Total posts: 934
Posted in:
Alright this sounds like the final remarks and Im already checking out.
- A lot of the top tier candidates seem like they would like to have Beto as a VP prospect they can mold to whatever their current platform is.
- Castro certainly had the hardest hitting blows that landed on Biden
- A couple candidates positioned themselves to eat into Biden's support on healthcare by advocating for Public Options or Medicare for All
- Overall no one suffered a catastrophic defeat or gaffe that will cause their campaign to self-destruct
- Buttigieg and Yang kind of receded into the background it seems though that may have just been me.
Overall Id be shocked if there was a major shift in the polls after this. All of them did equally adequate in terms of not shitting the bed on live tv, once the field gets narrowed down further maybe something interesting sill develop but right now, no dice.
gnite guys
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Understandable, but the last movie I saw to get this much praise from movie critics while also going against the grain of big over-the-top action scenes most superhero movies go with was Logan, and it ended up being one of my top 4 favorite movies of all time (Pacific Rim, Ready Player One, Frozen).... If this movie is the closest thing we get to a DC universe version of Logan, then it will be worth every penny I spend seeing it three times in theaters
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Administration is like the one thing that HAS been properly funded... Damn near every other aspect of the system though needs work or an overhaul, often both.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Im REALLY hyped to see that movie actually. The fact that i know so little about it despite its rave reviews makes me that much more excited to see it
Created:
Posted in:
"Whats the most professional setback you've suffered, how did you recover from it, and what did you learn from it?"
If the moderators are going to start asking personal philosophy questions that dont really mean anything then I might as well check out now since all the interesting questions that actually could have consequences in a presidential administration have already been asked....
Created:
Posted in:
Throwing money at education which the candidates are all singing right now might be the only issue where throwing money at the problem isnt necessarily a bad idea. Considering how much cuts were made to education following the Recession years and the shit salaries in the teaching profession compared to other fields, there isnt a list of simple policy changes that can undo the damage to the system to bring it back to world-class or even top of the pack..... Even private schools, which can often be targeted by candidates on the left, can actually be useful in offering a bail-out opportunity to children in districts where public schools simply failed them due to rampant budget cuts, yet at the same time some charter schools suck up education funding and produce no better results and occasionally even do more harm than good.....
Education may be one of those rare issues where the simple ideas actually are the best ones..... Raise funding for schools, invest in teachers, keep student-teacher ratios low, but the one easy solution I'm not hearing are curriculum-based solutions such as putting spelling classes and recess back into the schedule and easing up on standardized testing, all of which contribute massively to the current mediocrity of the system.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
fair enough sorry for the hostility, Ive been up since 3am so I dont exactly have the mental attentiveness I usually do.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Are you unable to understand the meaning of words....? Seriously, go through this entire thread and see if I'm either buying a lot of what candidates have been claiming up to this point and agreeing with them, or calling out their responses for their lack of practicality and chance of implementation. Pretty much every post I've been poking holes in their responses and have overall been critical of the answers.
If you cant readily observe that then you have a problem.
Created:
Posted in:
"The honeymoon period at the start are of a Presidency inflates the approval rating making it susceptible to a high drop"
Trump didnt have a honeymoon period to start his presidency....... He was already at 50% disapproval in February of 2017 after being in office for all of ONE MONTH...... Obama didn't hit 50 percent disapproval until late 2010 and Bush W didnt hit 50 percent disapproval until after he won re-election (March 2005)
A honeymoon period is where the general public is willing to give a chance to an elected president to enact his agenda, and then overall approval usually starts to slide back to around 50% slowly over time. Trump though hit 50% disapproval within a month of being elected, and has ping-ponged back and forth deep in the negatives for the ENTIRETY of his presidency.
Clearly the opinion on Trump is higher today than it was on Election Day 2016 and that’s what I said earlier.
You were wrong then and are wrong now, as both of our sources have indicated several times....
Created:
Posted in:
"Endless War bad, Afghanistan stability good"
Someone needs to bite the bullet and admit the truth on this: That Afghanistan is fucked, theres no chance to obtain peaceful stability, and the reason for that is because so much weaponry was pumped into the state to fight against the Soviet Invasion of the country that these groups can now withstand any internal and even external assault on them even if its sustained for as long as the war has gone on.
Aghanistan has no economy, no industrialization, barely any literacy, no freedoms or protected civil liberties.... There's no feasible path to prosperity for the country short of being annexed into Pakistan and Iran, we might as well cut our losses and pull out
Created:
Posted in:
Once again any immigration responses are geared more towards being open on accepting people rather than resolving the crisis within Central America that is causing the current mass migration in the first place. Warren almost gets there by 'reestablishing the rule of law' but then she goes down the hole by blaming Trump for manufacturing the crisis for political gain.
Someone give an answer that isnt just 'throw money at the problem' and you win the fucking issue on this one. Right now Castro is the strongest candidate on immigration simply because he's done his homework more than anyone else on the issue and has incredibly specific policy proposals to address the issues.
Created:
Posted in:
"As president, I will not be afraid of the NRA"
Id like that to be my submission for 'most pointlessly obvious statement of 2019', no shit that a Dem presidential candidate isn't going to bend to the will of the NRA rthe way Trump has, thats like a GOP candidate saying they will not bow down to the will of Planned Parenthood... ffs
Created:
Posted in:
Mandatory Gun buy-backs is an interesting topic Ill give them that.
On the one hand, ex-post-facto laws make it illegal for any law to penalize people for something that was previously legal, and the 2nd amendment is loosely defined enough to protect the ownership of certain laws after being allowed as legal, and on the other hand if the argument can be made that compensation of property is followed (via a cash payment that would be part of a buy-back) then MAYBE it could be legal, but I would bet against it as Biden has suggested...... District Judges for the US courts always tend to be more in favor of preserving civil liberties when challenged by federal authority, Im sure that one of them would challenge a mandatory gun buy-back proposal and send the issue to the Supreme Court.
'Can you name one Republican who would agree with gun control"
Ding ding, thats the winner. Dems cant convince the GOP to agree to anything on gun control short of the NRA filing for bankruptcy and no organization filling the void
The only kind of gun control bill you maybe could get past the GOP would be one for mental health screenings, because the GOP could frame that as a 'people shoot people' issue without blaming guns themselves. Mandatory buy backs and assault weapon bans though will be dead on arrival in the Senate unless the GOP suddenly stops caring about ceding ground on such a core issue, which I dont see happening no matter how many more mass shootings take place.
Created:
Posted in:
Harris getting a BIG fuck-you question from the moderators regarding her previous record and her seeming flip-flop on position she holds know compared to when she was Attorney General or whatever. Attorney Generals dont craft punitive law or dictate what crimes are or aren't punishable, the job is about evaluating the constitutionality of state laws and policies with what the state government and the national government dictates.
If she was a governor of the state THEN she would be more accountable for policies carried out under her watch, but Attorney General is not the position that a lot of people think it is or make it out to be.
Klobuchar setting the example showing how senators or governors have more power over the implementation of certain policies on state matters which just proves the previous point.
Prison reform, as good of an idea as it is, gets pretty stale as a topic when all the candidates agree on the same points..... Non-violent criminals shouldnt be jailed, once you've served your time you should get your rights back, focus more on rehabilitation and job training than punishment, etc..... The fact that Bernie goes so far to think that people in jail should still be able to vote, including the Florida High School shooter (whatever his name is), is the only stand-out policy position regarding criminal justice reform compared to all the candidates shows how uniform the support for reform is among the candidates.
Created:
Posted in:
Beto and Castro coming together over race relations in the country regarding the shooting in El Paso is a nice touch, but seriously claiming that he can root out racism is just incredibly short-sighted.... Racism is ingrained so deeply into aspects of society that you cant simply legislate it out of the system, let alone in a 4 year time period.... It takes decades of education to over time raise a new generation to be more accepting of each other, and even then thats no guarantee that it will work since internet and social media tech makes it more likely than ever for people to fall into an echo-chamber where they convince themselves that other races are inferior or sub-human.
You can make prosecution of crimes and sentencing of gulity people based on race better, thats an obtainable goal, but believing you can root out racism if elected is utopian fantasy.
Created:
Posted in:
Castro does do his homework on issues I'll give him that. He certainly knows more about immigration policies than anyone else on the stage and he also knows a lot of the fine technicals about healthcare as well. he's right that its better to automatically opt-in people into the system is better than only leaving it as a loophole should a worst case scenario happen under Bidens plan like losing your job..... Caught Biden in a bit of a whirl there but leave it to Buttigieg of all people to come in and rain on the whole broadside goddamn..... If Biden or Sanders or Warren got a big win thats oen thing, but for Buttigieg and Castro those kinds of things could extend a campaign another month, let him have that victory so that he can hang in the race, ballsy move to try to rain on the parade
Created:
Posted in:
Harris pulling a Biden move by crediting Obama with the healthcare reforms passed under his term while also trying to station herself away from Bernie. Im surprised the candidates didn't try to do this earlier in other debate opportunities because it might be too little too late for some of them. I think half the candidates on the stage right now have never regularly polled higher than 4% in most polls.
Biden pulling out the Cancer card in response to Bernies accusation that the current system drives people into bankruptcy (a valid point he has) kidn of ending on a dud there.
Created:
Posted in:
Naturally Biden and Warren tee off on Biden on healthcare..... This whole issue boils down to whether you value policy that is practical and can be implemented upon assuming office, or what policy you think should be implemented regardless of practicality or odds of it being implemented
Klobuchar getting in on it by advocating for just a public option is a solid move on her part. Sanders and Warren aren't going to lose any support to other candidates who also favor single-payer healthcare since theyve been the flag-bearers of single payer for a long time, but Biden is damn sure at risk of losing support of voters who are more centrist on the issue.
Buttigieg trying to make the same move by putting himself between the center and Sanders by instead pushing for Medicare for All... Does Sanders sound like hes fighting through a sore throat or do you think his mic might be a bit muted since he has a tendency of being the loudest person in any room he's in?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Per your own sources:
Wisconsin = "The poll shows 45 percent approve of the job Trump is doing, while 53 percent disapprove."
Pennsylvania = Approval down 9 percent
Michigan = Approval down 13 percent
Florida = 0 Net approval shift
North Carolina = Approval down 2 percent
"Like I said his a bit more popular right now than on Election Day"
Your own sources literally suggests the exact opposite of what your overall claim is...... Maybe you are confusing Trump being viewed better compared to Hillary as the base value of how his popularity should be measured, but then that assumes that Hillary's popularity is net neutral for which all other politicians should be compared to.
Either way, both my numbers and your numbers show now that since being elected, a massive portion of people in key swing states he barely won in the first place have a more negative opinion of Donald Trump now then previously, and at rates that should be incredibly worrisome for anyone who hopes Trump stays in office
Created:
Posted in:
Theyre screwing around with intros at the moment which should buy me enough time to get this put together before anything interesting actually happens. Ill go ahead and dive into this
1) I'll be shocked if I actually make it through the whole thing.
I've been up since 3am because my sleep schedule is nice and fucked for whatever reason, so the odds I'm able to bear with this for 3 hours is pretty slim in the first place. Even though we have all the top performing Dem candidates on one stage for onec rather then split up half-equally among two debates, I still have my doubts that this will unveil anything new or interesting
2) Im only slightly interested in what happens this time
If the past 4 debates put together are any indication, a good 80% of the questions asked to candidates tonight will be repeated questions or rephrased versions of questions already asked earlier in the campaign.... Healthcare, Immigration, Climate Change and Trump in general will probably dominate the question topics tonight, with other issues such as foreign policy being shelved or barely getting light at all
3) There probably wont be an interesting clash between candidates
Biden has been receiving broadsides from candidates all throughout the campaign, and apart from Harris the first time he's weathered them fairly well. Still, the liberal leaning candidates will take shots at him, some of the lesser tier candidates might take a shot at Warren or Sanders for the implausibility of their proposals, but it won't stick since Sanders and Warren have the most unshakable support of any of the candidates on stage right now.
MAYBE one of the middle tier candidates goes at it with another middle tier candidate (Buttigieg vs Beto, Yang vs Klobuchar, etc). If that happens it will certainly catch my attention and be an interesting talking point for a split second, but overall it wont have much of an impact on the race since the top tier candidates (Biden, Warren, Sanders) either have support that never wavers, or is massive enough where a slight dip in numbers following the debate would be fairly meaningless and return back to normal weeks later.... Only a Rick- Perry-esque 'oops' moment at this point could dramatically shift the landscape of the nomination, and while its easy to think Biden would be most likely to have such a moment, you do have to realize that he's been at this for so long that he's immunized himself from having big screw ups by having controlled smaller ones pop up every now and then, or by waiting for Trump to do something 5 times stupider that everyone remembers instead.
Warren is giving her intro now and Biden is up next, so lets get started.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Literally has nothing to do with anything but good job on making yourself look as stupid as I imply you are. You save a lot of work on my part by being a blissful idiot entirely of your own desire rather then make me have to work to bring it out of you. Saves everyone a lot of time and allows the adults to converse with each other more easily
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Nice ad hominem
If you actually did literally any research at all and saw that Trump's popularity across swing states has declined dramatically, as I showed in the link I provided previously that literally states right at the beginning that: "The president has sustained double-digit declines in net approval rate in nearly every state that could be considered a tossup, and more voters disapprove than approve of him in states like Wisconsin, Michigan, Iowa, Pennsylvania and Ohio that Trump won in 2016", then maybe your opinion would actually become more valuable to people then that of a rusty mailbox .
Replying to a post with a single of an argument that by a quick glance is objectively false and easily disprovable doesnt earn you the opportunity to have your thoughts be respected or considered by others..... It earns you only ridicule, which is what is warranted in your case.
Replying to a post with a single of an argument that by a quick glance is objectively false and easily disprovable doesnt earn you the opportunity to have your thoughts be respected or considered by others..... It earns you only ridicule, which is what is warranted in your case.
Created:
Posted in:
2022 is the only election where Dems stand to make enough gains where they can even think of enacting major legislation championed by the more liberal faction of the Dem party... Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Florida..... All of those states are FAR more competitive in terms of party support in both states than most of the states with senate races this cycle. Yet even if Dems clean up in 2022 and managed to get gains in 2020 and win the presidency in 2020 as well, it still may not be enough to get to the 60 vote super-majority needed to ram whatever legislation they want through Congress, assuming that everybody votes the party line as well
Created:
Posted in:
So much of the platforms of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren require total control of the houses of Congress to the point that a majority of what they're campaigning on is a non-starter in terms of ability to be implemented. Theres no way that Universal Healthcare or massive gun control measures will pass the Senate with the needed 60 votes because the GOP will not compromise on either of those issues (at least to any degree Warren or Sanders voters would be satisfied with) and the Dems wont win enough Senate seats to give the party a super majority to pass whatever legislation they want.
A large number of the states with Senate races in 2020 are contests where Dems simply dont have a good chance of winning.... Arkansas, Alaska, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee.... Most races take place in states that are so inherently Republican that no Democrat has a feasible chance of flipping the seat..... Some organizations think that there are only 4 seats where the seat can be flipped, and one of them is a Democrat seat at risk of flipping back to the GOP:
Arizona - GOP
Colorado - GOP
Maine - GOP
Alabama - DEM
Assuming that Senate seat in Alabama flips back to being Republican, if the Dems win in Arizona AND Colorado AND Maine, then that results in the Senate only swinging two more seats into the favor of the Democrats, putting the total at 51-49 for the Dems (This is counting 2 Independents who usually caucus with the Dems)..... Thats simply not enough of a majority to ram major legislation like gun control or universal healthcare through Congress in order for it to be signed by the President.
Whether the policies proposed in the first place is sensible or too far to the left is one thing, the simply math in the Senate that needs to be done for there to even be a chance of the legislation being passed is something else entirely. A majority of their platforms simply cannot be enacted without some sort of massive voter shift in GOP stronghold states flipping the senate seats to the other side, meaning that a majority of their platforms are unobtainable fantasy, regardless of the merits or motivations behind them.
Created:
Posted in:
Question: what are the odds of me being appointed as an honorary mod just to scare some of the louder-mouth members into shutting up about frivolous complaints every once in a while?
Created:
Posted in:
Figures that the four people who decide to respond all share the same brain cell
Created:
Posted in:
Forgot to mention that his tax plan actually f*cked over a lot of middle class supporters who initially voted for him while giving the wealthy a massive tax cut that is exploding the national deficit.....
Like the NUMBER ONE RULE OF PRESIDENTS WHO WANT TO GET RE-ELECTED is dont cause people to have to pay more in taxes if there isnt some sort of crisis or war going on to justify it..... The fact that he managed to screw that up after barely winning in 2016 to begin with almost seals his fate alone.
Created:
Posted in:
- His approval ratings in close to every potential swing state has dropped anywhere from 5 to 15 points, to the point that in many of those swing states a majority disapprove of him compared to approve of him: https://fortune.com/2019/08/27/trumps-approval-rating-polls/
- In midterms of 2018 a MASSIVE number of seats of the house flipped from red to blue, where even districts that were Republican strongholds for years if not decades flipped to the other side: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/democrats-rack-more-gains-house-key-tight-races-are-called-n934066
- The literally non-stop line of self inflicted controversies by Trump and his administration is leading to fatigue among his supporters from trying to defend his actions. This month alone he got into a spat with Denmark for refusing to sell Greenland to him, invited Taliban operatives to the US to negotiate right before 9/11, tried to claim that he was right that Alabama was at risk of Hurricane Dorian with a map that had sharpie bubbled over Alabama, once again ramped up the trade war with China, and lost his third national security adviser who is now spatting over whether it was a resignation or an actual firing
- Greater risk of a recession is becoming an issue which is the number one indicator of whether or not an incumbent will keep or lose their position in the White House: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-08/u-s-recession-odds-pick-up-as-economists-cut-growth-estimates
- The top performing Dem candidates regularly beat Trump in head to head nation-wide matchups across almost every organization that has polling https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/general_election/
If current trends continue, the only way Trump DOESNT lose in 2020 is if Dems nominated Marianne Williamson and then fed her nothing but acid and tic tacs for 3 months prior to the election taking place. He will need a massive economic boom to come in out of nowhere, healthcare prices to drop 70% or more across the board out of nowhere, or every terrorism organization in the world offering to surrender in order for Trump to win re-election..... He was able to frame the 2016 election as a vote of confidence on how well the government is functioning, but in 2020 its his own administration that is being decided, and voters are not happy with how its been.
Created:
Posted in:
Short Version: Warren is now tied with Biden thanks to Gillibrand dropping out + shifts in hispanic voters towards Warren
Long Version:
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/b17i8aeg5p/econTabReport.pdf (Last week, PG 166)
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/hrk03f83zc/econTabReport.pdf (This week, PG 97)
With a 4 point gain over the last week from 20% to 24%, Warren is now tied squarely with Biden who has been hovering around the mid 20's for a good chunk of the race now. A quick analysis of the, well of the poll analysis, points to where this sudden boost came from
1) Gilibrand dropped out..... Seeing as how she was a champion of female politics and has literally announced she was going to focus on electing more women in Congress than continue her presidential run, its almost certain that what little part of the electorate she held flocked to Warren's side, giving her a slight bump in that regard.
2) Biden's support among women took a shift..... Regardless of any swing Gilibrand had when she dropped out of the race, Biden still went from being the first choice among women from 30% down to 25%, while Warren gained the support of being the first choice of women from 19% up to 24%, the exact same margin that Biden lost among his own support.... Deeper investigation of this shift reveals a stark development in terms of voter demographics in the race which could spell gigantic problems for Biden.
Warren Trends:
Female voters = 20% up to 24% = Net 4 point gain
Voters 45-64 = 20% up to 24% = Net 4 point gain
Voters 45-64 = 20% up to 24% = Net 4 point gain
Voters 30-44 = 20% up to 25% = Net 5 point gain
White voters = 25% up to 20% = Net 5 point gain
Hispanic voters = 14% up to 24% = Net 10 point gain
Voters 65+ = 16% up to 27% = Net 11 point gain
Voters 65+ = 16% up to 27% = Net 11 point gain
The thing with Biden though is that the numbers from Warren's gains didnt necessarily come entirely from his own base.... Biden actually gained 10 points with black voters over the same span (38% to 48% as their first choice), gained popularity with voters aged 30 to 44 (15% up to 19%), gained with male voters (17% to 23%) and even retained the same level of support from voters 45 to 65 (33% to 34%)...... The biggest losses for Biden came from older voters over 65 (down 7%), and female voters (30% to 25%), but this doesn't explain Warrens gains with hispanic voters and voters aged 30 to 44.
There are a couple possibilities for this:
1 - A number of undecided voters have chosen a side.
Quick comparison of the data shows that the percentage of undecided voters dropped from 12% last week to 9% this week, yet the totals for this week combined add up to about 102% so the actual percentage of people who changed their minds could actually be even greater than indicated
2 - Hispanic voters have chosen a side:
Analyzing data specifically from Warrens favorability ratings (shown below)
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/b17i8aeg5p/econTabReport.pdf (Last week PG 153)
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/hrk03f83zc/econTabReport.pdf (This week PG 82)
(continued) shows that her favorability among Latino voters jumped up from 41% favorable up to 47% favorable. The same percentage of hispanic voters who were undecided went from 29% down to 21%, which indicates that Warren had a good week of convincing hispanic voters to like her, which could be driving up her numbers over the past week.
3 - Asian voters also like her more:
Asian voters dont have a demographic representing them in the polls, but numbers from 'others' show Warren going from 39% favorability up to 48% favorability, repeating a similar trend of Hispanic voters, but what makes this demographic different is that the same number of 'other' voters both times have the same percentages of being undecided (about 22.5% both times).... Remarkably, the percentage of 'other' voters that did not view Warren favorably took a massive dive, from 40% being unfavorable down to 30%, which would account for this shift out of the blue.
4 - Hispanic voters find her more electable.
The last chunk of the poll that yields the most data is the 'electability' info, where voters consider if Warren could feasibly beat Trump in a general election matchup regardless of their personal preferences. Warrens numbers mostly stayed stagnate (although her support among black voters dropped 9 points from 53% she could beat Trump to 44%), but her numbers among hispanic voters illustrate a massive shift.... Last week 26% of hispanic voters thought she could beat Trump in a matchup, but now thats up to 36%.... The same number of hispanic voters also declined in the number who thought she would lose to Trump, from 42% thinking she would lose down to 32%)
(Both times the number of hispanic voters who were not sure who would win in a matchup was at 32%)
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/b17i8aeg5p/econTabReport.pdf (Last week PG 198)
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/hrk03f83zc/econTabReport.pdf (This week PG 126)
Created:
Posted in:
While we know them as Hurricanes in the Atlantic, Huge storms in the Pacific are known as 'Typhoons' even though they are virtually the same thing as Hurricanes. Typhoons in the Pacific normally impact the Philippines more than any other country in the Pacific, with Japan and China right behind them (China in particular has a nasty history with typhoons due to their population and historical poverty). For the first time though, North Korea is now on the list as a country at risk.
Typhoon Lingling (I swear to God thats the actual name of the storm) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Pacific_typhoon_season#Typhoon_Lingling_(Liwayway) Known in the Philippines as Typhoon Liwayway, at one point was a Category 4 storm when it swept through the southern most islands of Japan before it continued northwards. It gradually weakened as it skirted around the coast of China, but it made landfall in North Korea sometime two days ago with maximum sustained winds of 80 miles per hour.
Category 1 hurricanes average wind speeds between 74 and 90 miles per hour
While the storm pushed 122 miles per hour in wind speed while slashing South Korea, resulting in three deaths, the storm eventually made its way further north right over Pyongyang before crossing into Russia and eventually weakened into a tropical depression.
Now im willing to bet that North Korea's shitty infrastructure and government handling of just about everything made it that the country is woefully unprepared to handle the effects of even the lowest tier of major storms. Short of an outbreak of a war itself, hurricane strikes like these may very well bring the country to its knees more then sanctions ever could. Unlike poorer states such as Haiti, Puerto Rico, or the Bahamas, North Korea likely wont be able to get the same sort of financial outreach from sympathetic nations to recover from heavy storms that strike the nation, so the storm and future storms that take aim at North Korea could have profound geopolitical implications for North Korea and the current security situation in East Asia.
(Anyone who wants to make a troll debate\claiming that global warming is good can also use this as an example for why its good, since it arguably makes hurricanes strike North Korea)
Created:
Posted in:
Now I normally dont get into UK politics due to how differently things are done there and how arbitrary it can appear to be. (Case in point, elections can be ordered at almost any time requested by the prime minister, whereas US elections for legislative bodies of Congress take place every 2 years regularly), but some crazy shit has gone down over there that I feel should be discussed.
Recently: A bill was passed by both houses of Parliament (House of Commons and the House of Lords) that would bar the UK from exiting the EU without a deal in place for the country to exit the EU should they go through with it. Previously, that outcome was a possibility since the EU's terms to the UK should they leave were not accepted by the UK government, meaning that they would have to either stay in the EU or exit with no trade deal to fall back on and effectively be on their own.
Now though, the UK is in a position where they can only exit the EU if other terms are agreed upon, or they cannot exit at all.
Thats normally where this story would end, but it gets crazier:
1 - That whole law passed requiring an exit agreement to be in place in order to formally leave the EU, that was passed with members of the party that holds control of the government: The Tory Party (UK Republican Party).... The Tories were pretty hellbent on exiting the EU regardless of whether or not a plan was in place at the time of withdrawal, while every other opposition party that has any power is not.... Those opposition parties combined power with 21 Tory legislators to pass a bill making it illegal for the UK to undertake Brexit without a deal being in place upon exiting.
2 - Because 21 Tory party members went against their own party to require there being some deal in place should the UK go through with exiting the EU, Boris Johnson (PM + Tory Party leader) kicked them out of the Tory party, essentially for defecting to the other side even though some of them may indeed support exiting the EU as long as a deal is in place should they exit.
3 - As a result of ousting 21 members of his own party, Boris Johnson now does not have a majority in Parliament to do his bidding. He can no longer call for new elections because the majority that is now the opposition will reject such a measure, he cannot undo the law forbidding Brexit without a deal being in place to transition into since legislators just voted to create that law, and he likely will be unable to ask the EU for more time or to renegotiate conditions since theyve already made their terms clear and are in a position of power in regards to the UK.
As a result of those 3 developments, Boris Johnson and the tory party have basically painted themselves into a corner with only two options:
- 1 - They can abandon their drive to carry out Brexit, which would be borderline suicidal since they are the party that currently represents the portion of the population that wanted Brexit to happen
- 2 - Boris Johnson can resign, which will force power to be handed over to a coalition of opposition parties who would select an interim Prime Minister from their own ranks, and then the next time elections are held try to make a comeback and get the numbers to make a new push for Brexit in the future.
And thats it. Those are the two options that the ruling Tory Party in the UK is currently facing. Give up on the top issue facing the UK where they represent the entire side in favor of leaving the EU, or they can stand down from power in the hopes that they will play their cards right better than the opposition and in the next round of elections increase their numbers in Parliament to take up the issue again.
Either way though puts them on the track towards staying in the EU, since option 1 basically gives up on pursuing Brexit, while option 2 temporarily puts power into the hands of opposition parties that are heavily against exiting the EU. This dramatic shift in the future of the UK regarding Brexit was all caused by a recent vote where a number of Tory defectors sided with opposition parties to require there be a deal in place for Brexit to occur. Beacause of that, The Pro-Brexit ruling Tory party now lacks the ability to go through a no-deal exit from the EU, lacks the numbers to call for new elections to maybe get more numbers on their side in Parliament to pursue Brexit further, lacks the ability to convince the EU to allow for more time or renegotiate terms of a Brexit, and basically lacks the ability to pull out of the EU since previous terms offered by the EU were soundly rejected by Parliament back when Theresa May was the prime minister.
So, barring any crazy development where a number of legislators suddenly deflect back to the Tory Party and to support a no-deal Brexit policy, the UK appears to be heading towards remaining in the EU, and Boris Johnson could be effectively forced to resign and hand power over to the opposition
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
That is the problem. Not people disagreeing with me.
What part of my comment made any sort of insinuation that you didnt like the votes simply because they disagreed with you.
Let me summarize a bit better:
- Shitty votes happen,
- They used to be the norm back on DDO for literally years before changes started being made
- While voting standards have improved and are better enforced, the system isnt perfect and a few will always slip by
Let me know which step causes any confusion
Created:
Posted in:
I remember on DDO where for years it was the wild west when it came to voting and damn near every debate had counter votes and votebombs and people just went with it.....
Im not saying that people on here are sensitive or whatever, but guys, as someone who had a literal shitton of debates on DDO, you guys do need to be a little more relaxed when it comes to debate votes. Not every single debate you make is going to recieve the attention and protection it should. I know how infuriating it can be for other people to fuck up the effort you put into your arguments, but its going to happen sooner or later and it just comes with the nature of debate sites
Created:
Posted in:
Why do I always get tagged in the stupidest shit?@Imabench, @Our_Boat_is_Right, @christopher_best, @Patmos, @logicae
Created:
Posted in:
Havent updated in a while since polls havent been coming out and Dorian is sporadically knocking out my internet connection here in Jacksonville, but the new polls that have come out have basically reiterated the same points from before
1 - Bernies support is damn near impossible to hammer down (polls have him anywhere from 12 to 20%, and im certain this is because his support is driven by young voters who are incredibly volatile in terms of turnout and representation)
2 - Harris and Buttigieg are no longer major candidates (Harris hit 5% in recent polls that I believe are the most accurate, Buttigieg now hasnt been above 5% since 8/25 when he hit 6%)
3 - The Primary is effectively a three horse race between Biden. Warren, and Sanders, in that order
Created:
Posted in:
If there weren't, these high skilled immigrants would not be able to get jobs because there are no openings
Jesus Christ. Every time you respond it becomes increasingly clear how woefully ignorant you are about a wide variety of topics.
1) Immigrants who are highly skilled can use those skills to apply for a multitude of different jobs, not just one highly specialized job. In the field of medicine alone there are surgeons, pharmacists, physical therapists, radiologists, cardiologists, and at least 7 other branches of 'doctors' I cant think of off the top of my head.... 2) In the rare instance there ever is a shortage of positions for high skilled jobs, it would be in the interest of America to take in high-skilled immigrants regardless since those skills would make them better served to be a benefit to America regardless.
Bigger than you think if all 150 million immigrants come to the US
Well theyre not, so you just massively defeated your own argument that immigration should be tightly controlled so that voting ballots dont have to have multi-language options or there be translators in voting booths
The only language that does pose a future threat is Spanish, which in particular has a high chance of breaking away to form their own country if we make our borders this easy
Except there isn't a "High chance" of Spanish speakers wanting to break off to form their own country.
Has the idea ever once crossed your mind that because there are close to two dozen different nations that speak Spanish that it would naturally be asinine to think that they would all be willing to secede from the US under just a single one of those nationalities? I dont think an immigrant from Honduras would be willing to be part of a separatist plot to turn part of the US over to Mexico, and neitehr would a Nicaraguan, a Puerto Rican, a Cuban, a Columbian, a San Salvadorian, a Costa Rican, a Dominican, a Peruvian, an Argentinian, or a Chilean.... The fact that you are willing to think they would is just hilariously pathetic.
They just can´t vote until they learn English, pay the fee, and move to a state that won´t make 1 area too immigrant in order to keep the country mixed
Thats still assuming the constitutionality of the government having the right to force immigrants to live in a state of the governments choosing, which it doesnt
Lets say your an immigrant from Mexico. You come to the US and settle in Texas. Lets say that Texas becomes hispanophone majority and Mexico gets their government non-corrupted, they get their s*** together and Mexico becomes a good place to live. Texas might want to join Mexico at this point because mexico is no longer a terrible country.
Except they wouldnt, since not all Spanish speaking immigrants come from Mexico, since Mexico will almost certainly NOT become a comparably good place to live in comparison to the United States, and since hispanics have culturally assimilated into US society fairly well which eliminates your entire conspiracy that theyre would flip back to wanting to be Mexican for no real reason
No one should be on welfare.
The sooner you learn to adjust to the reality that everyone else is living in then the sooner you can start coming up with good ideas that people might agree with. You're not going to be able to eliminate the need for welfare nor the risk that some people might end up on it. To think that you can would be to believe you can turn the US into a Utopia, which is just unfeasibly laughable.
My tax policy, that I call operation 15, can get rid of our debt in less than 15 years and it involves getting rid of the income tax and replacing it with a 15% sales tax. That´s a different topic.
Sounds just as stupid and unfeasible as your immigration plan and you literally only give one sentence about it. Quite an accomplishment
A main thing keeping people from coming to the US is the fact that we only let 1 million immigrants a year and the US has a practical ban on immigration compared to the 160 million who would move if they could
Good, you concede that there wont be 160 million immigrants admitted into the United States.
Glad that youve made it all the way to step one of understanding the immigration issue.
If there is a law called the melting pot act
There's not. Moving on.
Right now they have, but if we were to let every single person that wants to come
What part of your dumbass brain cant get past the fact that the country is not going to let 160 million people immigrate into the United States? If the motivations behind your plan depends on a number of nonsensical impossibilities taking place in order for the plan to have an effect, then that makes the plan itself a nonsensical impossibility.
The Hispanics are a culturally unified group, unlike the culturally divided Europeans and Asians that came here.
If you're actually stupid enough to believe that then you arent even worth having a conversation with.
Created:
Posted in:
Most of the news I see these days seems more like it came from The Onion just because of how asinine real life is these days.
The one where Trump allegedly proposed nuking hurricanes to weaken them along with the one where Iran called the administration 'Mentally Retarded' come to mind the most
Created:
-->
@DebateArt.com
The only problem ( as it is now with the debate arguments ) is that the counter will be approximate, because of the markup it's really difficult to make it precise
Oh thats fine, as long as i have a rough idea of how much space is left then it should be easy to navigate with
Created:
DDO, as bad as it got in the end, did manage to maintain at least one thing right towards the end in that when users were creating posts. There was a little counter at the bottom of the screen showing how many characters you had left before you hit the max limit of a forum post, and if you started approaching the max limit you could edit your sentences more carefully so that you could say what you wanted to say while keeping it all in a single post.... On here though, not only is there no counter at the bottom to give you an idea of how much space you have left, but the limit of 5000 characters is substantially smaller than the DDO max of 8000 which close to all of us were used to since nearly all of us came from DDO in the first place.
Rather then raise the cap on how many characters a forum post can have (5000 I can work with, I dont post massive things THAT often), would it be possible to just have the little counter so that we can still figure out how close or far we are before hitting the cap limit on a post?
Created:
Posted in:
It would be cheap
Name one thing the US government runs that is done fairly cheaply where people are satisfied with how much is spent on the operation. The government cant even deliver mail without racking up billions in debt every year, its not going to be cheap to have an entire bureaucracy devoted to deciding where to send immigrants and keep up on the immigrants to make sure theyre still living there
The immigrant largely decides what state they settle in. Many immigrants won´t care what state they settle in.
Im gonna need you to clarify what your belief is here because those two sentences are fairly contradictory.
160 million people want to come to the US. Because of this, for every 2 native born Americans that exist in the country, there would be 1 immigrant.
im pretty sure that 160 million people want to win the lottery as well, that doesnt mean its actually going to happen.
This helps spread the effects of immigration more evenly across the country. (Later) The goal of this requirement is to maintain integration and unification so America isin´t divided on cultural grounds
It could also be abused to do the exact opposite of that and force immigrants to live in three or four states total. If Trump had the power to send all immigrants from Central America to California to put a massive financial strain on the state, and then tweet about how bad the state is run because of its liberal beliefs towards immigration, do you really think he would REFRAIN from doing that?
Even if there are good intentions behind the rule, it could 100% be used irresponsibly and corruptly
Where does the constitution say this (They cannot force a person to live in a particular state)
The 10th Amendment specifies that any powers not explicitly granted to the federal government by the Constitution is reserved for the States instead. Because its not stated that the federal government can mandate which states immigrants live in, only states could do that. However, no state has authority over another state, so they cant require that immigrants live in a specific state since states dont have authority over each other like that.
My main concern is with the Hispanics. If we allow them to settle wherever they want, most would settle in urban areas and in the South West. If they become too hispanophone, they might want to break away from the US on cultural grounds.
But the thing is that Hispanics who live in the US have adapted their cultural traditions into Americanized versions of those traditions over time, the same as Japanese Americans, Italian Americans, German Americans, so on and so on.
Best example: Cinco De Mayo isnt even celebrated as a major holiday in Mexico apart from the Mexican state of Pueblo. Mexico's independence day is September 16th which is their major holiday, but Cinco De Mayo can almost be missed depending on what state of Mexico you're in... Cinco de Mayo is what happens when a large enough cultural group of immigrants gain a sense of community here. They dont try to drag their traditions with them, they sort of blend native traditions with life in America to create something new.
Created:
Posted in:
If they are low skilled immigrants, they can take jobs that americans won´t apply for.
Alright well that solves about half the issue then with that one. The text doc word for word says "Doesnt take jobs from people already here" which was the big issue I had since there are many positions and jobs that are labor-intensive with pretty poor pay that many Americans themselves wouldnt take....
The other issues now are in regards to 'Must have a steady, consistent job'. The first issue is that because a lot of the jobs that Americans dont normally take also happen to be positions that have sporadic demand throughout the year. Farming seasons only last so long, construction jobs come in boom and bust cycles, etc. If those high intensity low wage positions are not considered 'steady and consistent', then the immigrant can be denied entry even though theyre willing to work an open job that Americans dont want to do but is a necessary job that needs to be done.
The other issue is that these kind of jobs often arent ones that immigrants have 'lined up' before entering the country. What usually happens is they immigrate and THEN look for what jobs are available for them to accept. Rule #2 implies that immigrants need a job before they can even step foot in the country, which just isnt realistic due to the nature of how immigrants get a job sometime after they enter the country and get a read on who or what is hiring
As long as there is enough openings, which there almost always is especially for high skilled jobs
But even if there aren't enough openings, what is the logic in not allowing immigrants with a solid skills-set from immigrating into the country? The reason why the US has achieved its status as the biggest economy in the world is because it held a monopoly on high-skilled talent following ww2 since everywhere else was either bombed to smithereens or an oppressive communist dictatorship..... Immigrants with high skills (college graduate as a measure) should be allowed into the country regardless if they have a job lined up or could apply for a job where there is already some competition. Their skills would make them the best candidate to be a benefit to the country you could ask for at that point
If they were from China for example, fleeing communism, that´s honorable and all, but if that's the case, why would they honor China?
Ask that question to any Cuban in Miami and you'll get the same answer I give right here: because a nation is more then just the regime currently running it..... Cuba used to be a capitalistic island paradise that was effectively a 51st US state before Castro came in and screwed up everything, causing a massive amount of emigration into the United States. Cubans who immigrated to the US to become American citizens though dont hate Cuba because the government forced them to flee or made their live unsustainable, they love Cuba and are proud they are cuban, they just hate Castro and the regime currently running it.
Allegiance to a country doesnt mean allegiance to a regime or a government. It involves culture, heritage, history, language, much more then just political aspects and the policy positions of those who happen to be running the country at any given moment. Your rule though implies that allegiance to a country primarily applies to the politics of the country and those who currently run it, but thats just not the case a vast majority of the time.
This rule (Be fluent in English) is merely a requirement for citizenship
Not according to the document its not.... The only time 'citizenship' is even mentioned in your document is the rule after that where you demand that immigrants pay $50 to get their citizenship card... The way its worded in the document, the rule makes it look like people would be denied the ability to immigrate into the country if they dont speak English fluently, not that they would be denied citizenship if they dont speak english fluently.
I don´t want to have to provide dozens of translations for voting ballots
Lol. How big of an issue is that exactly? As diverse as the country is, only Spanish and maybe a few asian dialects along the west coast are spoken with enough frequency to have those specific regions have ballots where the ballots have a little extra space at the bottom listing the same choices in other languages as they are in English. Voting booths also usually have a person or two to help with translation the ballot for those who request one so this is a non-issue completely.
The immigrant can select any method they want to learn English. They can learn it in a class. They can learn it due to exposure.
Before the document said that if they didn't speak English fluency they would be required to learn it, be required to take classes to learn it, and that they would have to pay for those classes on top of it.
You also dont even address the point that immigrants can get by in society without knowing English fluently due to immigrant communities and having a family member be able to help with translations as well, so the rule even updated is still a bad one.
The point of having the US pick which state the immigrants live in is to help keep the US integrated and to prevent separatist movements.
In what world do people flee oppression and corruption in their own country to immigrate to the United States only to then be a part of a separatist movement to have that part America secede and become owned by the foreign country they just fled from? Thats just irrationally nonsensical on top of not being Constitutionally viable.
Created:
Posted in:
5 - Buttigieg back on the outside looking in
I think last time I made an update on this it was after a poll showed Buttigieg and Kamala Harris polling at 8% in one poll... Well of the shitload of polls that have come out recently, only one of them has Buttigieg polling as high as 6%, the rest having him at 5% or lower. In the Emerson poll, Buttigieg only gets 3% of the vote behind Yang who hit 4%, and tied with Booker, Tulsi, and Beto in a 4 way tie for 5th place.
If Buttigieg isnt just having a rough week and is falling back into the lower tier of candidates, then it means that Biden has effectively locked down the moderate/centrist bloc of Dem voters.
6 - Harris needs to pick a side, FAST
This question is the one I admittedly spent the most time researching for this post. Biden is clearly more appealing to the moderate/centrist wing of the Democratic Party, Warren and Sanders appeal more to liberal wing of the Dem Party. The question that isnt easily answerable though is where all does Kamala Harris fit in? Short of analyzing her policy stances and trying to keep a running total based on personal opinion, the best way to try to find out is to see her approval among liberal and moderate voters
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/b17i8aeg5p/econTabReport.pdf = Pg 135 for this week
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/u4gcv1suy6/econTabReport.pdf = Pg 43 for last week
Liberal Approve = 61% last week to 67% this week
Liberal Disapprove = 24% last week to 20% this week
Moderate Approve = 37% last week to 35% this week
Moderate Disapprove = 34% last week to 35% this week
For comparison:
Biden Average = 64% approval from liberals, 52% approval from moderates
Sanders Average = 75% approval from liberals, 45% approval from moderates
Warren Average = 78% approval from liberals, 39% approval from moderates
When analyzing the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, Harris is between Biden to the Center, and Warren + Sanders to the Left. She is definitely closer towards Biden then she is compared to Sanders/Warren when it comes to who liberals prefer.... When it comes to moderate voters though she is seen more unfavorable in comparison to ALL of the top tier candidates, all of whom poll better among moderate voters than Harris currently does.
In order to stay relevant in the campaign, Harris is going to have to focus on appealing to one of these main factions. She faces a very uphill battle trying to convince liberal voters away from Sanders or Warren (shes behind them by about 10% in that category), but it will also be difficult for her to appeal more towards moderate voters since in that category shes behind Biden by 15%.
Its the same issue that Gingrich faced in the 2012 GOP primary. More moderate voters drifted towards Romney, while more conservative voters supported Santorum, and Gingrich was caught between the two for too long before having to drop out after winning I think only 3 states or so.
Whoever Harris tries to cater her campaign towards, she is going to have to make up her mind quick and start adjusting, because every day more and more voters make up their minds about who they will almost certainly support, otherwise the fate of her campaign will be decided before a single state even has an actual primary
Created:
Posted in:
Ima just do a regular update because I swear I was about 80% through a heavy analysis of two polls that showed Biden tied with Warren and Sanders, took a two day break, and when I checked again there were SIX MORE POLLS uploaded in that time and also a candidate dropped out of the race
So lets get into it
So lets get into it
1 - Gillibrand is out
After getting axed from the next debate for failing to do well enough in the polls to qualify (10 others have qualified, the main threshold to qualify being getting at least 2% support in polls a couple times), Gillibrand decided to end her candidacy for president. She is still early on in her term as a senator for New York (She was re-elected in 2018 just a year ago) so she had no pressure in terms of future career in politics to drop out, unlike Inslee who is up for re-election as governor of Washington.
Gillibrand has said she will instead use what resources she has left to try to help more women get elected to Congress, and has declined to endorse anyone.
2 - Sanders' support is volatile as shit
Of the 10 polls that have come out after the 18th, four of them have had Sanders polling at 20%, four more have him down near 15%, and one has him almost as high as 25%. No other candidate in the race, by far, has shown this kind of randomness in support in polls, and my best guess for why this is for Sanders is because his support is built heavily around the youth vote, the most sporadic and erratic voter base in the population when it comes to actual turnout....
Sanders is also seeing some of his support being poached by Warren and Biden.
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/b17i8aeg5p/econTabReport.pdf = Pg 163 for this week
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/u4gcv1suy6/econTabReport.pdf = Pg 75 for last week
When analyzing candidates people would consider supporting, Biden went up from 45% to 47%, while Warren, who actually leads in this category, went from 50% to 53% as well. This could be a sign that people are just more open to them then before as possible nominees if just looking at those numbers, but Sanders shows him LOSING consideration with voters. The percentage of people who would vote for him dropped from 44% to 41%.
While that doesnt sound like much, losing 3% of your support when the two other main candidates both gain 3% opens up a sizable gap between Sanders and Warren + Biden
No other candidate had as big of a swing in either direction compared to Sanders in terms of negativity, or Biden + Warren in terms of positivity. With no other candidate really getting voters attention outside of the big 3*, Warren and Biden gaining attention from voters while Sanders loses attention indicates that bit by bit, he may be losing his supporters to the other two campaigns.
(* There was actually a candidate who went from 7% to 11% in consideration, but it was Gillibrand who just dropped out)
3 - Biden bounces back slightly
The poll I trust the most, Economist/YouGov, for the past several weeks showed Biden slowly hemorrhaging voters over time. From 8/3 up to 8/17, Biden slowly and steadily lost support based on the very same polls taken at regular intervals. Its not just one particular segment of his base that just dropped through the floor though, his numbers shrank across the board whether it be older voters, black voters, or female voters.
This week though, Biden looks like he may have recovered some ground. His favorability is up among white voters (35% up to 38%), Male voters (39% to 43%), and his biggest gain was among black voters (62% increased to 68%)
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/b17i8aeg5p/econTabReport.pdf = Page 117 this week
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/u4gcv1suy6/econTabReport.pdf = Page 25 for last week
4 - Warren has held steady at about 19% for an entire month straight
In the month of August, four polls prior to this week had her at 20% or higher, while 9 polls had her closer to 15%, with two polls having her almost in single digits at 10%.... Based on the ultra-analytical Economist/YouGov polls that I favor though, Warren has been holding on around the 18% to 20% since late July and hasnt budged..... In the short term this means that her base is very hard to poach by other candidates such as Sanders or Harris, and that in the long run her campaign is built to last barring some sort of crazy meltdown or tremendous gaffe.
However, this fact can be lost when looking at other polls that have her much higher or (usually) much lower then that. If these other polls push the idea that Warren is doing worse then she actually is, thats a massive fuckin problem for her campaign. One look at certain polls could convince people that Sanders is still the candidate to represent the far-left faction of the Democratic base against the more Centrist/moderate Biden, and could also convince people against Biden at all costs that Sanders is their best bet to denying him the nomination.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
He may have just shit the bed actually, there are two polls that came out recently showing him tied with Warren and Sanders but im still going through the data and all cause im tryna figure out shit
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
There is so much of your response that is so blatantly incorrect that there is literally no point in continuing this conversation with you since you arent even close to having a feasible enough understanding of reality enough to discuss it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
lol
Its not the fault of immigrants that the US government has forgotten how to balance a checkbook. If your fear is defaulting or triggering hyper inflation, clamping down on immigration isnt going to do a damn thing about it. Cut down on military spending, raise the age to collect social security, dont give a giant fuckin tax break to the ultra wealthy for no damn reason.... Immigrants have about as much to do with the national debt being as high as it is than the islands nation of the Maldives, they shouldnt be the ones punished because Senators and presidents dont know what the hell theyre doing anymroe.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Even then though there is still an American Principle to let in immigrants no matter how likely their chances are at being pretty low income for a majority of their lives, just so that their kids and future generations can have a better shot at making it big. Its not just the highly skilled or the highly fluent or the highly wealthy that should be allowed in, it should be open to those who are willing to work hard and do what it takes. That kind of thing isnt going to show up on any sort of test though, so you just have to let those people prove themselves and have faith in them, but if things really go to shit then deport them.
My main focuses regarding immigration is that 1) They shouldnt have a problematic criminal record, i think we can all agree on that, and 2) Also shouldnt just be a lone young male seeking immigration, because historically speaking, its the lone males who on their own are the most prone to falling into crime or even becoming an extremist of some sort. People who wish to immigrate with families to support on the other hand are going to prioritize their families over themselves almost every single time, and can be trusted to keep their shit together as much as possible otherwise the entire family might get fucked because of it.....
Created:
Posted in:
It took me all of half a minute to see that this plan is utterly asinine.... Numbers 2, 4, 5 and 7 in particular made me lose brain cells as I read them.
For number 2, a vast majority of immigrants are not going to have a job lined up for them when they come here, as has been the case with just about every group of immigrants in US history. What has been the case throughout history is that immigrants have left their original countries due to warfare, bad economy, corrupt government, or some other calamity that has forced them to decide that its literally better for them to roll the dice and start a life in a different country completely from scratch rather then try to make things work out where they currently are. Immigrants come here and are willing to accept any job that will have them, which 95% of the time are low paying jobs that are very labor intensive that most Americans already dont want to do themselves.... The additional demand that it cant be a job that would be 'taken from someone already here' adds to the stupidity of the whole plan since 'a job that could be taken from an American' can be defined to mean pretty much any job you want it to, for the 5% of high paying jobs that are staffed by high-skilled immigrants who could be doctors in their own countries but want to be doctors here in America instead, that rule completely shuts them out from entering the country because the higher-skill jobs are ones that could very conceivably go to Americans.... So rule number 2 bars poor immigrants because they wont have a job lined up for them, and also bars wealthier and higher skilled immigrants by barring them from practicing their profession in the US just because there are people who also want to be doctors.
For number 4, Pledging allegiance and agreeing to be drafted in the army is fine, but requiring that they renounce allegiance to their country of origin is straight stupid. Immigrants are allowed to have pride for their country of origin and be proud of their cultural heritage while also live in the US. Having pride for your original country or country of your ancestors does not mean you cant also have pride in the United States, yet this rule treats that as a falsehood. hell Americans in this country have PARADES to celebrate their heritage from foreign countries, and the biggest one of them all is probably the one for Irish people in New York held every year.... In addition to being plain stupid, there's also no way to enforce this rule either as anyone can simply say that they will not be loyal to their previous country and then just do so anyways.
For number 5 there are pockets throughout America where you can get by and be a good citizen while not having the best English. New York, Seattle, LA, San Diego, Miami, El Paso, Chicago, New Jersey... There's even a big Somali community in North Dakota of all places due to a refugee resettlement program from the 90's. A lot of immigrant couples or immigrant families make it work by having one of the parents or eldest children be the most proficient in speaking English and then help the rest of the family keep up when they hit a speed bump..... From the get go, its possible to be able to live in America and be a good citizen while not being completely fluent in English, and this isnt even getting into the fact that 1) Coursework arguably isn't the best way to teach immigrants English, and 2) requiring that they pay for it is just unnecessarily cruel
Lastly with number 7.... What the fuck is even the point with number 7? Not only would it be needlessly bureaucratic to have the government spend a ton of tax dollars on deciding which state each and every immigrant should settle in, but Im pretty sure it's not even Constitutional for the government to say which state you have to live in. If a Japanese immigrant wants to live in Wisconsin because they always dreamed of having a dairy farm and because they like cold winters, is the government going to reject that request and force them settle in Washington with many other Japanese Americans?.... This power could also be easily exploited by a corrupt administration to also have immigrants only live in a handful of states just for political purposes. Of all the rules in the list you give, this one far and away makes the least amount of sense.
Created:
Posted in:
I look for debates to vote on on a regular basis but not many of them are interesting are even worth reading in the first place. A quick glance at the ones in the voting section right now shows the usual batch of religious debates, music battles, and borderline spam
Created:
Posted in:
Nah dont do it in person, too many unforseen scenarios could play out due to the unstable nature of him. Doing it via a text is way better because
1 - You can keep it nice and succinct that you believe he can go fuck himself from now on
2 - You can block his number immediately after sending the text as well as all other forms of communication you have with him (bully types not being able to have the last word, or any word for that matter, is as close to delivering an ass whipping as you can get)
3 - You can run your text by a friend so that they can point out anything that might be wrong with it, whereas in person you could make a mistake
4 - Theres nothing better in the world than telling someone off, tossing your phone behind you onto the couch or whatever, and watching Netflix for 3 hours not caring how much hes complaining right now
He put you through this much shit, why take the high road out of it? Burn some bridges, have some fun, give him a taste of his own medicine in the way that only you can do it.
1 - You can keep it nice and succinct that you believe he can go fuck himself from now on
2 - You can block his number immediately after sending the text as well as all other forms of communication you have with him (bully types not being able to have the last word, or any word for that matter, is as close to delivering an ass whipping as you can get)
3 - You can run your text by a friend so that they can point out anything that might be wrong with it, whereas in person you could make a mistake
4 - Theres nothing better in the world than telling someone off, tossing your phone behind you onto the couch or whatever, and watching Netflix for 3 hours not caring how much hes complaining right now
He put you through this much shit, why take the high road out of it? Burn some bridges, have some fun, give him a taste of his own medicine in the way that only you can do it.
Created: