American Politics

[SharkBait]

Really? I dont think people really care what a politician makes or their finances.

 

[xi0]

Really? I dont think people really care what a politician makes or their finances.

You don't care. Millions of others do. If you don't think it's important to know a potential leader of the country's finances and how they acquired their wealth... Then I'm not sure what to tell you.

 

[SharkBait]

You don't care. Millions of others do. If you don't think it's important to know a potential leader of the country's finances and how they acquired their wealth... Then I'm not sure what to tell you.

Why, most politicians are business folks, vetrans, or career politicians with businesses that we get all details of when they run their campaigns and the other party tries to dig up dirt on them (say if their products were truly made in america or not, or if they fired people just to save money on healthcare -> indiana folks this past cycle).

 

[xi0]

Why, most politicians are business folks, vetrans, or career politicians with businesses that we get all details of when they run their campaigns and the other party tries to dig up dirt on them (say if their products were truly made in america or not, or if they fired people just to save money on healthcare -> indiana folks this past cycle).

Because money is almost always a motivating factor. A personal tax return laid bare is just cold, hard facts, removed from any political spin. If a candidate has extreme debt, why should we elect them to handle the national budget? That's just one example.

 

[Franckie]

Quite frankly, its amazing that politicians in the US can run for any sort of public office without their finances and taxes being made public. It's just... common sense. Its what is done in most sensible places to begin with. Allowing politicians to run for office without making their finances and financial interests public is pretty much the same as saying its ok to be comically corrupt (regardless of whether a specific politician is or isn't corrupt).

Worse, they aren't forced to publicly divest themselves of their assets. It's one of the reasons Eric Cantor, former Majority Leader for the GOP in the House of Represenatives, got sacked after he sabotaged the STOCK Act, an attempt by Congress to crack down on insider trading.

 

[SharkBait]

Looks like Democrats are killing themselves from the inside

 

[xi0]

Lack of support? I've seen Democrats do nothing but condemn the NY Post and Trump.

 

[SharkBait]

it happened

 

[M3J]

Democrats have two big issues: (1) messaging and (2) they're too right-wing for the general public. On messaging, you can't get Democrats to do anything like support items like local newspapers and they only hold a single press conference on an issue before moving onto something else. They have issues attracting and retaining competent help because they're cheapskates who pay jack squat to their interns. Policy-wise, Democratic elites are too right-wing for the general public. For example, universal healthcare is a noteworthy goal, but how they'd go about it leaves much to be desired because Democrats are too timid to tackle the cancer-like price gouging that is rampant in the industry. They're almost as dependent on the business community as Republicans are, and their half-assed support for labor over the past 40+ years has backfired on them considerably.

Democrats are as scummy as Republicans, they just hide it better because they know fake social concerns will get them votes.

Really? I dont think people really care what a politician makes or their finances.

This shows how little you know.

Lack of support? I've seen Democrats do nothing but condemn the NY Post and Trump.

But they don't support Omar much, if at all, and many have condemned her or even passed a bill banning criticism of Israel, I think? I think Bernie and AOC are the only ones who defended Omar, weeks after the attacks.

 

[xi0]

But they don't support Omar much, if at all, and many have condemned her or even passed a bill banning criticism of Israel, I think? I think Bernie and AOC are the only ones who defended Omar, weeks after the attacks.

No, it wasn't a ban. It was a resolution condemning antisemitism... which has no actual legal consequences.

"They don't support Omar much, if at all" - yet Pelosi herself has condemned what Trump tweeted and Capitol Police have ratcheted up security for her and her family as a result. Congressman Nadler from NY has also come out in support of her. I think you're probably mixing this latest thing up with her comments about AIPAC and Israel, which a lot of Democrats didn't support her on.

Personally, I think claims of antisemitism are used far too readily in response to criticism of Israel. It's a touchy subject for a lot of people, so the response isn't surprising.

 

[M3J]

No, it wasn't a ban. It was a resolution condemning antisemitism... which has no actual legal consequences.

"They don't support Omar much, if at all" - yet Pelosi herself has condemned what Trump tweeted and Capitol Police have ratcheted up security for her and her family as a result. Congressman Nadler from NY has also come out in support of her. I think you're probably mixing this latest thing up with her comments about AIPAC and Israel, which a lot of Democrats didn't support her on.

Personally, I think claims of antisemitism are used far too readily in response to criticism of Israel. It's a touchy subject for a lot of people, so the response isn't surprising.

it does if someone criticizes Israel (which is why they came up with that), as people think anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism.

I could be.

I do wonder though. Is it because of them being pro-Jewish, because Israel pays them off well, or because they're fighting Muslims?

 

[xi0]

it does if someone criticizes Israel (which is why they came up with that), as people think anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism.

I could be.

I do wonder though. Is it because of them being pro-Jewish, because Israel pays them off well, or because they're fighting Muslims?

What does? It's not a ban.

Pays who off well? Plenty of people support Israel without needing to be paid off for it. I support Israel's right to exist, but that doesn't mean I support everything they do, especially when it comes to enforcing said right.

 

[M3J]

It's still an unnecessary resolution to pass. Where's the same energy when it comes to other races?

Politicians. Didn't Omar call AIPAC out on it?

 

[xi0]

It's still an unnecessary resolution to pass. Where's the same energy when it comes to other races?

Politicians. Didn't Omar call AIPAC out on it?

HR 183 was literally titled "Condemning anti-Semitism as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contradictory to the values and aspirations that define the people of the United States and condemning anti-Muslim discrimination and bigotry against minorities as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contrary to the values and aspirations of the United States. "

Like many lobbies, maybe. But I would expect most of them to agree with what they're being paid for anyway.

 

[SharkBait]

He was exonerated and vindicated, why so much press around keeping the muller report in the public eye. Democrats should focus on other things, like asking why gov't money is being sent to Notre Dame instead of the national crisis on obesity.

 

[Newkerzy]

Mueller report quotes Trump’s reaction to Russia investigation: 'I'm f***ed'

Thursday as Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report was released, President Trump said he was “having a good day.” This is terrible,” Trump told former Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Sessions’ of staff Jody Hunt when he learned about Mueller’s appointment.

news.yahoo.com

C'mon Bob...... You could've gone just a liiiiiiiitle bit up further, and you backed out? What are you, a virgin?

(Yes, terrible joke, I know. If anyone would be willing to come up with something better, please, by all means.)

 

[xi0]

He was exonerated and vindicated, why so much press around keeping the muller report in the public eye. Democrats should focus on other things, like asking why gov't money is being sent to Notre Dame instead of the national crisis on obesity.

“The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred”

“Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

He was neither exonerated or vindicated. Or do you think he was just because he said so and posted some shitty meme? Volume II of the Mueller Report practically builds the case against him for Felony Obstruction of Justice but doesn't make a prosecutorial judgment in part due to The Office of Legal Counsel holding the position that a President can't be indicted while in office. That means it would be up to Congress to do their job and invoke the articles of impeachment.

Trump and his own son demonstrated a willingness to look for help from Russia in the election, Trump lied about having a business ties to Russia. He lied about anyone in his campaign having contact with Russian agents.... lie after lie after lie. There may be no way to prove criminality there, but it's clear and obvious that this administration was morally and ethically bankrupt from the very start, and can't be trusted with putting US interests first. Why most Republicans sweep this under the rug is a clear demonstration that they have no backbone.

 

[SharkBait]

Trump and his own son demonstrated a willingness to look for help from Russia in the election, Trump lied about having a business ties to Russia. He lied about anyone in his campaign having contact with Russian agents.... lie after lie after lie. There may be no way to prove criminality there, but it's clear and obvious that this administration was morally and ethically bankrupt from the very start, and can't be trusted with putting US interests first. Why most Republicans sweep this under the rug is a clear demonstration that they have no backbone.

Why impeach him or do anything of the like? Nothing about it throws into question if he has or does not have the capability to continue to admirably run or country. Again all of those was about election stuff in the past that ought not hold any weight or bearing on his current state in office.

 

[xi0]

Why impeach him or do anything of the like? Nothing about it throws into question if he has or does not have the capability to continue to admirably run or country. Again all of those was about election stuff in the past that ought not hold any weight or bearing on his current state in office.

Because if a case could be made against a President for committing a felony, maybe even multiple times over, then why should that person hold office?

A very fair argument could be made that Russian attempts at election interference did have a factor in him winning due to their activities on Facebook alone, and due to how close the race was.

 

[SharkBait]

A very fair argument could be made that Russian attempts at election interference did have a factor in him winning due to their activities on Facebook alone, and due to how close the race was.

But how would you prove that Trump told them to do that?