ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , democratic party

Closed Thread
Old 29th January 2020, 03:48 AM   #161
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,456
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
I don't get why America finds it so hard to have a working UHC. They seem to find ways to overcomplicate everything to the point that nothing works properly

When it comes to UHC, simple is best. Every man, woman and child should be entitled to Government underwritten health insurance, paid for via a fixed percentage of each taxpayer's tax liability which will cover them from the cradle to the grave. Each person has a fixed dollar amount allocated to them as the premium for their insurance. Should someone wish to opt out of the government insurance plan and go private, they are free to do so, and if they do, that allocated premium is paid to the provider of their choice, and the person is responsible to pay the provider the balance of their premium.

Simple to understand
Simple to administer


Similar (bit not identical) systems work in Norway, Sweden, Australia and Switzerland. New Zealand has a similar system that is limited to healthcare for accidents and injuries sustained at work or at home.
Simply put:

It's been proposed for many decades. Initial resistance was based around anger at the idea that it might help black people, without either experimenting on them or sterilizing them. As US conservatism moved towards a more abstract "small government" claim of thinking in the latter half of the 20th century partly in reaction to the logical conclusion to this line of thinking in WW2-era Germany, and partly after the Tuskeegee Experiment was exposed to everyone, it became more of a "private business can do this better" claim of neoliberalism, embraced by both major political parties.

When Obama put forth Romney's plan for Massachusetts, critics screamed that it was "reparations" and "payback for slavery" - see Rush Limbaugh, Dinesh D'Souza, and so forth. And not that we have a white nationalist striving to take their health care access away, the poorest white Americans cheer.

Yes, I realize that conservatives, and especially the local white supremacy brigade, might whine about it. I don't care. Frankly, I hope they all have me on their ignore lists. But the more you dig into US history, why it's so bizarre and unique, the more you hit on a bunch of crap meant to drain wealth from black people, ad transfer it to *some* white people.

I really need to buy some books on Native American history, because I already know the same is true for them in general, but I'd like to be able to at least hear from historians on the particulars...
Mumbles is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 05:08 AM   #162
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 18,569
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
It's the left wing policies that the Democrats are failing to promote.

Where is the Democrat single-payer UHC policy ? Hopelessly mired.

Where are the Democratic proposals for a massive extension of the welfare state to provide for the millions of Americans living in poverty ? Rejected, because the Democrats want to appear "fiscally responsible".

Where are the Democratic proposals to address income and wealth inequality by raising taxes significantly on rich individuals and profitable companies ? Rejected for fear of scaring the horses.

That's not to say that individual Democratic Party supporters, members or representatives don't support these policies, just that they never seem to become the official party policy.

One of the key differences between (the now much maligned) Tony Blair and Bill Clinton and Barack Obama is that Tony Blair made all the correct centre-right noises about keeping public spending and taxes down but once elected implemented a surprisingly wide range of leftish policies like addressing the chronic under-funding of the NHS, implementing working tax credits to move hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty, properly funding schools and so on. Bill and Barack made the same noises but then when they were in office actually implemented those centre right policies, keeping government spending low, extending tax cuts and so forth.
Taxation is theft
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 05:15 AM   #163
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 11,095
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Taxation is theft
so is breathing.
__________________
“Impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”-Sen. Lindsey Graham
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 06:01 AM   #164
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 88,413
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Taxation is theft
Prove it.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 06:16 AM   #165
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 18,569
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Prove it.
Theft

Quote:
In common usage, theft is the taking of another person's property or services without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it.[
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft

Evidence for lack of consent.

"I do not consent".

There, I provided testimonial evidence.

There. I defined the term, and I provided evidence. That satisfies the burden of proof.

Quote:
Burden of proof (also known as onus probandi in Latin) is the obligation on somebody presenting a new idea (a claim) to provide evidence to support its truth (a warrant). Once evidence has been presented, it is up to any opposing "side" to prove the evidence presented is not adequate.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 06:42 AM   #166
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 19,232
Wow.

Some people are clearly terrified of her. You can tell because they ignore the argument in favour of ad hom. it's a dead giveaway
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 06:47 AM   #167
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 31,968
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Theft



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft

Evidence for lack of consent.

"I do not consent".

There, I provided testimonial evidence.

There. I defined the term, and I provided evidence. That satisfies the burden of proof.



https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
Well, I hope you aren’t using public roads, schools, emergency services, or libraries. If you end up not paying for them, it would be theft.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 06:52 AM   #168
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 19,232
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Well, I hope you aren’t using public roads, schools, emergency services, or libraries. If you end up not paying for them, it would be theft.

Can I talk to you about the utter pointlessness of putting apples in a barrel full of water and trying to get them out with your teeth?
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 07:04 AM   #169
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 18,569
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Well, I hope you aren’t using public roads, schools, emergency services, or libraries. If you end up not paying for them, it would be theft.
I didn't claim I wasn't a thief.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 07:05 AM   #170
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 41,990
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Wow.

Some people are clearly terrified of her. You can tell because they ignore the argument in favour of ad hom. it's a dead giveaway
What does this say about people who dismiss rational criticism of her?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 07:24 AM   #171
ahhell
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,094
Originally Posted by Jerrymander View Post
Isn't the UK more right wing since it has a monarchy?

Steve Bannon is considered further right then the mainstream Repulicans and yet...
Bannon has a lot more incommon with european right wing than the traditional US right. Which, again, is why the, "The US doesn't have a real left party" doesn't makes sense. Until Trump we didn't have a real right wing party either. Unless all you are only talking about the welfare state, in which case, European countries don't actually have right wing parties. Saying that would be regarded as being as silly as AOC latest trite pronouncement.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 07:25 AM   #172
Cabbage
Master Poster
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,201
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Theft


Quote:
In common usage, theft is the taking of another person's property or services without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft

Evidence for lack of consent.

"I do not consent".

There, I provided testimonial evidence.

There. I defined the term, and I provided evidence. That satisfies the burden of proof.



https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof


Just wanted to draw your attention to the fact that you ignored the highlighted portion of the definition.

You're Welcome!
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 07:32 AM   #173
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,342
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I'm not even sure why "left" or "right" matters. I'd bet you that most of us aren't all on one side of all the issues.
While this is true of the Left, in fact diversity of opinion within the Democratic Party is central to AOC’s original comment.

It’s different on the Right which is monolithic because it’s base doesn’t take form it’s political stance based on the issues. Instead what happens on the Right is that the Right Wing media tells it’s base what the right wing stance is on each issue and any elected official with a divergent view on any issue is called a RINO and either pushed out or forced to toe the party line.
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
. She (and all politicians) should be more concerned with formulating actual policies and getting them passed, if she can. Convince more Americans to agree with what she wants and the shifts will happen all by themselves.
A big part of the US electorate, particularly on the right, isn’t using issues to decide who to vote for. Most right wing voters do it the other way, who they vote for determines where they stand on the issues. This is why they the right can go from being ardent free traders to ardent protectionists overnight, go from thinking the deficit is everything, to thinking the deficit means nothing then back to the deficit means everything in less than a decade. It’s why the right can simultaneously be ultra-nationalistic yet still think it’s ok for foregone powers to influence US elections or accept low key (and occasionally not so low key) secessionist movements.

I could go on but other than guns, religion and xenophobia, issues are ephemeral on “right wing” of US politics. I have right wing in quotes there, because Republicans voters are frequently far away from what used to be considered right leaning polices like personal freedom, states rights, fiscal responsibility and market economies.

The situation is a little different for Democrats because people who base party support on the issues themselves have been leaving the Republicans for 3 decades, and the Democrats are the only place to go and many right wing ideas and issues have moved with them. This has made the party an amalgamation of the traditional left and the thoughtful right. Strategically it’s made more sense for the latter to lead the party because the former will vote democrat regardless.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 07:48 AM   #174
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 18,569
Talking

Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
Just wanted to draw your attention to the fact that you ignored the highlighted portion of the definition.

You're Welcome!
It doesn't require anything else.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 07:50 AM   #175
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 31,968
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I didn't claim I wasn't a thief.
You're talking about theft. When is it theft for theft and when is it merely commerce?
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 07:51 AM   #176
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 31,968
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Can I talk to you about the utter pointlessness of putting apples in a barrel full of water and trying to get them out with your teeth?
I know. I'm done.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 07:51 AM   #177
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 18,569
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
You're talking about theft. When is it theft for theft and when is it merely commerce?
Can you rephrase?
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 07:57 AM   #178
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,342
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Kevin Drum had a pretty good article on this the other day, pointing out that because the number of liberals is smaller than the number of conservatives, the former have to compromise in order get enough of the centrists and even some center-right people to vote for them. As the conservatives start with more votes, they only need to get slightly conservative centrists to reach 51%.
Poll Republican voters on whether they would:
- Support ending social security payment
- Ending Medicare
- Ending Medicaid
- Ending farm subsidies

Unlike most of the stuff the right wing media rails about these are actual left wing polices and fairly far to the left at that. Nonetheless, they are all broadly supported by Republican voters. If you can filter out the demonization and generalization of the right wing media there are many more issues where Republican voters lean significantly to the left.

Based on the issues, the GoP isn’t really a right wing party at all, it’s a mashup of populism and special interest held together by media narrative and party loyalty. The only way it becomes “right wing” is by defining itself as “the right” defining anything else as “the left”
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 08:04 AM   #179
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 19,232
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What does this say about people who dismiss rational criticism of her?
I hadn't thought about that. I hadn't really noticed any rational criticism.

Not that I'm saying that there isn't any, just that those people seem to be drowned out by the massive numbers of people dismissing her comments due to her background or social status.
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 08:07 AM   #180
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 41,990
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I hadn't thought about that. I hadn't really noticed any rational criticism.

Not that I'm saying that there isn't any, just that those people seem to be drowned out by the massive numbers of people dismissing her comments due to her background or social status.
In this thread?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 08:09 AM   #181
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 19,232
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
In this thread?

This thread mainly consists of the noise I was talking about.

I gave up after the first couple of pointless exchanges. Her statement is not, for me, so controversial that I was terribly interested in half arsed denials of her statement.
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 08:19 AM   #182
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 41,990
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
This thread mainly consists of the noise I was talking about.
I didn't think this thread had a lot of people dismissing her comments due to background and social status.

There's been the usual "but not in Europe!" side-track. Some bobbing. Some (limiited) discussion about whether AOC's strategy to pull the Democratic party further left is a good one on the merits. That's about it. The noise drowning out this discussion just doesn't seem to be present.

Quote:
I gave up after the first couple of pointless exchanges. Her statement is not, for me, so controversial that I was terribly interested in half arsed denials of her statement.
For me, what's interesting is not so much her statement, as what she's doing about it. It doesn't terrify me, though.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 08:21 AM   #183
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,342
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
This doesn’t support your claim, in fact it disproves it because it specifically says “someone else”. In a democracy, the government is an extension of the populace and since you can’t steal from yourself, it can’t be theft.
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Evidence for lack of consent.

"I do not consent".
No-one has ever said choices must be consequence free. You can chose not to pay taxes, but the consequence is that you must live somewhere else and not have the benefits these taxes pay for. This choice IS available, people choose to live in a social framework supported by taxation because the taxation is preferable to not being part of that society. However, since you are still free to emigrate, not paying taxes is still a choice, just not a consequence free choice.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 08:31 AM   #184
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 41,990
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
This doesn’t support your claim, in fact it disproves it because it specifically says “someone else”. In a democracy, the government is an extension of the populace and since you can’t steal from yourself, it can’t be theft.
Civil asset forfeiture.

Also, abuse of eminent domain.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 08:50 AM   #185
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,342
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What does this say about people who dismiss rational criticism of her?
"She's a Socialist!" isn't a rational criticism. Nor is “She wants the US to move to the left” , or “the US doesn’t want to move to the left”, or any criticism that is based on political views.


A rational criticism would be something like “She supports policy X, but that policy won’t have the effect she claims because of reason 1, 2 and 3.” in the rare cases Republicans get this far the reasons they give invariable dogma with little in way of sound scientific/economic basis.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 09:02 AM   #186
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 48,564
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
"She's a Socialist!" isn't a rational criticism. Nor is “She wants the US to move to the left” , or “the US doesn’t want to move to the left”, or any criticism that is based on political views.
How about she tended bar and therefor everything she says is garbage because the american dream is supposed to be understood to be a lie and only our betters know what we need?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 09:06 AM   #187
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 41,990
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
"She's a Socialist!" isn't a rational criticism. Nor is “She wants the US to move to the left” , or “the US doesn’t want to move to the left”, or any criticism that is based on political views.


A rational criticism would be something like “She supports policy X, but that policy won’t have the effect she claims because of reason 1, 2 and 3.” in the rare cases Republicans get this far the reasons they give invariable dogma with little in way of sound scientific/economic basis.
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
How about she tended bar and therefor everything she says is garbage because the american dream is supposed to be understood to be a lie and only our betters know what we need?
Neither of those criticisms is a noise drowning out other discussions.

The second one hasn't been made in the thread at all, even.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 09:17 AM   #188
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 19,232
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Neither of those criticisms is a noise drowning out other discussions.

The second one hasn't been made in the thread at all, even.

Can you say which post contains what you view as relevant?
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 09:29 AM   #189
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,841
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
While this is true of the Left, in fact diversity of opinion within the Democratic Party is central to AOC’s original comment.

It’s different on the Right which is monolithic because it’s base doesn’t take form it’s political stance based on the issues. Instead what happens on the Right is that the Right Wing media tells it’s base what the right wing stance is on each issue and any elected official with a divergent view on any issue is called a RINO and either pushed out or forced to toe the party line.
But this goes towards what I'm talking about. I don't think think "left" and "right" are truly meaningful in the US. We have two parties and each of them has a diversity of opinion on the left-right spectrum. Yes, Democrats tend to be more progressive and Republicans more conservative. However, Rs can be progressive when it comes to certain issues and Ds can be conservative on certain issues.


Quote:
A big part of the US electorate, particularly on the right, isn’t using issues to decide who to vote for. Most right wing voters do it the other way, who they vote for determines where they stand on the issues.
I think this is true of voters on both sides. I live in a heavily Democratic part of Texas. When I ask people why they are Democrat, I don't get back reasoned arguments, I get back reality like, "because that's the way it is here." One of my friends likens it to being a fan of the Dallas Cowboys -that's who we support in the RGV and if you don't, you are on the outside. I think for most people, political party membership is like this.
Quote:
This is why they the right can go from being ardent free traders to ardent protectionists overnight, go from thinking the deficit is everything, to thinking the deficit means nothing then back to the deficit means everything in less than a decade. It’s why the right can simultaneously be ultra-nationalistic yet still think it’s ok for foregone powers to influence US elections or accept low key (and occasionally not so low key) secessionist movements.
This would be ignoring the swings in the Ds on similar issues.

To bring it back to AOC: she seems to be openly hostile to the basic fact that the Party she joined in order to get herself elected is indeed a Big Tent and that's probably it's greatest strength -that diversity of opinion and openness to new ideas on either side of the spectrum. She wants the Dems to move more in her direction -and I have no problem with that; it's her perrogative- which I think would weaken the Party because it would make it a Small Tent, alienating many voters who would otherwise be Ds. Almost all the people where I live are Ds but they don't talk like AOC, they talk like moderate, Blue Dog Coalition members -who represent our districts, BTW. I think the Ds would lose a lot of people down here if they went full AOC.

Quote:
I could go on but other than guns, religion and xenophobia, issues are ephemeral on “right wing” of US politics. I have right wing in quotes there, because Republicans voters are frequently far away from what used to be considered right leaning polices like personal freedom, states rights, fiscal responsibility and market economies.

The situation is a little different for Democrats because people who base party support on the issues themselves have been leaving the Republicans for 3 decades, and the Democrats are the only place to go and many right wing ideas and issues have moved with them. This has made the party an amalgamation of the traditional left and the thoughtful right. Strategically it’s made more sense for the latter to lead the party because the former will vote democrat regardless.
I don't think you are completely off-base, I just don't think it's as cut and dried as you think it is. Like I said, most people don't tend to be all on one side of all the issues. So many people here are for gay rights, higher taxes on the wealthy, against abortion, want immigration reform along the lines of the Republicans (not the wall!) and want welfare cut -but they are Democrats. We are team players for the most part.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 09:31 AM   #190
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 18,569
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
This doesn’t support your claim, in fact it disproves it because it specifically says “someone else”. In a democracy, the government is an extension of the populace and since you can’t steal from yourself, it can’t be theft.


No-one has ever said choices must be consequence free. You can chose not to pay taxes, but the consequence is that you must live somewhere else and not have the benefits these taxes pay for. This choice IS available, people choose to live in a social framework supported by taxation because the taxation is preferable to not being part of that society. However, since you are still free to emigrate, not paying taxes is still a choice, just not a consequence free choice.
A) government is not an extension of a person. A person doesn't extend beyond their own arms.

B) it wasn't a question of choice, it was a question of consent. I can choose to follow the demands of my kidnapper, I am not consenting to being kidnapped.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 09:34 AM   #191
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,342
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Civil asset forfeiture.

Also, abuse of eminent domain.
I can see the possibility of specific cases where people colloquially call something theft because it’s unfair, unreasonable or unjust. It would still not be literal theft for the same reason taxation in general isn’t. I can’t see this colloquial usage in the more general case because it’s only specific implementations that would be inherently unfair, unreasonable or unjust.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 09:34 AM   #192
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,005
By the way this thread is a lot better if you sing the last few words of the title in a Miley Cyrus voice.

"Hey hey hey we don't have a left party in the USA...."
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 09:38 AM   #193
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 19,232
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
But this goes towards what I'm talking about. I don't think think "left" and "right" are truly meaningful in the US.
fixed that for you.

Any attempt to describe a person's views on finance, economics, human rights, the environment, worker protections, healthcare, etc (the list goes on and on) as a point in a single dimension is going to be ineffective and divisive. It only serves to put the world into 'us' and 'them' camps.

I happen to think this a a feature, not a bug, for those for whom the left/right paradigm has use.
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 09:47 AM   #194
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 18,569
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
fixed that for you.

Any attempt to describe a person's views on finance, economics, human rights, the environment, worker protections, healthcare, etc (the list goes on and on) as a point in a single dimension is going to be ineffective and divisive. It only serves to put the world into 'us' and 'them' camps.

I happen to think this a a feature, not a bug, for those for whom the left/right paradigm has use.
I don't know, I think I can pretty much be summed up as a point on a single dimension.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 09:53 AM   #195
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 41,990
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Can you say which post contains what you view as relevant?
The OP does a pretty good job of laying out the topic. There's some relevant replies, but not many.

The noise that's drowning it out isn't personal attacks on AOC. It's the extended slapfight about whether America has a left party or not.

If you read the OP, rather than just the thread title, it's clear that the question is incidental to the topic. AOC is taking action to bring the Democratic party further left. It puts the thread title quote in context.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 10:01 AM   #196
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 19,232
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
The OP does a pretty good job of laying out the topic. There's some relevant replies, but not many.

The noise that's drowning it out isn't personal attacks on AOC. It's the extended slapfight about whether America has a left party or not.

If you read the OP, rather than just the thread title, it's clear that the question is incidental to the topic. AOC is taking action to bring the Democratic party further left. It puts the thread title quote in context.

I can't see the criticism. It seems to be simple reporting.

As to if she's 'right' to try to drag her party leftwards, well, that's up to the ballot box. This is slightly confounded by the fact that she and Bernie actually terrify members of their own party, due either to:

- the ruin that she will bring for her unreasonable ideas

or

- The fact that if she gets what she wants Democrat corporate paymasters won't get what they want. (Indeed, it will be the end of corporate control of the US if she actually gets what she really, really wants.)


depending on your particular point of view.
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 10:04 AM   #197
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 18,569
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I can't see the criticism. It seems to be simple reporting.

As to if she's 'right' to try to drag her party leftwards, well, that's up to the ballot box.
Prestige did raise a specific moral question about her behavior. I don't think many here hitch the resolution to moral questions based on the majority.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 10:42 AM   #198
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 41,990
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I can't see the criticism. It seems to be simple reporting.
Sorry, I misunderstood your question. The OP lays out what I think is the relevant topic of the thread.

Criticisms relevant to that topic, that do not express the kind of ad hom 'noise' that you're talking about, include:

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
She doesn't want to fundraise because they have the audacity to help their members.



She doesn't want to fundraise for them because she disagrees with the objective.....of advancing the interest of DCCC members.

Next, she will be announcing she wont do anything for the NFLPA as they refuse to provide legal services to MLB players.
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
You are missing a key part. One is a member of the DCCC, one is not. For the DCCC to start choosing who in the DCCC to not support is not a smart move for the DCCC.

How is the DCCC wanting to protect the interest of existing DCCC members any different than Cortez wanting to protect existing members of her district from AMAZON? In both cases, they favor existing members not being displaced over potential future members.


I will quote her



The DCCC is actually promising to protect the existing community of representatives.
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
She's trying to have it both ways: All the advantages of being part of the Democratic establishment, plus all the advantages of undermining that establishment. This doesn't sound like a stable strategy for sustaining the advantages of the Democratic establishment.
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
That's a valid point. I'm not saying she's in the wrong, here.

However, the establishment does have a realistic value proposition: "Join our team, support our cause, benefit from our established position, and we'll see that you're taken care of."

If you're a progressive that likes that proposal, you can accept the proposition, be a team player, and enjoy the benefits of the establishment. And if you don't like that proposal, you don't have to join.

It's different on the other side of that page. When a progressive doesn't like the proposal, but joins up anyway with the intention of exploiting the benefits while undermining the establishment that provides them... It's hard for me not to conclude that she's in the wrong.
Aside from two or three posts on the first page, the kind of "noise" you're talking about simply isn't there. Rational criticism is there, but not much. And there's certainly a lot of noise, just not the noise you imagined.

Quote:
As to if she's 'right' to try to drag her party leftwards, well, that's up to the ballot box.
That's a cop-out. It's also circular and incoherent.

The ballot box is where you go to say whether you think she's right or not. It's not the place that tells you what to think. Is she right to try? If she succeeds, will it further the things you want to further? If she fails, will it damage things you want to protect? These are questions you have to answer for yourself, on the way to the ballot box. These aren't questions the ballot box can answer for you.

Quote:
This is slightly confounded by the fact that she and Bernie actually terrify members of their own party, due either to:

- the ruin that she will bring for her unreasonable ideas

or

- The fact that if she gets what she wants Democrat corporate paymasters won't get what they want. (Indeed, it will be the end of corporate control of the US if she actually gets what she really, really wants.)


depending on your particular point of view.
Exactly. People aren't waiting for the ballot box to tell them if AOC has a good idea. They're making up their own minds about it, and taking that to the ballot box to tell everyone else.

Anyway, nobody is drowning out the conversation with "terrified" ad homs. The people who are drowning out the conversation are the ones bickering about whether the US has a left party. But I have no idea what terrifies them. The idea of not being heard, perhaps?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 10:52 AM   #199
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 19,232
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Sorry, I misunderstood your question. The OP lays out what I think is the relevant topic of the thread.

Criticisms relevant to that topic, that do not express the kind of ad hom 'noise' that you're talking about, include:









Aside from two or three posts on the first page, the kind of "noise" you're talking about simply isn't there. Rational criticism is there, but not much. And there's certainly a lot of noise, just not the noise you imagined.


That's a cop-out. It's also circular and incoherent.

The ballot box is where you go to say whether you think she's right or not. It's not the place that tells you what to think. Is she right to try? If she succeeds, will it further the things you want to further? If she fails, will it damage things you want to protect? These are questions you have to answer for yourself, on the way to the ballot box. These aren't questions the ballot box can answer for you.



Exactly. People aren't waiting for the ballot box to tell them if AOC has a good idea. They're making up their own minds about it, and taking that to the ballot box to tell everyone else.

Anyway, nobody is drowning out the conversation with "terrified" ad homs. The people who are drowning out the conversation are the ones bickering about whether the US has a left party. But I have no idea what terrifies them. The idea of not being heard, perhaps?

Okay, half of them I dismiss out of hand due to the source not being connected in any way with the planet.


With regard to the rest:

Anyone who thinks political parties can't move position is mental and hasn't read history

If political parties positions aren't moved by people then what are they moved by.


She appears to be GBS's unreasonable woman. and all power to her.
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 10:52 AM   #200
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,342
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
But this goes towards what I'm talking about. I don't think think "left" and "right" are truly meaningful in the US. We have two parties and each of them has a diversity of opinion on the left-right spectrum. Yes, Democrats tend to be more progressive and Republicans more conservative. However, Rs can be progressive when it comes to certain issues and Ds can be conservative on certain issues.
The origin of “Left” vs “Right” political spectrum really comes down to reformers vs traditionalists. In typical use Conservative more or less lines up with traditionalist, but Progressive is only one type of potential reform.

In the China or Soviet Union, for example, once authoritarian Communism had established itself as the norm, a move towards democracy and a market-based economy is reformist and therefor left leaning, while hard line communism is traditionalist and therefor right leaning. “left leaning” liberalism is easily recognisable because then original left was looking for the same reforms while the right traditionalist were supporting the aristocracy. Communism, however, was itself a reformist ideology at one point but is now the traditionalist ideology the reformers were trying to overthrow.
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I think this is true of voters on both sides. I live in a heavily Democratic part of Texas. When I ask people why they are Democrat, I don't get back reasoned arguments, I get back reality like, "because that's the way it is here."
In some cases maybe, but again the current Democrats have a large contingent of people who would have backed the GoP 35 years ago and these are the people who generally set Democratic policy which is why they currently stand as a center-right “moderate conservative” party.

Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I think for most people, political party membership is like this. This would be ignoring the swings in the Ds on similar issues.



The swings in Democratic policy have been consistently in one direction and are the very subject of this thread so they not ignored.

Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
To bring it back to AOC: she seems to be openly hostile to the basic fact that the Party she joined in order to get herself elected is indeed a Big Tent and that's probably it's greatest strength -that diversity of opinion and openness to new ideas on either side of the spectrum. .
I don’t sense this hostility. What I see is her arguing for her preferred direction, something that is a perfectly normal when you are part of a diverse organization. The people taking a hostile stance towards are not right leaning Democrats but Republicans trying to defend their strict party line divisions.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:25 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.