header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: OT-Politics Thread: please TRY to keep it civil, you damned dirty apes

 (Read 3068530 times)

Honestbuckeye

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 6934
  • Liked:
Push back against what, exactly?
Anything, everything and especially common sense.  
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
-Mark Twain

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 31301
  • Liked:
Anything, everything and especially common sense. 
I just saw that some clown introduced articles of impeachment. For what?

Donald Trump Impeachment Moves Forward in Congress
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

Honestbuckeye

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 6934
  • Liked:
I just saw that some clown introduced articles of impeachment. For what?

Donald Trump Impeachment Moves Forward in Congress
It is all some of them know.   No solutions to real challenges- of any kind.   Just resist. 
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
-Mark Twain

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 31301
  • Liked:
I hope the Speaker calls it for a vote. Get them all on record. 2026 is coming.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

utee94

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 22337
  • Liked:
Not pushing back against Trump enough?  That's practically the only thing they've been doing.

What he should be thinking is, not achieving their own platform agenda and goals effectively.  And that should lead to some introspection as to why exactly that is...


FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 45760
  • Liked:
CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa (AP) — Pete Buttigieg returned to Iowa on Tuesday with some subtle and not-so-subtle messages about what’s changed since he ran in the state’s 2020 Democratic presidential caucuses.

Above all, his speech sounded like he was preparing for a second White House bid. Buttigieg gave a strident critique of President Donald Trump’s administration while demanding Democrats make their agenda clear and reach out to people who disagree with them.

The combination rally and policy chat toggled between questions about the future of the Democratic Party, both nationally and in Iowa, after three consecutive elections where Donald Trump has carried the once-competitive swing state.

As much as an indictment of the first months of the second Trump administration, Buttigieg argued Democrats’ reemergence as a leading national party must come with a concise telling of what they support.

“There’s this theory that we should just hang back and let them screw up. I disagree,” he said. Buttigieg acknowledged Democrats need to revisit some of their policy principles without naming any.

But he pivoted quickly to note, “We need to be in touch with our first principles, what we would be doing if we were in charge.” Among them, he argued, was to restore a federal right for a woman to receive an abortion, he said, prompting a 30-second standing ovation.
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

Honestbuckeye

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 6934
  • Liked:
Not pushing back against Trump enough?  That's practically the only thing they've been doing.

What he should be thinking is, not achieving their own platform agenda and goals effectively.  And that should lead to some introspection as to why exactly that is...


Amen.  I mean, if you ask me what I think their platform is the only thing I can come up with is:
not a secure boarder
stand up for violent criminal illegals
fight to keep biological males in women’s sports. 
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
-Mark Twain

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 83300
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
I just saw that some clown introduced articles of impeachment. For what?

Donald Trump Impeachment Moves Forward in Congress
I disagree that it really is "moving forward".  I saw three cosigners had dropped out supporting it, last I saw it was one member.

What Democrats want to do of course is reclaim the majority so they can hold endless hearings, much as Republicans did with Biden.  This feeds the base without actually impeaching (though they could try that again also).

Democrats of course have a very strident but fairly small segment that si SCREAMING for them to DO SOMETHING!!!!  So, they try and manuever a something by for example showing up at some ICE facility with cameras and starting a shoving gig.

It's nearly all for show, on both sides.

utee94

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 22337
  • Liked:
CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa (AP) — Pete Buttigieg returned to Iowa on Tuesday with some subtle and not-so-subtle messages about what’s changed since he ran in the state’s 2020 Democratic presidential caucuses.

Above all, his speech sounded like he was preparing for a second White House bid. Buttigieg gave a strident critique of President Donald Trump’s administration while demanding Democrats make their agenda clear and reach out to people who disagree with them.

The combination rally and policy chat toggled between questions about the future of the Democratic Party, both nationally and in Iowa, after three consecutive elections where Donald Trump has carried the once-competitive swing state.

As much as an indictment of the first months of the second Trump administration, Buttigieg argued Democrats’ reemergence as a leading national party must come with a concise telling of what they support.

“There’s this theory that we should just hang back and let them screw up. I disagree,” he said. Buttigieg acknowledged Democrats need to revisit some of their policy principles without naming any.

But he pivoted quickly to note, “We need to be in touch with our first principles, what we would be doing if we were in charge.” Among them, he argued, was to restore a federal right for a woman to receive an abortion, he said, prompting a 30-second standing ovation.


Agree with the first point highlighted in red, this is essential to any chance of resurgence.  And it should be painfully obvious to them, and yet it feels like a revelation every time someone mentions it, but then it gets quickly ignored and buried once again, as they lean back into being the "anti-Trump" party.


Amen.  I mean, if you ask me what I think their platform is the only thing I can come up with is:
not a secure boarder
stand up for violent criminal illegals
fight to keep biological males in women’s sports.
Well, as the article FF quoted mentions, their agenda definitely includes pushing back for national laws on abortion.  And even though I'm inclined to believe that this power should reside with the states, it's at least a position that's more than simply "anti-Trump."  So from their perspective, I'd say that's a start.

But as the dude in FF's article states, they need to do more of this.  They need to define a concise platform of what they're actually FOR, rather than what they're against.  I agree with much of what the Dems have historically championed-- womens' rights, the rights of legal minorities, and other similar positions.  But these are no longer the positions that are being voiced nationally, they have become minority positions or even opposition positions within their own party.



Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 83300
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Democrats "back in the day" were for things like Labor and the "working man", and of course had a very strong anti civil rights component (Dixiecrats).  They also had figures like Sam Nunn who I think were respected by both sides.  I believe if they dropped back to focusing on "labor" they'd be better off, politically, though it would largely be, I suspect, for show.  

Trump has basically coopted that portion of the electorate who simply don't like all this focus on "woke ideas" (I dislike that term, but whatever).  Pushing "DEI" hard is a loser, in my view.  If you ask "man on the street" what Democrats are FOR, you probably get a lot of comment about DEI kind of stuff.

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 31301
  • Liked:
Agree with the first point highlighted in red, this is essential to any chance of resurgence.  And it should be painfully obvious to them, and yet it feels like a revelation every time someone mentions it, but then it gets quickly ignored and buried once again, as they lean back into being the "anti-Trump" party.

Well, as the article FF quoted mentions, their agenda definitely includes pushing back for national laws on abortion.  And even though I'm inclined to believe that this power should reside with the states, it's at least a position that's more than simply "anti-Trump."  So from their perspective, I'd say that's a start.

But as the dude in FF's article states, they need to do more of this.  They need to define a concise platform of what they're actually FOR, rather than what they're against.  I agree with much of what the Dems have historically championed-- womens' rights, the rights of legal minorities, and other similar positions.  But these are no longer the positions that are being voiced nationally, they have become minority positions or even opposition positions within their own party.



They are anti-women's rights and anti-legal minority.

They are FOR trans rights and illegals.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 83300
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Here's a question I ponder at times.  I bet we all have known people we respect for their intelligence who have quite different political views, smart folks, smarter than me, and they believe various things are good that I view as not very good at all.

We both can explain our POVs (usually) without shouting or denigrating (usually, it of course can drop to that).  Those on one side like to claim those on the other are "dumb", and there is some educational bias in US politics.  But, I think mainly, both "sides" have no monopoly on smarts.  

I don't feel I have "a side" across the board, I try to listen to folks who have opinions I don't share if they can present them coherently (which I admit is a bit rare).  

At times in some social setting a stranger will ask me if I'm a liberal or conservative, and in the first place I find that inappropriate if you don't much know me, but the best response I've found is "I'm an extreme moderate.".  That gets a laugh and they usually leave me alone afterwards.  I'm actually not moderate on various things, but I can lean "L" or "R" depending.

My main issue is we can see problems and few can present practicable solutions to them, which is why they are problems.

bayareabadger

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 9387
  • Liked:
Push back against what, exactly?
Throwing people out of the country for mundane political speech, using the office for egregious personal enrichment, letting dinguses cut services for entertainment value? 

(to be clear, I’m phrasing all that in freak out language some folks on here are fond of. In truth, once you get as deep into politics as a lot of folks here, it’s push back and push back forevermore)

MikeDeTiger

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 4505
  • Liked:
But as the dude in FF's article states, they need to do more of this.  They need to define a concise platform of what they're actually FOR, rather than what they're against.  I agree with much of what the Dems have historically championed-- womens' rights, the rights of legal minorities, and other similar positions.  But these are no longer the positions that are being voiced nationally, they have become minority positions or even opposition positions within their own party.

Leading up to the 2020 election, for the first time I read each Party's official platform document thingy.  Actually, I believe the Republican platform was just a quick document that ratified and endorsed the 2016 platform, so I guess what I really read was the 2016 one.  One was about 40 pages, the other nearly 80, iirc, but I don't remember which was which.  The Republican platform covered a wide range of things, a lot of which I agreed with, and noted with dissatisfaction that the politicians actually do very little to achieve, imo.  Seemingly half of the Democratic platform was an invective against Trump, and the other half included ideals/policy stance.  Overall, it seemed those official documents were a reasonable outline of what the parties claim to be about.  Maybe it's just a lot harder to articulate what they need to in Instagrammable sound-bytes.  

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.