Jump to content

The Politics Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Members

I’m proud of Pete for putting ego aside and doing the right thing. Considering he has more votes and delegates that Klobuchar and Warren, they should be embarrassed at this point. Warren is literally only playing for a contested convention and had no path to the nomination. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 45.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vee

    6816

  • DRW50

    5988

  • DramatistDreamer

    5521

  • Khan

    3458

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

 

I don't have any real clue on how this all really works in the US, but CNN basically said Biden and the Democrats want Warren and Klobuchar to stay in through Tuesday because they'll block Sanders from winning their home states and they'll keep him from running the table in other places.

 

Also speaking as someone who grew up around "socialism" and is probably more liberal/left than most of the people here, I'll say I do not understand the Sanders thing at all or why he's some sort saint to some of these people. I grew up in places where we had socialised medicine and all those things and I'm definitely to the left, but he just seems like a con artist to me. No offense to the US, but I don't ever see you guys getting all the things he's promising because the US isn't made that way. Anyway, can someone explain to me his loud rabid fanbase? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Klobuchar and Warren could take a number a delegates on Super Tuesday which would reduce Sanders' chances of running up a sizable plurality of delegates. Sanders' supporters include a lot of oddballs who have no real ideology other than liking any candidate who talks about revolution and change (some of them used to support Ron Paul who is the polar opposite of Sanders).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

People in this country and the term socialism here is crazy. Now I am not comparing Bernie Sanders to Franklin Delano Roosevelt at all(Roosevelt was a savvy democratic politician and was a member of the machine in NY. He also served as Governor in the state before he ran for president, handling statewide problems and helping his citizens through the onslaught of the great depression). But his supporters love to compare him to FDR, which is laughable. What I will say about Sanders is that he has proposals that other more liberal presidents did including FDR and LBJ(LBJ was also a VERY SAVVY politician). Medicare is our healthcare insurance program for seniors and people with disabilities. It was always intended to be expanded to a nationwide program for all, when implemented but it is not socialized. The doctors and healthcare providers and services are all still private. Medicare is managed by the federal government, like an insurance company and negotiates directly with doctors and providers on services and their costs. Most doctors and providers accept Medicare patients but not all. But it's not socialized medicine.

 

I actually have no objection to expanding medicare but there are other approaches to do it others have proposed that don't kick people immediately off their own private healthcare insurance that some may actually like. But before the ACA(OBAMACARE) insurance companies were allowed to deny people like me coverage - I am a breast cancer survivor simply for the fact that I had a major illness years ago. One of many problems with our private healthcare insurance plans pre ACA. And just to be clear there are still problems with the ACA that could have been fine tuned had one political party not been actively trying to undermine it and invalidate it since it was passed into law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Well, Flavor Flav has left the group before so there are likely underlying philosophical issues brewing there. This Sanders rally situation was probably the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.

 

I too applaud Buttigeig for leaving the race to make way for a clearer path for coalescing around a viable candidate.  I follow (and am followed by) quite a few gay men of color and none except for one, was actually checking for Pete. In their tweets many expressed a kind of weariness, if not exasperation that Pete did not speak to their issues or issues such as the mortal peril that transgendered and transwomen, of color especially were facing as well as protection of their civil liberties.  I will say that even though I mostly avoid subtweets and comments, which are often vitriolic and nasty, I did see some homophobic comments that I blocked as I don't want that venom anywhere near my social media.  I reflexively learned to do this when I came across the disgusting comments I'd see about Kamala Harris as well (some of which I had to report because they were threatening as well as disgusting).

Edited by DramatistDreamer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I think the criticism of Buttigieg not representing most lgbt people (and beyond lip service not even trying to represent anyone who was not just like him) was valid. It's unfortunate that those concerns were overshadowed by those who hate themselves and have to hate everyone else in order to get validation. Ben Mora, Bernie's ex-field director, was back on Twitter and talking about how conservative men who are caught in hotels with rent boys are better gay representation. (he was then suspended again and went on about how they'd taken so much from him...too lacking in self-awareness to know that perpetually trying and failing to audition for a Topeka adaptation of Boys in the Band is why he is where he is, not Twitter). Many of these same types of Twitterati also hated Harris and went out of their way to attack her in the ugliest terms. They do nothing but drag down everyone around them, and I have a feeling they're one of the main reasons their dear leader has underperformed this entire primary. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

The vitriol of the Bernie Bros is running neck and neck with the often caustic disposition and personality of Sanders himself as a turnoff for someone like me. And this is coming from someone, who as a college student and graduate once admired many of the positions that Sanders used to discuss, when he once used a tone that was indicative of someone who had respect for other people and not at all the person who readily disparages others.  I know that there are followers and fans of every group that are abrasive and irritating but the Bernie Bros are a different level of fanatic and nastiness seems to be a prerequisite. I also think that those who are trying to say, "not all Bernie followers/admirers" are increasingly throwing up their hands or are remaining silent, probably because they know that their voices will never reach above the fray of Bernie Bros ready to shout them down.

 

 

I feel as though, for about a month, I've been reading too much about the coronavirus but this thread is a very interesting, if unsettling read. You know it's never good when/if any administration is compared to the Bush administration's handling of the dissemination of information regarding going to war in Iraq. There are definite similarities in how the information has been tailored to fit the desired narrative in both cases, to support what the administration wants to show in order to persuade.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Finland seemed such an odd choice for a location shoot. ATWT went to Greece and later Spain while GL had Tenerife and there were others in that timeframe. But Finland not being a known tourist destination or offering the tropical/sunny atmosphere usually associated with location shoots seems off brand. Maybe they were negotiating a deal with a tourist association and it fell through.
    • I was talking about 1986, but the glimpses of 1982 are about the same. 
    • I skimmed some of the 1982 synopses; Steve was planning on an opening an office in Finland, and I think Jim went there as part of the preparation. That probably was a big issue; AW had already gone to San Diego that year, with Rachel/Steve/Mitch. And to upstate NY with Pete and Diana. I wonder if upstate was as expensive lol  AW in 1982 has always fascinated me, because of how messy it was 
    • That makes sense. What a messy time for the show. And any changes they made were mostly for the worse.
    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
    • My comment has nothing to do with cast resentment, but does relate to the Finland location shoot: It may be a coincidence, but Jim Matthews died in Finland in 1982.  Hugh Marlowe's final episode was in April 1982, but the character probably didn't die untll May or June. (I'm unable to find the character's date of death, only the date of Marlowe's final episode). SInce Jim and Rachel had very little interaction after around 1975, it is unlikely Jim's death in Finland had any connection to Rachel's potential visit, but the choice to have Jim die in that location at that time is a head-scratcher.  I'm sure the writers sent Jim on an extended trip (and off-screen) because of Marlowe's illness.  But Finland seems like a strange choice considering the (then) recently cancelled location shoot.  
    • I totally understand your sloths concern about it and I agree with you. Let’s hope the show plays it’s cards right.    Further comments about the last few episodes: - I liked that one of the attendees was filming the scene. That’s realistic. I wonder if the writers will follow up with that.  - Martin and Smitty trying to drag Leslie out was very heteronormative, so perfectly in line with them two as characters lol.    As for the future: it’s obvious the Duprees will come to accept Eva one way or another, but the rivalry with Kay should be here for the long term   On the topic of acting: the only bad actors I’m seeing are Ted and Derek. Tomas hasn’t proven to be either good or bad, so far, but he’s certainly mediocre and uncharismatic. He sucks the energy out of the scenes and I don’t see any couple of women ever vying for him. 
    • I’m trying to think which actors VW were working with at the time, and none of them had been there for a while. Even like Mac and Ada didn’t have that big of a part in Rachel’s storyline.  And Jamie was involved with all that movie stuff.
    • Brooke did ads before ATWT too. That probably helped get her the job. After ATWT she seemed to branch more into hosting, along with ads.  I think I saw Kelley in an ad or two, but you're right she wasn't on as much. 
    •   Thanks for sharing these. I wonder if Charles might have been in the running for Adam. I know Preacher was a bit of a bad boy at times on EON, but Neal seemed to be a step down, and Robert Lupone had played a similar part on AMC. Given the huge cast turnover at this point I wonder who thought they had been there long enough to go.  Laura Malone/Chris Rich would get a remote within the next year. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy