ESF I think there is a difference between folks being absent in a thread because say work, and the defeaning silence on certain topics like inter-sectional feminism. Those are noticed because you see the view count but no one has anything to say.
I haven't posted as much because I don't have any day down time anymore. I may pop in at lunch, but thanks to new duties, I can't post because time doesn't allow for it.
But, I'm on vacation for two weeks so all manner of shenanigans now have my full attention.
I was too late to the meat of this post to participate actively when trees > people (?!?!?!?!) was being discussed, but I'm so glad I read to the end if for no other reason than to see the phrase "all manner of shenanigans" so that I can embrace it and incorporate it into my daily speech patterns. Because let me tell you all, there is ALL MANNER OF SHENANIGANS going down at my office lately (client side, my colleagues are cool).
I don't like to be all "I was here" in those kinds of threads because it feels awkward, so I've been trying to ask questions instead. It's two-fold because (1) it shows I read it - yay! and (2) it furthers the discussion.
I don't like to be all "I was here" in those kinds of threads because it feels awkward, so I've been trying to ask questions instead. It's two-fold because (1) it shows I read it - yay! and (2) it furthers the discussion.
Actually, I like this approach. You don't learn unless you ask questions and it does show engagement.
Like ESF asked about candidates supporting Trump - does it mean they are also racist? That dives into other aspects and allows more discussion on why people think it's problematic.
I don't like to be all "I was here" in those kinds of threads because it feels awkward, so I've been trying to ask questions instead. It's two-fold because (1) it shows I read it - yay! and (2) it furthers the discussion.
That's a great approach, and I think I will adopt it as well.
So I do have one for everyone. Is Marco Rubio the most viable Republican candidate? I couldn't find his stance on Black Lives Matter or Women's Rights, so I assume in reality they are poor even if perhaps he's made a good speech here and there.
I did see some stuff about "traditional marriage to help get people out of poverty" and other things that sound like code for cis hetero marriage.
Also, I get that he is Cuban, but why on earth does someone in modern times care about having a stance on Cuba? That seems very niche. It's like some sort of nod to a world that no longer exists, perhaps to court the olds?
Re: Cuba. For one, the Cuban-American population is significant, especially in Florida (swing state). People still care about relations with Cuba. However, there is evidence that younger Cuban-Americans don't care as much or prefer to have better relations with Cuba. So the tide is turning and I think Rubio is courting the older and/or more conservative Cuban-Americans (who are more likely to vote). Plus, Rubio is relatively young but still over 40 so I would assume Cuban-Americans around his age can go either way on Cuba. As for non-Cuban-Americans, I think I recall the majority thinking that it's time to have relations with Cuba, for various reasons.
I don't like to be all "I was here" in those kinds of threads because it feels awkward, so I've been trying to ask questions instead. It's two-fold because (1) it shows I read it - yay! and (2) it furthers the discussion.
That's a great approach, and I think I will adopt it as well.
So I do have one for everyone. Is Marco Rubio the most viable Republican candidate? I couldn't find his stance on Black Lives Matter or Women's Rights, so I assume in reality they are poor even if perhaps he's made a good speech here and there.
I did see some stuff about "traditional marriage to help get people out of poverty" and other things that sound like code for cis hetero marriage.
Also, I get that he is Cuban, but why on earth does someone in modern times care about having a stance on Cuba? That seems very niche. It's like some sort of nod to a world that no longer exists, perhaps to court the olds?
For similar reasons that people care about Israel. It's obviously not an exact comparison, but there are people for whom fleeing Cuba as political refugees is still fresh in their mind. A former boss of mine (not the one who was schtupping his secretary) fled Cuba with her family when she was a child. I don't know what her stance on U.S.-Cuba relations are. I know what mine are from a detached and unemotional position. Hers very may well be different from mine, and her children may be influenced by hearing stories of Mom fleeing Cuba as a little girl.
Bottom line is that it may feel like ancient history to those of us who are under 40 and have no personal connection to Cuba, but it is not ancient history for many, many people. I favor opening relations with Cuba, but I think the way to get those who oppose doing so on board is to show the ways in which opening relations will help Cubans living there, not just to act like it doesn't matter anymore. That just tells people their opinions and feelings don't matter, which is a great way to alienate people.
I don't like to be all "I was here" in those kinds of threads because it feels awkward, so I've been trying to ask questions instead. It's two-fold because (1) it shows I read it - yay! and (2) it furthers the discussion.
That's a great approach, and I think I will adopt it as well.
So I do have one for everyone. Is Marco Rubio the most viable Republican candidate? I couldn't find his stance on Black Lives Matter or Women's Rights, so I assume in reality they are poor even if perhaps he's made a good speech here and there.
I did see some stuff about "traditional marriage to help get people out of poverty" and other things that sound like code for cis hetero marriage.
Also, I get that he is Cuban, but why on earth does someone in modern times care about having a stance on Cuba? That seems very niche. It's like some sort of nod to a world that no longer exists, perhaps to court the olds?
Here are my thoughts on Rubio's "moderate" positions.
There's this thing called the "Overton Window." In my opinion, the idea that we think Rubio is a moderate on certain social issues is a textbook example of that political phenomena. In other words, on some things, he seems moderate because he is not as far right as others in the Republican field. But I don't think that means he's actually a moderate, it just means that some things, like abortion rights, have shifted so far to the right that his ideas seem moderate in comparison.
If you google Marco Rubio Black Lives Matter, you will see that he had some normal things to say. He also said he doesn't think the feds should do anything, but he also didn't deny that racism exists and that people get stopped by the police because of their skin color, so he gets credit for living in reality. I don't think acknowledging reality instead of denying racism happens, while refusing to do anything about it makes him a "moderate" but it does put him at the top of the heap, at least. I don't think he agrees with Rand Paul on sentencing and criminal justice reform, but I could be wrong on that.
He likes birthright citizenship and generally talks about immigrants in nice, moderate language. His 2013 bi-partisan immigration bill is probably fairly characterized as moderate, but I don't really know all the specifics.
On women's rights, no, he's not a moderate. He would like to ban abortion even in the case of rape and incest, and supported Florida's Scarlet Letter law. He is seen as a moderate because he says he will back abortion bans with rape and incest exceptions just so they can get passed and some abortions are stopped, which people have construed as supporting rape and incest exceptions.
On gay rights, maybe the moderate label is appropriate. He will not push for a constitutional amendment, because he thinks that is an admission that the constitution as written actually means what Kennedy says it means. He would rather appoint judges to reverse that decision. He does not support gay marriage and supports various "religious freedom" bills for business owners. The gay rights debate has shifted so fast and so quickly that perhaps these are positions that one could legitimately call moderate.
Re: Rubio, is he really moderate? I don't mean that as a "gotcha" question. I keep seeing people say "I hope Rubio is the candidate" as opposed to cruz, Carson, Trump, et al. My dad is a pretty staunch democrat but has said he would vote for Rubio over Sanders.
are his politics and positions legitimately more moderate and less of the far-right/tea party variety?
He is more moderate than a lot of Republicans (COUGH TED CRUZ COUGH) on immigration, but from what I have learned about him, no, he's not really moderate on much else. Honestly, with Trump and Carson and Cruz, this field has been SO OUT THERE that Rubio seems moderate because he is very smart, speaks very coherently on the issues (COUGH TRUMP AND CARSON COUGH) without seeming creepy (COUGH CRUZ COUGH). Watching him debate, he gets into a decent number of specifics, so you find yourself saying, "Yeah, this guy really knows his stuff." And part of it is the intangibles - Cruz and Trump just come across as SO BLUSTERY, Kasich waves his hands wildly, Huckabee is a total nutter. Even comparing him to Bernie - Bernie yells, and Rubio's calmer demeanor is closer to Hillary's.
Overall, he projects an image that is much more moderate than his actual positions.
Post by tacosforlife on Dec 23, 2015 11:31:02 GMT -5
Oh, Rubio also seems more moderate than a few of the candidates on foreign policy in that he seems to understand foreign policy. Sadly, understanding of - not experience with - foreign policy is a serious concern with a fair number of candidates this year.
Marco Rubio, who wanted to shut the government down over Planned Parenthood funding, said that Planned Parenthood “created an incentive for people to be pushed into abortions so that those tissues can be harvested and sold for a profit."
"I think Tupac was more someone who was trying to inform us about what was going on, and he did it through entertainment," Rubio explained to TMZ while discussing his predilection for West coast rappers of the 90s over the prominent rappers of today. Rubio says that he admires these rappers because he viewed them as "reporters" of their lives in LA.
"There is an emerging consensus that the time for criminal justice reform has come. A spirited conversation about how to go about that reform has begun. Unfortunately, too often that conversation starts and ends with drug policy. That is an important conversation to have. But when we consider changing the sentences we impose for drug laws, we must be mindful of the great successes we have had in restoring law and order to America’s cities since the 1980s drug epidemic destroyed lives, families, and entire neighborhoods. I personally believe that legalizing drugs would be a great mistake and that any reductions in sentences for drug crimes should be made with great care."
He is the only, correct me if I'm wrong, GOP candidate to address BLM with sincerity and to say it needs to be addressed and is an issue. I haven't watched his August interview referenced often, but I will try to this weekend.
Peter Beinart (journalist from the Atlantic) tweeted this:
if @marcorubio talks this way consistently, he'll win enough Latinos + African Americans to take the WH
Post by 2curlydogs on Dec 23, 2015 12:08:59 GMT -5
Ok. I've waded thru all 14 pages and I'm not even going to touch most of it. Except to say I don't remember if I participated in the Intersectional Feminism thread (I am on the board 90% of the time from work only, so...), but I did read the whole thing. I think now, though, I'll try and take @josieposie's approach by asking questions.
But can we go back to Paul Ryan facing a primary challenge? From Google, I'm only seeing this in tea party sources and there's a Facebook page set up. Is this a legit thing or is it just the Tea Partiers freaking out over the Omnibus bill?
Given the demographic of the area, I wonder at the viability of an attack from the Right.
All I can say is that I'm on vacation with the cutest babies on the planet. I can only check in in the mornings and evenings. And other than some emphatic thumbs ups to some things happening in here I can't really participate in the heavy stuff this week and I can only fade in an out. Plus I am going to be facing my three crazy uncles (a llibertarian sexist, a Bernie bro, and a Trumpster in disguise) all this week so I'm reserving my strength.
I am incrediably disappointed however that the sexy men for Bernie did not take off.
All I can say is that I'm on vacation with the cutest babies on the planet. I can only check in in the mornings and evenings. And other than some emphatic thumbs ups to some things happening in here I can't really participate in the heavy stuff this week and I can only fade in an out. Plus I am going to be facing my three crazy uncles (a llibertarian sexist, a Bernie bro, and a Trumpster in disguise) all this week so I'm reserving my strength.
I am incrediably disappointed however that the sexy men for Bernie did not take off.
It's because they're all naked for this guy...
Which is sort of like looking at (the past naked) girls in playboy with the image of Hugh standing off camera. Buzz kill.
My husband and I talk about intersectional feminism all the time now, after reading that thread. I don't think I posted in it but I did learn a lot.
I don't get how anyone could even consider voting for Trump, period. I don't understand how anyone would want that man and his beliefs to be what the US stands for. Let alone within the country, but to the outside world? That's what you want to be known for? He's just so...crass. He lacks all the skills I actually attribute to the leader of a major world player. Can you imagine him at a G8 summit?
I think the fact that anyone is actually willing to vote for him, period, speaks to the state of racism in the US. Right now his guns are aimed at Muslims but racism only sees one colour, and it's white...eventually he will set his sights elsewhere and no POC will be safe.
My husband and I talk about intersectional feminism all the time now, after reading that thread. I don't think I posted in it but I did learn a lot.
I don't get how anyone could even consider voting for Trump, period. I don't understand how anyone would want that man and his beliefs to be what the US stands for. Let alone within the country, but to the outside world? That's what you want to be known for? He's just so...crass. He lacks all the skills I actually attribute to the leader of a major world player. Can you imagine him at a G8 summit?
I think the fact that anyone is actually willing to vote for him, period, speaks to the state of racism in the US. Right now his guns are aimed at Muslims but racism only sees one colour, and it's white...eventually he will set his sights elsewhere and no POC will be safe.
I find it telling that we've had at least two three posters on this board in the last 24 hours give declarations that they might vote for a racist candidate. Even with walkbacks, that is evidence right there (unscientific though it might be) that racism is still not a priority for voters - even after the strides which seemed to have been made with discussion threads we've had. Which boggles my mind. I'm in the mentality that I'd rather burn the whole thing down if we have to persist in a society where it's a-OK to see fellow human beings as substandard.
Let's be honest, it's easy for a white person to vote for a racist like Trump. None of my rights would be stripped (at least not because of race...my sex is another thing).
Post by jeaniebueller on Dec 23, 2015 13:35:54 GMT -5
I heard on a show this morning that the Clinton people are somewhat panicked about the potential of HRC having to debate with Trump because of his wild card and ridiculous comments. Not because she is not a skilled debater, but because once she mentions the war on women or women's issues, Trump may fire back with the sexual harassment suit against Bill Clinton, the Monica Lewinsky scandal and other issues that other candidates previously have stayed away from. You just don't know what Trump will say, basically.
I heard on a show this morning that the Clinton people are somewhat panicked about the potential of HRC having to debate with Trump because of his wild card and ridiculous comments. Not because she is not a skilled debater, but because once she mentions the war on women or women's issues, Trump may fire back with the sexual harassment suit against Bill Clinton, the Monica Lewinsky scandal and other issues that other candidates previously have stayed away from. You just don't know what Trump will say, basically.
I had not thought of this. Holy shit. He'd totally go off on insane non sequiturs. Yikes.
I heard on a show this morning that the Clinton people are somewhat panicked about the potential of HRC having to debate with Trump because of his wild card and ridiculous comments. Not because she is not a skilled debater, but because once she mentions the war on women or women's issues, Trump may fire back with the sexual harassment suit against Bill Clinton, the Monica Lewinsky scandal and other issues that other candidates previously have stayed away from. You just don't know what Trump will say, basically.
I had not thought of this. Holy shit. He'd totally go off on insane non sequiturs. Yikes.
I like to believe she could shut this shit down in a second.
Because it's not like HE is exactly the paragon of marital bliss. Nor is he free from sexual harassment/assault issues.
ETA: And, I mean, it's one thing to try and tar Hillary by proxy. It's another thing to be accused of sexual harassment and assault yourself. Like The Donald.
I had not thought of this. Holy shit. He'd totally go off on insane non sequiturs. Yikes.
I like to believe she could shut this shit down in a second.
Because it's not like HE is exactly the paragon of marital bliss. Nor is he free from sexual harassment/assault issues.
ETA: And, I mean, it's one thing to try and tar Hillary by proxy. It's another thing to be accused of sexual harassment and assault yourself. Like The Donald.
I hope that is the case but have also heard that when these issues have recently come up at different events, she has looked like a deer in the headlights.
And you make a good point about the Donald, but the guy also clearly has no shame.
I heard on a show this morning that the Clinton people are somewhat panicked about the potential of HRC having to debate with Trump because of his wild card and ridiculous comments. Not because she is not a skilled debater, but because once she mentions the war on women or women's issues, Trump may fire back with the sexual harassment suit against Bill Clinton, the Monica Lewinsky scandal and other issues that other candidates previously have stayed away from. You just don't know what Trump will say, basically.
I had not thought of this. Holy shit. He'd totally go off on insane non sequiturs. Yikes.
Which will play well to those who already love him. But I'm still clinging to hope that these shenanigans won't serve him well among the general electorate.
Of course, I never believed he'd make it this far, so WTF do I know?
I actually think that is why so many career politicians are floundering against him. He just hurls insults and lies through his teeth when confronted. How do you debate that?
It's one thing to prepare for a debate and debate but that's not what he does. It's bananas.
He's a Republican who hates the current GOP. Most of his posts from the last year have been about what a shit show the party is, but he's got a lot of posts that are more generally about the issues, especially if you poke around through the archives. He's got some great posts about the issues that give me hope. This is a good intro to him. goplifer.com/2014/11/21/four-true-facts/
His posts about racial issues are usually very good, and he's an equal opportunist in terms of how he takes both parties to task for their contributions to structural and institutional racism. He needs an editor because sometimes his writing is not so good, but the main takeaways are usually very sharp. Also, the comments section is usually great. I have seen some excellent points made there.
I actually think that is why so many career politicians are floundering against him. He just hurls insults and lies through his teeth when confronted. How do you debate that?
It's one thing to prepare for a debate and debate but that's not what he does. It's bananas.
He's the lys of the GOP!
Here's Hillary Clinton's proposal for education.
BENGHAZI!!!!!!!!
Board goes crazy. No meaningful discussion is held.
I actually think that is why so many career politicians are floundering against him. He just hurls insults and lies through his teeth when confronted. How do you debate that?
It's one thing to prepare for a debate and debate but that's not what he does. It's bananas.
He's the lys of the GOP!
Here's Hillary Clinton's proposal for education.
BENGHAZI!!!!!!!!
Board goes crazy. No meaningful discussion is held.
One of our friends was talking about how he "does great" in the debates and I was like, the fuck??? But I think that's what it is. People debating him are dumbstruck by how to respond to what he says because it's like an snl skit of a political debate instead of an actual debate. And political debates tend towards useless anyway by the time you fact check, plus the GOP field is particularly bad and large right now. So I think a lot of people who don't follow politics don't notice the difference and their general takeaway is that he did a good job.
Anyway our friend isn't a trump supporter but does lean R on some things. He sort of follows politics but not really. I think his attitude is probably one shared by the general public to some degree.
So... can we start a GoFundMe to convince Jon Stewart to run if only to be in a televised debate with the Donald? I feel like he's got the comedic timing, pace, and quip factor to shut that shit DOWN.