead of just getting an account from the bank which issued our checks, which offered checking accounts with no fees and no minimum balance, with a branch less than a mile from our office (and many other branches in the metro area). They could open an account there for free, deposit no money, and only use it to cash their check once every two weeks. I told that to everyone at our training / orientation. Many still didn't do it. I hope 15 years later there are now fewer people who do that, but I'm sure there are still some who do.
P1: LEV helps E
P2: S are E
C: LEV helps S
Would be logically valid if P2 read 'E are S'.
But I don't think anyone is claiming that Extremists are Socialists. (That is, nobody believes that all extremists are socialist)
I thought I explained this?
P1: ∀ a ∈ {Extremist} LEV helps a
P2: Socialist ∈ {Extremist}
P3: LEV helps Socialist
The above is valid and does not mean all extremists are socialists. If you want to say his argument is different from the above, then sure, it might not be valid. But I thought he was saying the above.
Regarding your arguments; I agree that it's not particularly difficult for many people to get an ID, but really plenty of poor people would have no reason to get one for any of the reasons you list apart from a bank account. Bank accounts can be very helpful for poor people, but many of them still don't bother to get one; even those who have government IDs.
Difficulty is not the only issue. For 8 years in college and grad school I always used my home state ID which was good enough for everything. But if I was in Florida or whatever I would have had to get a separate photo ID just for voting as out of state licenses were fine for banking, driving, renting, flying, alcohol literally everything but voting. They obviously knew that when designing the law as well.
My point is that if you want to take down the GOP, both the shitlibs and the lefties are going to have to find a way to shake hands - because neither alone are going to be enough to beat them. But we are probably going need a recession or maybe WW3 before that happens with how stubborn you people are because you had all the artillery needed but decided to shell it at each othe
I'm just saying there will never be a candidate who magically gets 100% of his or her votes by not simply being the lesser of 2 evils to a decent percentage of their voters. If people like me get the blame for Harris or Clinton then it should be fine to blame the leftists for Sanders' failures, especially in 2020. He literally lost because people didn't see much difference between him and Biden. Maybe they should try running someone more people want to support rather than just being a lesser evil to the other candidates?
get onboard with sensible gun regulations and maybe someone would give a **** about your cry baby voter id bullshit.
I thought I explained this?
P1: ∀ a ∈ {Extremist} LEV helps a
P2: Socialist ∈ {Extremist}
P3: LEV helps Socialist
The above is valid and does not mean all extremists are socialists. If you want to say his argument is different from the above, then sure, it might not be valid. But I thought he was saying the above.
Logic is fine so long as lesser evil voting helps all extremists.
I just talked to my neighbor who is a high level manager at a large (nationwide) architectural firm. She said it's the worst business climate for her company since she's been there (a long time). Business has declined every month since the inauguration. They are laying off a bunch of their workforce.
She said the first thing they've had to do is scramble to fix all of their website and any other correspondence. She said they don't even know what to do until some government toadie tells them it is wrong.
Lot's of their business is government and it has completely dried up. A significant amount of business comes from higher education. They have put holds on everything. Many of their contracts are EV related manufacturing and it has stopped.
She said that one of their biggest projects is a South Korean owned manufacturing facility. They have been told that once the project is completed, the company is pulling out, hoping an American company might buy it.
Making america great........
