Due to a security update, you may have to reset your password. Don’t panic, nothing has gone wrong and your password is safe. If you don’t have access to that email, send Tube a message at [email protected] More info here: https://status.vanillaforums.com/incidents/2zdqxf3bt7mj
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

The [Primary Thread] In Which We Behave Like Civilized People

1171820222333

Posts

  • I needed a gnome to post.I needed a gnome to post. you cannot kill me in a way that matters Registered User regular
    edited November 9
    knitdan wrote: »
    If we can’t completely reorganize society into a perfect socialist utopia overnight, we shouldn’t even try to do anything.

    Purity, purity above all!

    i don't know how many times we have to say that just because we disagree about something going far enough, doesn't mean that we immediately lay down and die and fall asleep

    i know this rhetoric about socialist purity meaning we just sit here and only post on the internet is a real banger for you cuz y'all post it at least once a month but some new material would really liven things up


    like seriously, imagine how annoying you would find this if the biden supporters implied you were doing nothing and just purity testing every time you said that biden wasn't doing something well enough

    I needed a gnome to post. on
    6WLALQ5.jpg
    Styrofoam SammichDee KaepainfulPleasanceCantidoMagellBloodsheedThe Cow KingOne Thousand CablesJuliusSanguinius666264ShortyYamiB.Man in the Mists
  • knitdanknitdan Oh no Too much hornyRegistered User regular
    Harris just released a plan to expand after-school programs in poor communities, which would be a huge deal for millions to Americans.

    Half of Rose Twitter brought up some bullshit about the school-to-prison pipeline, and the other half complained that she wasn’t trying to give everyone a 30-hour workweek instead.

    Trust me I know annoying

    “I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
    -Indiana Solo, runner of blades
    PantsBCelestialBadgerMonwynjmcdonaldJaysonFourBigJoeMshrykeLanlaornFencingsaxNo-Quarter
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud bear with us as we do some "rebranding" Registered User regular
    Bernie and Warren are almost identical in policy and I am happy with either candidate taking the primary. There is almost no difference at all between them and the fights over who hates or loves billionaires more is a manufactured argument that doesnt actually get us anywhere.

    SleepYoutubeElvenshaeGennenalyse RuebenThe SauceLord_AsmodeusA Kobold's KoboldcncaudataRedTideshrykeBloodsheedVishNubRchanenCaedwyrmilskiFencingsaxRozKristmas KthulhuSanguinius666264QanamilBullheadTarantioNo-QuarterKurganMr RayElldrenTofystedethMan in the MistsKwoaru
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    edited November 9
    I mean no one is actually suggesting what we should be doing. I'm willing to admit I'm a bit of an extremist in this regard though. As always Warren's deal here is the friendly way for us to go about these things, same with sanders even. However sanders is pretty much always swinging for the fences with his messaging and can get away with saying billionaires shouldn't exist, it's right in his wheelhouse message wise. Warren coming down just slightly to his right is also pretty predictable there as well.

    Honestly if I didn't know any better I'd think they were just straight up coordinating game at this point.

    Sleep on
    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudRchanenFencingsaxKayne Red RobeKaputa
  • CoinageCoinage The Naming of Cats is a difficult matter Registered User regular
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    I’m talking about the rhetoric of doing away with billionaires and the refrain of “we’re gonna have a Revolution in this country”

    I think its more viable and coherent than this thing Warren seems to be pushing where we'll just keep them in check and get rid of the "bad" ones.

    I mean if we want to talk about rhetoric it looks pretty silly when she plays up the "billionaires are scared of me" bit and then gets on stage and talks about how if "you come up with a really good idea", which is stock capitalist apologia, she's fine with you having billions of dollars, like, jesus christ.

    I think you're wrong about viability, because outlawing billionaires will happen approximately never.
    Some of us have some optimism and would like to believe billionaires can be outlawed, instead of billionaires can longer exist because global society has collapsed under the stress of climate change.

    s586cu2r93hr.gif
    painfulPleasanceJuliusKaputaMan in the Mists
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    Even in well-managed fairly egalitarian societies, billionaires exist. I don’t see how we are supposed to get rid of them without some serious Communism shit where we straight-up confiscate their wealth. And that would probably result in social unrest/economic collapse.

    I’m now a hard no on Sanders. Warren is the only viable candidate for me.

  • CoinageCoinage The Naming of Cats is a difficult matter Registered User regular
    I don't know, a thousand people doesn't sound like much of a riot to me

    s586cu2r93hr.gif
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    Coinage wrote: »
    I don't know, a thousand people doesn't sound like much of a riot to me

    The knock-on consequences of straight-up confiscating the wealth of the ultra-rich would cause chaos. For a start, you couldn’t do it in the 2 years that a President tends to have the House and the Senate so you’d need to suspend elections, declare martial law etc.

    Best to just stick to a reasonable wealth tax.

  • ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    the first billionaires were a product of the gilded age and the correct, very late response was, in fact, a complete restructuring of society

    PhillishereCantidoMetzger MeisterStyrofoam SammichOne Thousand CablesDee KaeJuliusDoodmannShortyBandableboogedybooYamiB.KaputaMan in the MistsHacksaw
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    Elendil wrote: »
    the first billionaires were a product of the gilded age and the correct, very late response was, in fact, a complete restructuring of society

    They increased taxes and regulations. That’s what we should do.

    Also I don’t think they had literal “billionaires” back then, inflation you know.

  • LanzLanz Registered User regular
    edited November 9
    Even in well-managed fairly egalitarian societies, billionaires exist. I don’t see how we are supposed to get rid of them without some serious Communism shit where we straight-up confiscate their wealth. And that would probably result in social unrest/economic collapse.

    I’m now a hard no on Sanders. Warren is the only viable candidate for me.

    you could regulate businesses such that they must be owned, in some fashion as designed by company charter, by the actual workers of the business and not by outside investors or a single individual or small group.

    That would probably go to some length to reign in billionaires by depriving them of the mechanism that allows for such extreme wealth hording, and still allows for a market economy, but one in which each company is democratically responsible to their workers.
    Elendil wrote: »
    the first billionaires were a product of the gilded age and the correct, very late response was, in fact, a complete restructuring of society

    Rockefeller being the first in 1916

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
  • ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited November 9
    Elendil wrote: »
    the first billionaires were a product of the gilded age and the correct, very late response was, in fact, a complete restructuring of society

    They increased taxes and regulations. That’s what we should do.

    Also I don’t think they had literal “billionaires” back then, inflation you know.
    rockefeller and henry ford apparently made it across the finish line

    Elendil on
  • PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    Elendil wrote: »
    the first billionaires were a product of the gilded age and the correct, very late response was, in fact, a complete restructuring of society

    They increased taxes and regulations. That’s what we should do.

    Also I don’t think they had literal “billionaires” back then, inflation you know.

    John Rockefeller was the first billionaire. Breaking up his Standard Oil via federal antimonopoly action was one of the major moves we made to end the Gilded Age.

    Also worth noting here that one of the big reasons the original Gilded Age ended was because of fear of socialism and communism. There’s something about multiple riots, strikes, revolutions, and assassinations that didn’t stop no matter how many commies were executed that focused the minds of politicians on curbing business excess.

    ElendilCelestialBadgerpainfulPleasanceLord_AsmodeusDarkPrimusGennenalyse RuebenSleepRchanenMetzger MeisterFencingsaxJuliusDoodmannViktor WaltersboogedybooYamiB.Man in the MistsHacksaw
  • LanzLanz Registered User regular
    edited November 9
    Elendil wrote: »
    Elendil wrote: »
    the first billionaires were a product of the gilded age and the correct, very late response was, in fact, a complete restructuring of society

    They increased taxes and regulations. That’s what we should do.

    Also I don’t think they had literal “billionaires” back then, inflation you know.
    rockefeller and henry ford apparently made it across the finish line apparently

    specifically, Rockefeller reached $1 Billion dollars in 1916, not accounting for inflation.


    Adjusted for inflation, that billion was about $16 billion in today's value

    EDIT: As Always, LeGuin:
    “We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings. Resistance and change often begin in art, and very often in our art, the art of words.”

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
    painfulPleasanceMetzger MeisterJuliusSanguinius666264Viktor WaltersMan in the Mists
  • CoinageCoinage The Naming of Cats is a difficult matter Registered User regular
    Coinage wrote: »
    I don't know, a thousand people doesn't sound like much of a riot to me

    The knock-on consequences of straight-up confiscating the wealth of the ultra-rich would cause chaos. For a start, you couldn’t do it in the 2 years that a President tends to have the House and the Senate so you’d need to suspend elections, declare martial law etc.

    Best to just stick to a reasonable wealth tax.
    I think you and I are talking about very different time scales than I am. You are right that the president in 2020 would have to essentially seize the government to confiscate billionaires by 2024, but afaik the people posting here are not, you know, Maoists. I'm certainly not.

    s586cu2r93hr.gif
    Fencingsax
  • KamarKamar Registered User regular
    Hm, I'm disappointed in that answer from Warren but she's still my candidate. It's not like the next president is getting rid of billionaires either way.

    Thinking we shouldn't have billionaires doesn't make you a socialist, though, and I'd much prefer to hear lip service to eliminating billionaires over not.

  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    I don't really care that she she thinks billionaires should "exist", I only care that she's willing to tax them. And she is, so

    LxX6eco.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
    CelestialBadgerCantidoMorganVForarZonugalMarathonjmcdonaldLord_AsmodeusPreacherCantideOremLKshrykeVishNubGennenalyse RuebenthatassemblyguySleepXantomaskimeRchanenAstaerethYoutubeElJeffejoshofalltradesMetzger MeisterElvenshaeTynnanTryCatcherIncenjucarSummaryJudgmentFencingsaxLou29Kristmas KthulhuArdolStabbity StyleSanguinius666264Qanamil38thDoeBullheadNiryanever dieDoodmannTarantioViktor WaltersNo-QuarterKayne Red RobeboogedybooElldrenKoopahTroopahTofystedethMan in the MistsExtreaminatusHacksawKwoaru
  • LanzLanz Registered User regular
    Coinage wrote: »
    Coinage wrote: »
    I don't know, a thousand people doesn't sound like much of a riot to me

    The knock-on consequences of straight-up confiscating the wealth of the ultra-rich would cause chaos. For a start, you couldn’t do it in the 2 years that a President tends to have the House and the Senate so you’d need to suspend elections, declare martial law etc.

    Best to just stick to a reasonable wealth tax.
    I think you and I are talking about very different time scales than I am. You are right that the president in 2020 would have to essentially seize the government to confiscate billionaires by 2024, but afaik the people posting here are not, you know, Maoists. I'm certainly not.

    I generally lean market socialist with heavy federal regulation because of concerns of American political structures being really really good for turning centralized economic structures into state capitalism.

    waNkm4k.jpg?1
    PhillishereJulius
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    Axios has the latest Bloomberg info:
    Mike Bloomberg is jumping into the Democratic presidential race because he believes that Joe Biden is fading, opening the moderate lane next to Elizabeth Warren, sources close to the former New York mayor tell Axios.

    Why it matters: "Mike will spend whatever it takes to defeat Donald Trump," a Bloomberg source said. "The nation is about to see a very different campaign than we’ve ever seen before."

    I'm told there's no way he'll later run as a third-party or independent candidate, partly because of ballot-access hurdles.

    Honestly, the fact that Bloomberg thinks that he just has to outspend Trump when Trump beat candidates with far bigger warchests on both the primary and the general says a lot.

    CelestialBadgerCantidoRMS OceanicMagellLord_AsmodeusDarkPrimusGennenalyse RuebenRchanenElvenshaeMetzger MeisterNobeardFencingsaxJuliusKetBraKayne Red RobeMr RayMan in the Mists
  • LanzLanz Registered User regular
    edited November 9
    https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-11-08/democratic-primary-debate-moves-from-ucla-to-loyola-marymount-university

    Also apparently the december debate is getting moved as a result of labor disputes at the original location

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
  • LanzLanz Registered User regular
    edited November 9
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    Axios has the latest Bloomberg info:
    Mike Bloomberg is jumping into the Democratic presidential race because he believes that Joe Biden is fading, opening the moderate lane next to Elizabeth Warren, sources close to the former New York mayor tell Axios.

    Why it matters: "Mike will spend whatever it takes to defeat Donald Trump," a Bloomberg source said. "The nation is about to see a very different campaign than we’ve ever seen before."

    I'm told there's no way he'll later run as a third-party or independent candidate, partly because of ballot-access hurdles.

    Honestly, the fact that Bloomberg thinks that he just has to outspend Trump when Trump beat candidates with far bigger warchests on both the primary and the general says a lot.

    Imagine, if you will, if instead of a narcissitic attempt at preserving his own status and wealth and raising his social profile on the very stupid gamble of "Imma be president!" Bloomberg used all that money to, say, start an organization whose specific purpose was providing advice and transportation for folks who are having their exercise of the franchise crushed out by Voter ID laws where the GOP then closes out all the goddamn places to acquire ID, and then also provides dedicated transport services to and from polls for people on election day who cannot easily get out to their polling location.

    If you want to actually beat Trump and not be a vainglorious gobshite, perhaps that might be a better use of your literal billions of dollars, Mikey Bloomberg.

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
    TryCatcherMorganVForarLord_AsmodeusDarkPrimusCantideA Kobold's KoboldBloodsheedGennenalyse RuebenAstaerethElJeffeElvenshaeMetzger MeisterbrynhrtmnNobeardIncenjucarFencingsaxHappy Little MachineKristmas KthulhuArdolStabbity StyleJuliusSanguinius666264LabelNiryanever dieKayne Red RobeboogedybooElldrenYamiB.TofystedethMan in the MistsHacksaw
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    Bloomberg is going to find out he can’t buy votes. The old days of just blanketing TV with ads being enough to win are gone.

    TryCatcherYoutubeElvenshaeNobeardFencingsaxMan in the Mists
  • I needed a gnome to post.I needed a gnome to post. you cannot kill me in a way that matters Registered User regular
    knitdan wrote: »
    Harris just released a plan to expand after-school programs in poor communities, which would be a huge deal for millions to Americans.

    Half of Rose Twitter brought up some bullshit about the school-to-prison pipeline, and the other half complained that she wasn’t trying to give everyone a 30-hour workweek instead.

    Trust me I know annoying

    okay but have you considered talking to the people on this forum as though they were other human beings on this forum and not the nebulous Rose Twitter that you got mad at

    6WLALQ5.jpg
    painfulPleasanceMagellPhillishereFuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudBloodsheedkimeElvenshaeStyrofoam SammichThe Cow KingJuliusKetBraViktor WaltersShortyYamiB.Man in the Mists
  • painfulPleasancepainfulPleasance Registered User regular
    edited November 9
    knitdan wrote: »
    If we can’t completely reorganize society into a perfect socialist utopia overnight, we shouldn’t even try to do anything.

    Purity, purity above all!

    The reason you say insulting shit like this is because you know at some level that we are working at cross purposes, and any work that doesn't help you is useless. I would have accepted the argument that taxing the billionaires we have now would see them gone or made into jokes. But that shit you're saying? That's you. You're the one sticking to a fantasy. The people crying and screaming and threatening to support fascism because Warren has insulted them by insisting that any two men are equals and expanding on that to the point where they realize that it's not a lie will not treat her any better than they will treat Sanders.

    The thing that ruins every interaction we have with you is the avalanche of questions raised by the idea that somehow Warren will be more palatable than Obama was or Sanders is.

    Chief among them is "Will this person benefit best from my death?"

    painfulPleasance on
    YamiB.Man in the Mists
  • painfulPleasancepainfulPleasance Registered User regular
    Even in well-managed fairly egalitarian societies, billionaires exist. I don’t see how we are supposed to get rid of them without some serious Communism shit where we straight-up confiscate their wealth. And that would probably result in social unrest/economic collapse.

    I’m now a hard no on Sanders. Warren is the only viable candidate for me.

    holy shit the answer is yes

    Julius
  • knitdanknitdan Oh no Too much hornyRegistered User regular
    The Bloomberg campaign is off to a fantastic start



    Angus Johnson is a historian and here he’s quote tweeting Bloomberg’s campaign manager
    This...is incredible. Not only has the godawful Bloomberg logo been circulating for at least a day with no pushback, the apparently fake site is selling merch and collecting contact data from supporters. Still.

    Fake logo. Fake site. No wonder it was so laughably bad.

    “I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
    -Indiana Solo, runner of blades
    DarkPrimusshrykeYoutubeElvenshaeMetzger MeistertynicFencingsaxHappy Little MachineJuliusBullheadLabelNo-QuarterElldrenKoopahTroopahTofystedethMan in the Mists
  • AbsoluteZeroAbsoluteZero The new film by Quentin Koopantino Registered User regular
    Trump reminds me of a schoolyard bully who is also a popular kid. Nobody dares stand up to him lest they lose their social status and become outcast. I'm not sure who can overcome that kind of culture and social dynamic on a world-leader scale, but it would seem awful fitting for the school teacher to put an end to his shit.

    cs6f034fsffl.jpg
    ForarCelestialBadgerLord_AsmodeusthatassemblyguyRchanenNobeardFencingsaxViktor WaltersMr RayMan in the Mists
  • PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    Trump reminds me of a schoolyard bully who is also a popular kid. Nobody dares stand up to him lest they lose their social status and become outcast. I'm not sure who can overcome that kind of culture and social dynamic on a world-leader scale, but it would seem awful fitting for the school teacher to put an end to his shit.

    The subtext to a lot of the “GOP insiders privately say” stuff is that the entire party is scared shitless of their electorate. They are afraid not just for their professional positions, but also their personal safety.

    They thought they spent the last few decades trolling Democrats and creating loyal Republicans with Fox News, talk radio, and the like. Instead, they built a fascist movement that marched off with the first authoritarian who raised his banner.

    That’s probably the one area where genuine, behind-the-scenes negotiation has merits, once the GOP’s hands are removed from the steering wheel. This level of constant agitprop is unsafe for anyone in power, and it is either going to get walked back over a generation or explode into sustained civil unrest.

    ForarDarkPrimusshrykeRchanenYoutubeElvenshaeNobeardFencingsaxAbsoluteZeroElldrenTofystedethMan in the Mists
  • jmcdonaldjmcdonald I voted, did you? DC(ish)Registered User regular
    knitdan wrote: »
    Harris just released a plan to expand after-school programs in poor communities, which would be a huge deal for millions to Americans.

    Half of Rose Twitter brought up some bullshit about the school-to-prison pipeline, and the other half complained that she wasn’t trying to give everyone a 30-hour workweek instead.

    Trust me I know annoying

    okay but have you considered talking to the people on this forum as though they were other human beings on this forum and not the nebulous Rose Twitter that you got mad at

    Did you not pay attention to the four pages of the prior thread that parroted Knitdans exact point re: Harris’ plan?

    I mean. It was right there.

    shryke wrote: »
    ...Barack "charisma isn't a dump stat, nerds" Obama...
    QuidPreacherBigJoeMshrykeGennenalyse RuebeniTunesIsEvilLanlaornFencingsaxArdolNo-QuarterOneAngryPossumElldren
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    edited November 9
    knitdan wrote: »
    Harris just released a plan to expand after-school programs in poor communities, which would be a huge deal for millions to Americans.

    Half of Rose Twitter brought up some bullshit about the school-to-prison pipeline, and the other half complained that she wasn’t trying to give everyone a 30-hour workweek instead.

    Trust me I know annoying

    okay but have you considered talking to the people on this forum as though they were other human beings on this forum and not the nebulous Rose Twitter that you got mad at

    It's literally here, in this thread, that after school programs were called school to prison.

    Quid on
    CelestialBadgerMarathonForarRedTideshrykeGennenalyse RuebenElvenshaeiTunesIsEvilLanlaornMonwynFencingsaxKristmas KthulhuArdolBullheadNiryaNo-QuarterZonugalKayne Red RobeElldrenTofystedeth
  • I needed a gnome to post.I needed a gnome to post. you cannot kill me in a way that matters Registered User regular
    edited November 9
    If he's going to invoke referencing Rose Twitter I'm going to respect that and reference it as well.

    Which is really beside the point, because "i got annoyed that some people (including people who aren't socialists in this thread) did things that I found annoying, so now I'm going to be annoying to someone else" is not a banger of a position to take


    There are ways to disagree with those of us who are socialist without mocking us. Posters like ElJeffe do it frequently. It makes the thread a lot more pleasant to be in!

    I needed a gnome to post. on
    6WLALQ5.jpg
    Julius
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited November 9
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    I don't really care that she she thinks billionaires should "exist", I only care that she's willing to tax them. And she is, so

    Which is basically what this entire argument comes down to. Some I think should not but will find themselves very surprised that most people are not really invested in all this "outlaw and guillotine the billionaires!" rhetoric. "Let's tax the fuck out of the rich" is quite popular and generally seems adequate for most people in terms of rhetoric, including on the left. Trying to stir shit up about Warren with these quotes is just not all that meaningful to the primary.

    shryke on
    ForarCantidoGennenalyse RuebenjmcdonaldBigJoeMTryCatcherRchanenCelestialBadgerYoutubeSyphonBlueElvenshaeQuidMarathonNobeardFencingsaxKristmas KthulhuArdolBullheadDarkPrimusViktor WaltersZonugalboogedybooElldrenMan in the Mists
  • painfulPleasancepainfulPleasance Registered User regular
    Those on the receiving end of pragmatism and bipartisanship talk know it means that their lives are on the table.

    Metzger MeisterOne Thousand CablesBloodsheedAngelHedgieMan in the Mists
  • PaladinPaladin Registered User regular
    I'm glad it was brought up as people should be free to disagree with the sentiment that every billionaire is a sin. Might as well say it instead of being silent.

    Marty: The future, it's where you're going?
    Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
  • LanzLanz Registered User regular
    edited November 9
    Just a note of order, @jmcdonald: that conversation was this thread, lasted two pages with a few posts of spillover before the next piece of news hit, the point of rhetorical contention was voiced by exactly one poster, who then apologized for being snappy one page later on account of being tired and under the weather


    Also the last thread got closed days before the Harris plan was released.

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
    Julius
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Bloomberg is going to find out he can’t buy votes. The old days of just blanketing TV with ads being enough to win are gone.

    Steyer has shown the opposite. You totally can buy votes. The question is how many?

    And also you'd blanket facebook, not TV.

    Nobeard
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Bloomberg is going to find out he can’t buy votes. The old days of just blanketing TV with ads being enough to win are gone.

    Steyer has shown the opposite. You totally can buy votes. The question is how many?

    And also you'd blanket facebook, not TV.

    Bloomberg hired old consultants who are just bilking him for a percentage of the TV ad buy. So he's going to spend a ton on TV.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
    TryCatcherYoutubeCantidoshrykeFencingsaxGennenalyse RuebenElldrenMan in the Mists
  • ToxTox I kill threads Punch DimensionRegistered User regular
    edited November 9
    Sleep wrote: »
    I mean no one is actually suggesting what we should be doing. I'm willing to admit I'm a bit of an extremist in this regard though. As always Warren's deal here is the friendly way for us to go about these things, same with sanders even. However sanders is pretty much always swinging for the fences with his messaging and can get away with saying billionaires shouldn't exist, it's right in his wheelhouse message wise. Warren coming down just slightly to his right is also pretty predictable there as well.

    Honestly if I didn't know any better I'd think they were just straight up coordinating game at this point.

    I think it's more likely she's going for the Price is Right's "$X+1" approach

    Tox on
    Wishlists! General | Gaming | Comics | Twitter! | Dilige, et quod vis fac
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Bloomberg is going to find out he can’t buy votes. The old days of just blanketing TV with ads being enough to win are gone.

    Steyer has shown the opposite. You totally can buy votes. The question is how many?

    The answer is "not many." Enough to keep him in the primaries, not enough for voters to care.

    RchanenFencingsax
  • jmcdonaldjmcdonald I voted, did you? DC(ish)Registered User regular
    Lanz wrote: »
    Just a note of order, @jmcdonald: that conversation was this thread, lasted two pages with a few posts of spillover before the next piece of news hit, the point of rhetorical contention was voiced by exactly one poster, who then apologized for being snappy one page later on account of being tired and under the weather


    Also the last thread got closed days before the Harris plan was released.

    Knit dan made two points:

    Prison to school pipeline, which had one poster parroting this

    Work day is too long, which had at least three posters parroting this

    Mea culpa - the bad takes all blend together so I had simply assumed that it was the closed thread

    shryke wrote: »
    ...Barack "charisma isn't a dump stat, nerds" Obama...
    Elvenshae
This discussion has been closed.