Joe Biden........

Joe Biden, good or bad?

  • Good?

    Votes: 5 35.7%

  • Bad?

    Votes: 9 64.3%
  • Total voters
    14
Status
Not open for further replies.
BTW RFR in the poll could you add Sad? IMO Good and Bad are not really fair choices..
 
ez_willis said:
Come on, man. You can't believe that there is something the Dems can do to convince the GOP to work with them. They could literally adopt the right's agenda, propose it to them and it would be rejected because the right's base will not stand for the two parties working together. The left has been demonized for decades. There are generations of Americans that have been propagandized into believing lies and a large segment of the population that isn't real big on critical thinking.

There's literally nothing the left can do to get the GOP to work with them on making things better for America. And there's nothing that can be done to save this Country. Nothing. Thank God I'm not 18 years old. We had a great run and I was right in the Golden Age of it.
Click to expand...

I do believe that. I also think that you can say the same thing about congressional democrats and the political right, generally.
 
ibleedburgundy said:
If the motive is 'Above all else, I want you to accomplish nothing' then compromise is irrelevant.

I mean, that's the problem here. Republicans have taken compromise off the table, because compromise could be construed as a win for democrats, or worse (gasp): bipartisanship.
Click to expand...

The reaction to Joe Manchin and Kristin Sinema from congressional democrats says a lot about their appetite for bipartisanship, as do the perennial efforts to "reform" the supreme court, the filibuster, and the electoral college.

The notion that bipartisanship only happens when Republicans adopt Democrat policy preferences is a silly one.

Enacting transformative legislation requires broad bipartisan support in both legislative bodies. Not having enough votes is a strong indicator that you don't have the support.
Republican legislators have to win reelection, just like Democrat legislators do - so it isn't just a matter of congressional republicans axiomatically voting against legislation against the desires of the voters that elect them.
 
Last edited:
None of this is to say that the GOP doesn't suck. I just think the Dems also suck. A pox on both their houses.
 
Supercreep said:
I do believe that. I also think that you can say the same thing about congressional democrats and the political right, generally.
Click to expand...
GENERALLY maybe. MAYBE. But the Dems have show waaaaaaay more willingness to work together than the GOP has in decades. Specifically.
 
Supercreep said:
None of this is to say that the GOP doesn't suck. I just think the Dems also suck. A pox on both their houses.
Click to expand...
It's almost like the two party system was a stupid fucking idea. If only the forefathers could have predicted that and warned against it. That's a hard /s because they did and did. But here we are. Doomed to fail and watching all happen in slow motion for free except for the ads.
 
The problem with "democracy," to the degree that we actually have it in a constitutional republic, is that it requires citizens to be sane, sober, moral, and literate.

So yeah, doomed.
 
ez_willis said:
There are other ways to show bipartisan cooperation than to let activist judges slide on into positions like they were ultimately given. Roe v. Wade would like a word.
Click to expand...

The most reasonable alternative to letting "activist" judges "slide" is to accuse them of crimes and religious fanaticism?
 
Supercreep said:
The most reasonable alternative to letting "activist" judges "slide" is to accuse them of crimes and religious fanaticism?
Click to expand...
I could argue that calling a religious fanatic a religious fanatic isn't bad but it's taking away from the overall point that we both agree on, which is neither side being willing to work with the other. You provided three activist judges as one sliver of an example but it's not what we were talking about overall and I think you know that. Supreme Court appointments do not equate to maybe agreeing to raise the minimum age of purchasing an assault rifle to 21. There's a million other ways of working together than lifetime appointments to the SCOTUS. Start with something little. ANYTHING. The Dems have tried that a million times and the GOP won't have it.
 
ez_willis said:
I could argue that calling a religious fanatic a religious fanatic isn't bad but it's taking away from the overall point that we both agree on, which is neither side being willing to work with the other. You provided three activist judges as one sliver of an example but it's not what we were talking about overall and I think you know that. Supreme Court appointments do not equate to maybe agreeing to raise the minimum age of purchasing an assault rifle to 21. There's a million other ways of working together than lifetime appointments to the SCOTUS. Start with something little. ANYTHING. The Dems have tried that a million times and the GOP won't have it.
Click to expand...

Sure, I broadly agree with you. I'm not trying to be coy, though. It comes down to the specific policy proposals.

In this instance, you suggest raising the legal age to purchase an assault rifle (I suppose we mean any semiautomatic rifle with some superficial features) from 18 to 21. I think there might be broad support for that. One significant legislative obstacle would be the need to amend the consitution to do it. I'm all for raising the legal age for voting to 21. Our military is by far the largest provider of assault rifles to 18-20 year olds, so it may cause some recruitment issues. :D
 
I think the point is that both sides need to take each other seriously and engage in good faith. Splitting the world into dichotomies of marxism and white nationalism isn't taking the country to the "sane, sober, moral, and literate" destination.
 
Supercreep said:
Sure, I broadly agree with you. I'm not trying to be coy, though. It comes down to the specific policy proposals.

In this instance, you suggest raising the legal age to purchase an assault rifle (I suppose we mean any semiautomatic rifle with some superficial features) from 18 to 21. I think there might be broad support for that. One significant legislative obstacle would be the need to amend the consitution to do it. I'm all for raising the legal age for voting to 21. Our military is by far the largest provider of assault rifles to 18-20 year olds, so it may cause some recruitment issues. :D
Click to expand...
I didn't use that example for any particular reason than providing the first example that popped in my head. It could have literally been about anything else that the two sides could agree on and then enact together to show the Country that they are willing to work together. Which the GOP has no desire to do because they are trying to get elected as you pointed out. And the best way to do that right now is for all of them to tell their base that the Democrats ARE eating babies and grooming kids for a sex trade.
 
Supercreep said:
I think the point is that both sides need to take each other seriously and engage in good faith. Splitting the world into dichotomies of marxism and white nationalism isn't taking the country to the "sane, sober, moral, and literate" destination.
Click to expand...
I agree. Can you give me one example that you can think of that the Dems could use to bring the two sides together, and vise versa.
 
It kinda feels like to me, just in this State, that the dems are like the republicans 30 years ago, and the republicans are like the crazy drunk uncle that shows up to Thanksgiving every few years and makes a mess of everything.
 
Supercreep said:
The problem with "democracy," to the degree that we actually have it in a constitutional republic, is that it requires citizens to be sane, sober, moral, and literate.
Click to expand...
It's a fair point. Without having a properly informed electorate who are in a position to make rational decisions with regard to policy that affects them - doom is the result.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top