The Donald Trump is Batcrap Crazy and The Leader of the GOP Thread

[gounion]

I personally don't want to end either lobbying or campaign contributions.

For example, the Sandy Hook parents/coalition should be able to lobby on what they care about (which is less kids being killed in school) and even contribute to candidates. There's nothing wrong with that.

That said, I know what I would like, which is the campaign finance landscape pre-Citizens United, when there was a lot more transparency, less dark money, and more campaign finance limits and regulations.

Both corporations and unions, gun control advocates and gun rights nut jobs , poor people and rich people should be able to have a say, and even to help fund candidates, from Bernie Sanders to Ted Cruz. The problem with the system right now is the rich, corporations, and gun nuts get a bigger voice than the other side, and that's not fair - it's not democracy, it's plutocracy.

As to how we get there, had that discussion.

As I see it, that doesn't mean you can't lobby. You can certainly lobby. And your numbers will mean a lot. But you can argue right and wrong, and effects of bills, instead of "here's how much money I can put into your pockets."

The right doesn't want to see this, because they know that the left has the numbers. I mean, the CEO has... himself. He's wanting what's best for him. But when organizations of VOTERS get together, that would make real change.

But as things are now, dollars are what's voting. When they can rake in millions, they pay less attention as to whether it's good for America or not.

[gounion]

How do you you accomplish that?

Pretty difficult, with the right-wing court we have now. It'd take a Constitutional Amendment. But that would make our government far more honest than it is now.

I don't pretend that there is any real path to getting such a thing done.

[ProfX]

You have been able to contribute to candidates since 1776, AFAIK. I dunno, in 1776, you probably had to send your contributions by horseback in a sack, could take a few weeks to arrive.

The thing is, before Citizens United, there were campaign finance regulations and controls so the people with more money couldn't give such outsized amounts and get such disproportionate access. CU nuked so much of that.

What I want is what existed before CU, and the path to that is either a Constitutional amendment, or a SCOTUS that will overturn that decision.

GoU, don't you want unions to be able to contribute to pro-union/labor candidates? I do.

(I also think corporate management should be able to contribute through their PACs, the Chamber, etc., just not in an outsize/unfair way.)

[gounion]

You have been able to contribute to candidates since 1776, AFAIK. I dunno, in 1776, you probably had to send your contributions by horseback in a sack, could take a few weeks to arrive.

The thing is, before Citizens United, there were campaign finance regulations and controls so the people with more money couldn't give such outsized amounts and get such disproportionate access. CU nuked so much of that.

What I want is what existed before CU, and the path to that is either a Constitutional amendment, or a SCOTUS that will overturn that decision.

GoU, don't you want unions to be able to contribute to pro-union/labor candidates? I do.

(I also think corporate management should be able to contribute through their PACs, the Chamber, etc., just not in an outsize/unfair way.)

Nope, I think that it would be great for unions if they didn't have to constantly fund-raise to have PAC money to give (as not one dime of union dues money can go to any candidate for office). And of course, the corporations will always greatly outspend to unions (something like 20-1 or better) because they don't have to raise their money, they just take it out of the corporation. The stockholders have no say in their donations.

It would be great for EVERYONE'S bottom line if they didn't have to dump billions into elections.

And the unions would have better clout, as their numbers would have a bigger influence than the billions from the corporations.

That's my view. I've seen how the sausage is made. There's gotta be a better way.

As an aside - at one time, it was completely illegal for corporations to give to politicians.

[Motor City]

Trump Tucker Truckers

oh noooo

[Number6]

That sounds reasonable. But you and I know that profits does not always equal cash. Any idea what they project the costs to fireproof their lines? Was any of that 9 billion set aside for that purpose?

Local news reported SDG&E got a "10.2% equity profit on capital projects, such as wildfire prevention upgrades in the East County, or pilot programs to install electric vehicle charging stations."
https://www.cbs8.com/article/money/ampe ... 9284064958

As for the cost of their program to fire-proof their lines and towers, that is $3 billion.
https://www.cbs8.com/article/money/ampe ... 146816cd16

[Motor City]

So now that we know what it's not, I still don't know what it is. I mean, I know what the word means, but as always, when we get into semantics, I'm not sure how you happen to be using it.

At the end of the day, what is it that both parties agree on that they should be doing? Looks to me like there are more people in one party than the other who cares about those folks who are working and vulnerable. (You like Bernie Sanders and AOC. One caucuses with the Democrats, the other IS one) There may be conservative Dems, but I don't know of many if ANY progressive Republicans. I wish there was bipartisan agreement on that, but it's conservative Republicans that are blocking liberal and progressive Democrats from doing it.

We were talking about biden and harris though, they arent moderate they are rigidly conservative and they often claim to be bi partisan when aligning with the other conservatives and I was just explaining people can see through that and can see the vulnerable left out completely. If you want an arms dealer to run the military instead of a civilian then they are bi partisan and its done yesterday if you want the public spending to aid the public then your out of luck theres no room left at the inn.

[bradman]

If House and Senate members aren't paid then only those who are rich will be able to afford to be House and Senate members. How does this not encourage them to pass legislation that only increases their wealth?


Most "moderates" lean towards liberals or conservatives and there are very few true "moderates." The same goes for Independent voter. If the "moderates" combine into one party which way would they lean? Your BIL's ideas aren't very well thought through.

i've known him since the 7th grade. It's how he met his future wife, my sister. He was a decent liberal back then. It was only after he got his first job and moved out that his love affair with the dollar started getting carried away. He came out shortly after he married my sister. i told him, if i had known he'd pull a stunt like that i probably would not have been able to 'forever hold my piece'. He told me someone had to save her from having to live a commie life. i called him a blood sucking capitalist pig. He said family get togethers should be interesting. i agreed.

We've been ribbing each other for that many years now. When it comes to politics the conversation usually starts out with some off the wall comment. It's kinda a signal. Are ya interested or not? If you're not interested ya ask about family, cars, the weather....If you are interested, you do the best to counter the off the wall comment with one of your own. Since we've had those conversations hundreds of times, from the git go we know where it's headed.

It wasn't difficult to come to an agreement on dark money. His love of hoarding money is only second to his reverence to the almighty dollar. Apparently, It's sacrilege to use Abe like that. He's always had decent boundaries when it comes to greed, cheating, and deception .

So far we are about 85% in agreement with Pac's. While i'd like to see them eventually gone, he doesn't. We agree on better regulation but he won't go as far as i would.

And then we get to where we left off during the last conversation, CU. We go round and round on that one. We've reached a couple agreements here and there but always seem to come to a wall when it comes to what Gu mentioned awhile back, representation. (He has a strong distaste for unions. It's about the only subject that has to treaded lightly on. i have a tendency to get a bit pissy when it comes to someone picking on beloved unions.) i've tried a number of ways to explain the difference between Union representation, and corporate representation. It's where the money gets involved once again. Much like the union, he expects the corporation to look out for the best interests of his stock. Right now we are sitting somewhere around what GU mentioned. He'll only give up his representation when everyone else to agrees to give up theirs. Now that's a wish.

His moderate comment thing is new and developing.

For the record, i like GU's wish. Get rid of all the money. After all, the saying isn't, 'money is the root of all good'.

[ProfX]

I believe political campaigns do too much fundraising. It has definitely become ridiculous. When freshmen congressmen are already busy fundraising for half of a 2 year term, raising for their next campaign.

We should support more public financing of campaigns. Most of the money raised by campaigns goes to media buys, which of course could be made free or low cost if a certain lobby (NAB) didn't want to lose that cash cow. (Although Facebook also makes big bucks now too.)

Here's the problem with not addressing the underlying problem: if we ban political contributions to candidates, wealthier candidates will be able to buy millions of ad buys, whereas less wealthy candidates won't be able to, and Congress will be more full of millionaires. The other half of the problem is campaigns in the U.S. indeed are both too long and too expensive.

I don't think it could be possible to ban all citizens or interest groups from donating to candidates. I personally also don't think it's necessary. I DO support campaign finance reform and all the key limits and reforms that were in place pre-CU. There needs to be a fair and level playing field; campaign raising limits helped maintain that. I DO support changing things so that candidates shouldn't have to focus so much on fundraising. It's better for us (corruption) and even IMHO for them if they spend less time doing it, as it takes away from what they should be doing - legislating. We DEFINITELY need more transparency and less dark money.

There never was a period historically where contributions to candidates from citizens (I agree corporations are and were a different beast) were banned. I also don't think anything changes if 40 citizens (or however many) band together to raise money for candidates who agree with them on an issue.

I just don't like the current plutocratic/corporocratic system where interests with larger donations get to be heard more and over represented; that to me is the core of the problem.

[ProfX]

We were talking about biden and harris though, they arent moderate they are rigidly conservative

Bullshit.

Our ideology score placed Kamala Harris as the most liberal senator in 2019
https://govtrackinsider.com/our-ideolog ... d25493ca72

Words have meaning.

There is also a nice list of legislation she sponsored, to help the weak and vulnerable.

[carmenjonze]

i've known him since the 7th grade. It's how he met his future wife, my sister. He was a decent liberal back then. It was only after he got his first job and moved out that his love affair with the dollar started getting carried away. He came out shortly after he married my sister. i told him, if i had known he'd pull a stunt like that i probably would not have been able to 'forever hold my piece'. He told me someone had to save her from having to live a commie life. i called him a blood sucking capitalist pig. He said family get togethers should be interesting. i agreed.

We've been ribbing each other for that many years now. When it comes to politics the conversation usually starts out with some off the wall comment. It's kinda a signal. Are ya interested or not? If you're not interested ya ask about family, cars, the weather....If you are interested, you do the best to counter the off the wall comment with one of your own. Since we've had those conversations hundreds of times, from the git go we know where it's headed.

It wasn't difficult to come to an agreement on dark money. His love of hoarding money is only second to his reverence to the almighty dollar. Apparently, It's sacrilege to use Abe like that. He's always had decent boundaries when it comes to greed, cheating, and deception .

So far we are about 85% in agreement with Pac's. While i'd like to see them eventually gone, he doesn't. We agree on better regulation but he won't go as far as i would.

And then we get to where we left off during the last conversation, CU. We go round and round on that one. We've reached a couple agreements here and there but always seem to come to a wall when it comes to what Gu mentioned awhile back, representation. (He has a strong distaste for unions. It's about the only subject that has to treaded lightly on. i have a tendency to get a bit pissy when it comes to someone picking on beloved unions.) i've tried a number of ways to explain the difference between Union representation, and corporate representation. It's where the money gets involved once again. Much like the union, he expects the corporation to look out for the best interests of his stock. Right now we are sitting somewhere around what GU mentioned. He'll only give up his representation when everyone else to agrees to give up theirs. Now that's a wish.

His moderate comment thing is new and developing.

So-called moderates are just cons without the integrity to acknowledge being cons. Thanks for another anecdote that proves it.

For the record, i like GU's wish. Get rid of all the money. After all, the saying isn't, 'money is the root of all good'.

In fact, the saying is actually a Bible verse that’s often misquoted. The phrase is, “the love of money is the root of all evil,” not “money is the root of all evil.” It comes from 1 Timothy 6:10.

[Libertas]

So-called moderates are just cons without the integrity to acknowledge being cons. Thanks for another anecdote that proves it.




In fact, the saying is actually a Bible verse that’s often misquoted. The phrase is, “the love of money is the root of all evil,” not “money is the root of all evil.” It comes from 1 Timothy 6:10.

Pretty important distinction.
In Shasta county county an official a republican wanted to enforce the mask mandate so a trump supporter from Connecticut a billionaire came with a half $1,000,000 to run a recall election to remove him, so that they could make people sick on purpose to show worship to Donald Trump.

If you vote GOP you are an enemy of the human race. I assume everybody understands this now.

[bradman]

We were talking about biden and harris though, they arent moderate they are rigidly conservative and they often claim to be bi partisan when aligning with the other conservatives and I was just explaining people can see through that and can see the vulnerable left out completely. If you want an arms dealer to run the military instead of a civilian then they are bi partisan and its done yesterday if you want the public spending to aid the public then your out of luck theres no room left at the inn.

[bold] To me that's a key to what you're getting at. The downtrodden. The bottom of the food chain. Viewing it from there, i can see why some think Biden and Harris are rigidly conservative. They're not delivering and and for the most part, given the system, begin to look like any other conservative.

i would hope some would keep in mind, the Dem's sometimes falling short is not from the lack of trying to deliver what is needed for those at the bottom of the rung.

[carmenjonze]

We were talking about biden and harris though, they arent moderate they are rigidly conservative and they often claim to be bi partisan when aligning with the other conservatives and I was just explaining people can see through that and can see the vulnerable left out completely. If you want an arms dealer to run the military instead of a civilian then they are bi partisan and its done yesterday if you want the public spending to aid the public then your out of luck theres no room left at the inn.

Their immigration policies are indeed rigidly conservative, as they’re just a continuation of Trump/Obama immigration policies.

But actual mainstream conservatism is literally guided by QAnon nuts, rich Putin supporters and white-Evangelical endtimers who have all converged into a dangerous personality cult around Donald Trump. That’s the mainstream, i.e. one of two parties.

Calling Biden and Harris “rigid conservatives” is extreme hyperbole.

[Libertas]

Their immigration policies are indeed rigidly conservative, as they’re just a continuation of Trump/Obama immigration policies.

But actual mainstream conservatism is literally guided by QAnon nuts, rich Putin supporters and white-Evangelical endtimers who have all converged into a dangerous personality cult around Donald Trump. That’s the mainstream, i.e. one of two parties.

Calling Biden and Harris “rigid conservatives” is extreme hyperbole.

The absurdity of calling them "rigid conservatives" is a reflection of what Bernie Sanders and others rhetoric did to the minds of some on the left.

They are the reason Hillary Clinton while getting millions more votes than traitor, lost by a handful of votes in a few states.

[gounion]

We were talking about biden and harris though, they arent moderate they are rigidly conservative and they often claim to be bi partisan when aligning with the other conservatives and I was just explaining people can see through that and can see the vulnerable left out completely. If you want an arms dealer to run the military instead of a civilian then they are bi partisan and its done yesterday if you want the public spending to aid the public then your out of luck theres no room left at the inn.

Aww, c'mon, man. Get real. They aren't conservatives.

[bradman]

Don't really see a need to rehash old perceived slights. Let's let the Republicans form the circular firing squads this time round eh.

[carmenjonze]

Don't really see a need to rehash old perceived slights. Let's let the Republicans form the circular firing squads this time round eh.

This is a really stupid metaphor, coming from a person who is a very active collaborator with Republicans.

[marindem01]

Bullshit.

Our ideology score placed Kamala Harris as the most liberal senator in 2019
https://govtrackinsider.com/our-ideolog ... d25493ca72

Words have meaning.

There is also a nice list of legislation she sponsored, to help the weak and vulnerable.

I was wondering where that even came from. Biden and Harris are NOT conservative. Biden emerged closer to left of center under President Obama, and Harris has never been considered Conservative. She is opposed to the Death Penalty, she as SF DA opposed the Death Penalty, but never refused to file Capitol Punishiment if the case warranted it. She support Climate Science, Ms. Harris is a hard core Femnist. As CA AG she refused a settlement that would been considered chump change after '08 Financial Disaster.

[marindem01]

Hot Holy Fucking Shit.

A state judge has ordered Donald Trump, his son Donald Trump Jr. and his daughter Ivanka Trump to sit for depositions within three weeks in New York Attorney General Letitia James’ ongoing investigation of alleged financial improprieties at the Trump Organization.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/1 ... e-00009847..

The judge, Arthur Engoron, also ordered the Trumps to turn over relevant documents within two weeks.

Trump’s lawyers have indicated he is expected to appeal the order.

[carmenjonze]

Hot Holy Fucking Shit.

A state judge has ordered Donald Trump, his son Donald Trump Jr. and his daughter Ivanka Trump to sit for depositions within three weeks in New York Attorney General Letitia James’ ongoing investigation of alleged financial improprieties at the Trump Organization.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/1 ... e-00009847..

The judge, Arthur Engoron, also ordered the Trumps to turn over relevant documents within two weeks.

Trump’s lawyers have indicated he is expected to appeal the order.

Was just about to post this same thing from AP

Trump must testify in New York investigation, judge rules

[Libertas]

Just at Randi Rhodes show, video of two teen kids in a fist fight in a mall, cops show up and tackle Black kid while white kid sits comfortably on chair.

amazing video

[carmenjonze]

Pretty important distinction.

Yeah, it's a weird thing. One expects Fundamentalists, conservative Evangelicals, and other cons to prooftext and distort the Bible to suit their purposes.

But I have always wondered how "For the love of money..." got taken up as "the love of money..." and by whom. This verse is possibly the most misquoted Bible verse, ever, so this not to harsh on bradman, personally. A lot of people make this mistake.

[Bludogdem]

We were talking about biden and harris though, they arent moderate they are rigidly conservative and they often claim to be bi partisan when aligning with the other conservatives and I was just explaining people can see through that and can see the vulnerable left out completely. If you want an arms dealer to run the military instead of a civilian then they are bi partisan and its done yesterday if you want the public spending to aid the public then your out of luck theres no room left at the inn.

When you’re a denizen inextricably pegged to the remotest bastion of the far left then I suppose Biden and Harris are rigidly conservative.

[Bludogdem]

Pretty difficult, with the right-wing court we have now. It'd take a Constitutional Amendment. But that would make our government far more honest than it is now.

I don't pretend that there is any real path to getting such a thing done.

So, pretty unlikely.