Strictly, it means that you judge one candidate to be best for your biggest priorities, not that no other candidate could be a suitable second choice on the merits of their policies that are lower priorities for you.
when it comes to presidential elections, the president does have more direct authority over how many bombs to drop on other countries than over legislation
The other way that foreign policy impacts domestic policy is that murderous ghouls who do or assist others in murdering political opponents and activists abroad get promoted and rise in power. Get the right leader, and they can use their skills at home.
The iron wall between foreign and domestic policy is a myth. You can see that in the immigrant children concentration camps on our soil.
Our foreign policy is actively corrosive to our own democracy, they're not unrelated.
How so? I hadn’t thought of it that way, would you mind expanding on it?
Primarily in two ways, with a third more philosophical one. The constant spending on war is intrinsically linked to the influence defense contractors have in government. Fewer wars, less profit for the MIC, less ability to buy people off. Additionally, its a crutch for politicians. Our ability to be on a constant war footing almost anywhere is politically useful whenever an administration wants to look tough and also ends up leading to politicians having to explain why they're not getting involved in every local brush fire to a voting population that has taken our involvement around the world for granted. Politicians can buy polling numbers with the blood of foreigners because we've made that possible on a moments notice.
The more philosophical concern is that a nation that's constantly at war but rarely actually feeling the cost loses perspective on the value of life. I mean you see it in this thread in a couple ways even. We murder and maim people all across the globe every day in the name of American empire, or intervention, or peace keeping or whatever and I think its hard to argue our indifference to it isn't in part because its always been that way. I can't help but view that as a concerning thing for a democracy.
You forgot where we have twisted our foreign policy to the personal benefit of our head of state. That's pretty fucking corrosive.
I mean sure, but that's just the current state of affairs. Our foreign policy doesn't become good when he leaves.
Like I said earlier in the thread, my two biggest priorities are the disassembly of our foreign policy machine and single payer. This means there's one candidate for me.
Our foreign policy machine has already been dismantled by Trump. The state department is in shambles. We need to rebuild it at this point.
i'm not saying Corbyn is an unpalatable figure, I'm saying Corbyn has been criticized for past remarks re: Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. and characterized as being terrorist friendly and I think that's a FP criticism with some impact to it, whereas Sanders doesn't have that history.
The GOP apparently literally have video of him in front of a huge crowd of Sandinistas while they chant "Here, there, everywhere, the Yankee will die". And that is apparently only the start.
I think one should not confuse a lack of anyone bothering to go after him on this issue with their being nothing there. I'm betting this is a case that would easily be made if anyone wanted to bother.
i feel like if they actually had this video we'd have seen it already
Why?
No one has any reason to use it right now. The GOP was pro-Sanders last election (in that they didn't think he'd win so they wanted him to weaken Clinton as much as possible) or this election (because he's not Biden and that's who they are going after) and Democrats know it's not really gonna work for them.
Like, even if you think that video is fake there's no shortage of things (legitimate and bullshit) one could dredge up about Sanders if you wanted to go at him hard. But we don't see any of them really because he has not yet been in a position where anyone has seen the need to bother. Same as for basically all the candidates this year who aren't Biden.
i'm not saying Corbyn is an unpalatable figure, I'm saying Corbyn has been criticized for past remarks re: Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. and characterized as being terrorist friendly and I think that's a FP criticism with some impact to it, whereas Sanders doesn't have that history.
The GOP apparently literally have video of him in front of a huge crowd of Sandinistas while they chant "Here, there, everywhere, the Yankee will die". And that is apparently only the start.
I think one should not confuse a lack of anyone bothering to go after him on this issue with their being nothing there. I'm betting this is a case that would easily be made if anyone wanted to bother.
i feel like if they actually had this video we'd have seen it already
Why?
No one has any reason to use it right now. The GOP was pro-Sanders last election (in that they didn't think he'd win so they wanted him to weaken Clinton as much as possible) or this election (because he's not Biden and that's who they are going after) and Democrats know it's not really gonna work for them.
Like, even if you think that video is fake there's no shortage of things (legitimate and bullshit) one could dredge up about Sanders if you wanted to go at him hard. But we don't see any of them really because he has not yet been in a position where anyone has seen the need to bother. Same as for basically all the candidates this year who aren't Biden.
Off the top of my head, if they weaken Mr. Sanders they boost Ms. Warren, which hurts Mr. Biden
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.
The other way that foreign policy impacts domestic policy is that murderous ghouls who do or assist others in murdering political opponents and activists abroad get promoted and rise in power. Get the right leader, and they can use their skills at home.
The iron wall between foreign and domestic policy is a myth. You can see that in the immigrant children concentration camps on our soil.
Oh please. The people brutalizing immigrants are not people who were running around brutalizing foreigners first. They are just standard home-grown all-american racists who probably never even left the country.
Our foreign policy is actively corrosive to our own democracy, they're not unrelated.
How so? I hadn’t thought of it that way, would you mind expanding on it?
Primarily in two ways, with a third more philosophical one. The constant spending on war is intrinsically linked to the influence defense contractors have in government. Fewer wars, less profit for the MIC, less ability to buy people off. Additionally, its a crutch for politicians. Our ability to be on a constant war footing almost anywhere is politically useful whenever an administration wants to look tough and also ends up leading to politicians having to explain why they're not getting involved in every local brush fire to a voting population that has taken our involvement around the world for granted. Politicians can buy polling numbers with the blood of foreigners because we've made that possible on a moments notice.
The defence industry doesn't need wars to be huge and influential. And Blood for Polls is one of those ideas that sounds good but does not seem to actually be a deliberate strategy by anyone and more just a thing that is taken advantage of when it happens. Because the ship that is foreign policy is very large and does not turn on that kind of a whim.
Like, the first point is the best one here and if you actually wanted to do something about it you'd need a policy of almost completely dismantling the US's defence and foreign policy apparatus. Which is well outside what anyone getting close to the Presidency is gonna be proposing and is very much isolationist to boot.
The more philosophical concern is that a nation that's constantly at war but rarely actually feeling the cost loses perspective on the value of life. I mean you see it in this thread in a couple ways even. We murder and maim people all across the globe every day in the name of American empire, or intervention, or peace keeping or whatever and I think its hard to argue our indifference to it isn't in part because its always been that way. I can't help but view that as a concerning thing for a democracy.
Given the actions taken during WWII if nothing else, I find this kind of reasoning deeply flawed. The two concepts don't seem to actually be correlated.
US foreign policy is only relevant to the thread in regards to the policies of those running in the Dem Primary. This isn't the place to get into the iniquities of present foreign policy (unless a Dem candidate is saying they'll do the same) - there's a whole thread for foreign policy already.
Tweet is from the Texas Civil Rights Project, a nonprofit group of attorneys focused on, among other things, voting rights, fighting racial and economic discrimination and reforming the justice system.
Text:
HAPPENING NOW:
JulianCastro along with our organizers and attorneys are escorting a group of asylum-seekers into the US to pursue their cases. They have been forced to wait in dangerous conditions under Trump's "Remain in Mexico" despite having an exemption.
#LetThemIn
Basically, today Castro and the Texas Civil Rights Project are organizing a big, public event, with press on hand, to force the the border patrol and the Trump administration to follow its own rules and allow asylum seekers who qualify for exemptions under "Remain in Mexico" to enter the U.S.
i'm not saying Corbyn is an unpalatable figure, I'm saying Corbyn has been criticized for past remarks re: Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. and characterized as being terrorist friendly and I think that's a FP criticism with some impact to it, whereas Sanders doesn't have that history.
The GOP apparently literally have video of him in front of a huge crowd of Sandinistas while they chant "Here, there, everywhere, the Yankee will die". And that is apparently only the start.
I think one should not confuse a lack of anyone bothering to go after him on this issue with their being nothing there. I'm betting this is a case that would easily be made if anyone wanted to bother.
i feel like if they actually had this video we'd have seen it already
Why?
No one has any reason to use it right now. The GOP was pro-Sanders last election (in that they didn't think he'd win so they wanted him to weaken Clinton as much as possible) or this election (because he's not Biden and that's who they are going after) and Democrats know it's not really gonna work for them.
Like, even if you think that video is fake there's no shortage of things (legitimate and bullshit) one could dredge up about Sanders if you wanted to go at him hard. But we don't see any of them really because he has not yet been in a position where anyone has seen the need to bother. Same as for basically all the candidates this year who aren't Biden.
He also has praised Castro's regime on video after traveling to Cuba and trying to meet with him. There's video of him honeymooning in the Soviet Union with Communist Party officials giving him the Potemkin village tour, after which he came back and said bread lines were a good thing (again on video).
As he stood on Soviet soil, Sanders, then 46 years old, criticized the cost of housing and health care in the United States, while lauding the lower prices — but not the quality — of that available in the Soviet Union. Then, at a banquet attended by about 100 people, Sanders blasted the way the United States had intervened in other countries, stunning one of those who had accompanied him.
...
Sanders then traveled to Yaroslavl, where he and his companions toured factories, hospitals and schools. During a boat ride on the Volga River, Sanders interviewed the city’s mayor for a Burlington radio show, quizzing him on the costs of housing and health care.
Throughout the trip, local officials took aside members of Sanders’s entourage, telling them that the Soviet system was near collapse. At one point, officials of an engine factory that employed thousands of people told Howard Seaver, an official with a Burlington business group, that orders from Moscow had fallen, and they asked whether he could help arrange business with the United States.
...
On one of the last days of the trip, officials in Yaroslavl took the Vermonters to a workers’ retreat at an oil refinery for a classic Russian celebration: a trip to the sauna and a bath in cold water. Wrapping themselves in towels and then putting on toga-style sheets, Sanders and his colleagues gathered around a table lined with vodka bottles. A video of the event shows Sanders, bare-chested, listening in delight to Russian folk songs. In response, Sanders and other Americans sang the Woody Guthrie ballad “This Land Is Your Land.”
...
“Under Castro, enormous progress has been made in improving the lives of poor people,” Sanders said before leaving, while noting “enormous deficiencies” in democratic rights. While he failed in his goal to meet Fidel Castro, he returned home with even greater praise than he had for the Soviet Union.
“I did not see a hungry child. I did not see any homeless people,” Sanders told the Burlington Free Press. While Cuba was “not a perfect society,” he said, the country “not only has free health care but very high-quality health care . . . The revolution there is far deeper and more profound than I understood it to be. It really is a revolution in terms of values.”
Warren’s plan includes closing a loophole that allows federal judges to escape investigations for misconduct when they resign from office or are elevated to the Supreme Court ― a loophole that Warren has railed against in the past.
“My plan extends the authority of the Judicial Conference to former judges so that individuals under investigation cannot simply resign from the bench to avoid accountability,” Warren said. “This provision would allow the judiciary to reopen the investigations into Alex Kozinski, Maryanne Trump-Barry, Brett Kavanaugh, and any other judge who benefited from this loophole.”
Warren also unveiled several proposals she hasn’t mentioned publicly before. They include prohibiting judges from deciding for themselves whether they should recuse themselves from a case due to conflict of interest; requiring Supreme Court justices to give written explanations of their decisions when a party asks for a recusal; and giving strong disciplinary tools to judicial ethics watchdogs, such as allowing them to take away nonvested pension benefits from judges.
Warren’s plan also proposes extending the Code of Conduct for United States Judges to the Supreme Court, which is currently not covered by such guidelines.
Explaining the need for this provision, Warren cited the 83 ethics complaints lodged against Kavanaugh that were dismissed upon his confirmation to the Supreme Court, as well as the lack of action after Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas failed to disclose payments his wife received from a conservative judicial activist group.
“Because the Supreme Court is not covered by a Code of Conduct, no procedure exists to file new complaints” against Kavanaugh, Warren said.
Update on Castro's efforts at the border today: All 12 asylum seekers who crossed with Castro and the Texas Civil Right Project were turned away and sent back to Mexico, in violation of the border patrol's own policies.
UPDATE: hours after we were told LGBT and disabled asylum seekers would have their cases heard, they have been returned to Mexico.
By law, these migrants are supposed to be exempt from the Remain in Mexico policy—but CBP had decided to ignore their due process. Outrageous.
We crossed back into the US with 12 LGBTQ and disabled asylum seekers who should not be included in the remain in Mexico policy.
I can understand the mindset that lets you ignore due process when nobody is looking. What I can't fathom is not putting on a show when a presidential campaign rolls through shop.
Anyway, good on Castro. I don't watch the candidates live right now, so I'm not sure why he doesn't get much traction. I like everything he's done during the campaign in print, he's seems like a great guy to have on our side.
This is a brutal blow to due process. These 12 people have been in CBP custody for 3 hours, which means that each person had less than 15 minutes for their non-refoulement interviews.
So, one of the latest news has been the NBA bending over to China because the general manager of the Rockets dared to support the Honk Kong protests. Here's what the Dem primary candidates have been saying:
So, one of the latest news has been the NBA bending over to China because the general manager of the Rockets dared to support the Honk Kong protests. Here's what the Dem primary candidates have been saying:
This Reddit thread has the rest of the US politicians talking about it, including quite a bit of the GOP.
Corporation selling out basically everything they have to get a piece of that Chinese economy is basically the entire story of chinese entry into the global economy sadly. Nice to see the potential nominees talking about it at least.
+32
Options
ElJeffeNot actually a mod.Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPAMod Emeritus
i'm not saying Corbyn is an unpalatable figure, I'm saying Corbyn has been criticized for past remarks re: Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. and characterized as being terrorist friendly and I think that's a FP criticism with some impact to it, whereas Sanders doesn't have that history.
The GOP apparently literally have video of him in front of a huge crowd of Sandinistas while they chant "Here, there, everywhere, the Yankee will die". And that is apparently only the start.
I think one should not confuse a lack of anyone bothering to go after him on this issue with their being nothing there. I'm betting this is a case that would easily be made if anyone wanted to bother.
i feel like if they actually had this video we'd have seen it already
Why?
No one has any reason to use it right now. The GOP was pro-Sanders last election (in that they didn't think he'd win so they wanted him to weaken Clinton as much as possible) or this election (because he's not Biden and that's who they are going after) and Democrats know it's not really gonna work for them.
Like, even if you think that video is fake there's no shortage of things (legitimate and bullshit) one could dredge up about Sanders if you wanted to go at him hard. But we don't see any of them really because he has not yet been in a position where anyone has seen the need to bother. Same as for basically all the candidates this year who aren't Biden.
In the interview I read with Sanders that I mentioned some pages upthread, he was specifically asked about this event, and his response was basically, "Yeah, and?"
Say what you will about Sanders, he owns his beliefs. I don't doubt his character at all, even if I would prefer him outside of the Oval Office.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
+20
Options
ElJeffeNot actually a mod.Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPAMod Emeritus
I can understand the mindset that lets you ignore due process when nobody is looking. What I can't fathom is not putting on a show when a presidential campaign rolls through shop.
Anyway, good on Castro. I don't watch the candidates live right now, so I'm not sure why he doesn't get much traction. I like everything he's done during the campaign in print, he's seems like a great guy to have on our side.
I think he doesn't get traction mostly because there is an embarrassment of strong candidates right now. And unfortunately, his signature issue isn't as popular as other candidates' signature issues.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
"He honeymooned in Russia" is just a terrible attack and the rest is watered down badly by a) always talking about how much a communist he is b) being in historical weeds c) his response as Jeffe said.
I'd appreciate a Sanders presidency just for its value in establishing whether or not pushing forward with zero regard for Beltway norms to do what you want to do is acceptable for a Democrat, or if that's a power only the Dark Side can use.
Though maybe he wouldn't test as much on that front as I'd hope, given some of his positions on Senate norms.
Kamar on
+1
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
Evidence suggests that Warren told the truth about being fired from teaching for being pregnant:
The (NJ) Herald News, Wednesday June 21, 1972. Two years after Warren left. Automatically is the key word here, friends. Unless Warren's principal was willing to buck norms, she would have been forced out.
PREGNANCY POLICY ON TEACHER VOIDED
NEWARK (AP) — Pregnant teachers can no longer be automatically forced out of New Jersey’s classrooms.
The State Division of Civil Rights overturned yesterday a requirement of the Piquannock Board of Education that a teacher must leave school after her fifth month of pregnancy.
Jenn is just a blogger but the newspaper clipping appears to be legit.
(Jenn corrects herself in a later tweet that this article was published one year after Warren left the job, not two.)
So IDK what the truth is, and honestly don't really care much, but I suspect this one will stick around since it plays well with her earlier comments about her ancestry in attack ads.
Styrofoam Sammich on
+1
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
So IDK what the truth is, and honestly don't really care much, but I suspect this one will stick around since it plays well with her earlier comments about her ancestry in attack ads.
So IDK what the truth is, and honestly don't really care much, but I suspect this one will stick around since it plays well with her earlier comments about her ancestry in attack ads.
This doesn't contradict the newspaper article saying that teachers were all forced out after five months of pregnancy, because Warren was offered an extension in April and then resigned in June 1971... and her child was born in September.
So she was offered an extension and then, later, when it was obvious that she was pregnant, she was forced to resign.
So IDK what the truth is, and honestly don't really care much, but I suspect this one will stick around since it plays well with her earlier comments about her ancestry in attack ads.
This doesn't contradict the newspaper article saying that teachers were all forced out after five months of pregnancy, because Warren was offered an extension in April and then resigned in June 1971... and her child was born in September.
So she was offered an extension and then, later, when it was obvious that she was pregnant, she was forced to resign.
Quite possibly, I don't know, and like I said, it doesn't really matter to me much. My point more was that there are enough crumbs here that supporters should expect this one to stick around, especially if she makes the general.
So IDK what the truth is, and honestly don't really care much, but I suspect this one will stick around since it plays well with her earlier comments about her ancestry in attack ads.
This doesn't contradict the newspaper article saying that teachers were all forced out after five months of pregnancy, because Warren was offered an extension in April and then resigned in June 1971... and her child was born in September.
So she was offered an extension and then, later, when it was obvious that she was pregnant, she was forced to resign.
Quite possibly, I don't know, and like I said, it doesn't really matter to me much. My point more was that there are enough crumbs here that supporters should expect this one to stick around, especially if she makes the general.
No, it's only going to matter if the media acts like it matters. This is a non-story.
So IDK what the truth is, and honestly don't really care much, but I suspect this one will stick around since it plays well with her earlier comments about her ancestry in attack ads.
This doesn't contradict the newspaper article saying that teachers were all forced out after five months of pregnancy, because Warren was offered an extension in April and then resigned in June 1971... and her child was born in September.
So she was offered an extension and then, later, when it was obvious that she was pregnant, she was forced to resign.
Quite possibly, I don't know, and like I said, it doesn't really matter to me much. My point more was that there are enough crumbs here that supporters should expect this one to stick around, especially if she makes the general.
No, it's only going to matter if the media acts like it matters. This is a non-story.
Well yes, it'll only matter if the media takes GOP attacks seriously and on good faith. So.....
i'm not saying Corbyn is an unpalatable figure, I'm saying Corbyn has been criticized for past remarks re: Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. and characterized as being terrorist friendly and I think that's a FP criticism with some impact to it, whereas Sanders doesn't have that history.
The GOP apparently literally have video of him in front of a huge crowd of Sandinistas while they chant "Here, there, everywhere, the Yankee will die". And that is apparently only the start.
I think one should not confuse a lack of anyone bothering to go after him on this issue with their being nothing there. I'm betting this is a case that would easily be made if anyone wanted to bother.
i feel like if they actually had this video we'd have seen it already
Why?
No one has any reason to use it right now. The GOP was pro-Sanders last election (in that they didn't think he'd win so they wanted him to weaken Clinton as much as possible) or this election (because he's not Biden and that's who they are going after) and Democrats know it's not really gonna work for them.
Like, even if you think that video is fake there's no shortage of things (legitimate and bullshit) one could dredge up about Sanders if you wanted to go at him hard. But we don't see any of them really because he has not yet been in a position where anyone has seen the need to bother. Same as for basically all the candidates this year who aren't Biden.
He also has praised Castro's regime on video after traveling to Cuba and trying to meet with him. There's video of him honeymooning in the Soviet Union with Communist Party officials giving him the Potemkin village tour, after which he came back and said bread lines were a good thing (again on video).
As he stood on Soviet soil, Sanders, then 46 years old, criticized the cost of housing and health care in the United States, while lauding the lower prices — but not the quality — of that available in the Soviet Union. Then, at a banquet attended by about 100 people, Sanders blasted the way the United States had intervened in other countries, stunning one of those who had accompanied him.
...
Sanders then traveled to Yaroslavl, where he and his companions toured factories, hospitals and schools. During a boat ride on the Volga River, Sanders interviewed the city’s mayor for a Burlington radio show, quizzing him on the costs of housing and health care.
Throughout the trip, local officials took aside members of Sanders’s entourage, telling them that the Soviet system was near collapse. At one point, officials of an engine factory that employed thousands of people told Howard Seaver, an official with a Burlington business group, that orders from Moscow had fallen, and they asked whether he could help arrange business with the United States.
...
On one of the last days of the trip, officials in Yaroslavl took the Vermonters to a workers’ retreat at an oil refinery for a classic Russian celebration: a trip to the sauna and a bath in cold water. Wrapping themselves in towels and then putting on toga-style sheets, Sanders and his colleagues gathered around a table lined with vodka bottles. A video of the event shows Sanders, bare-chested, listening in delight to Russian folk songs. In response, Sanders and other Americans sang the Woody Guthrie ballad “This Land Is Your Land.”
...
“Under Castro, enormous progress has been made in improving the lives of poor people,” Sanders said before leaving, while noting “enormous deficiencies” in democratic rights. While he failed in his goal to meet Fidel Castro, he returned home with even greater praise than he had for the Soviet Union.
“I did not see a hungry child. I did not see any homeless people,” Sanders told the Burlington Free Press. While Cuba was “not a perfect society,” he said, the country “not only has free health care but very high-quality health care . . . The revolution there is far deeper and more profound than I understood it to be. It really is a revolution in terms of values.”
"He honeymooned in Russia" is just a terrible attack and the rest is watered down badly by a) always talking about how much a communist he is b) being in historical weeds c) his response as Jeffe said.
I don't think it's watered down by any of that. That stuff is all a major and easy line of attack if anyone actually wanted to bother.
Trump will get more juice out of each squeeze of Pocahontas, he's too lazy and his base is too dumb to be walked through the teacher outrage. It's not super complicated, but it's too nuanced to easily transform into flingable bullshit.
0
Options
WACriminalDying Is Easy, Young ManLiving Is HarderRegistered Userregular
I think it's the height of special pleading to say that "nuanced he-said, she-said about why somebody got fired in the 70's" will stick and impact a candidacy, but "78-year-old dude literally JUST had a heart attack" won't.
I think it's the height of special pleading to say that "nuanced he-said, she-said about why somebody got fired in the 70's" will stick and impact a candidacy, but "78-year-old dude literally JUST had a heart attack" won't.
I didn't. Did someone else?
+2
Options
ElJeffeNot actually a mod.Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPAMod Emeritus
Well shit, a contemporary newspaper article and examination of the timeline suggests Warren is telling the truth, but a right wing tabloid says she's lying.
If only I knew which to believe!
Hey guys, let's tweet about this issue until the media picks it up and runs with it, that'll definitely suss out the truth of the matter.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
"He honeymooned in Russia" is just a terrible attack and the rest is watered down badly by a) always talking about how much a communist he is b) being in historical weeds c) his response as Jeffe said.
I can't fathom looking at a post that says - with video evidence - that he praised Castro's regime on video, that he bought into a bunch of Potemkin village nonsense in Russia, and that he said in an easily-clippable soundbyte that it was a good thing for people to have to wait in bread lines and then somehow concluding that the attack being outlined is 'he honeymooned in Russia'.
Those are like the only four words in the entire post that aren't hugely damaging to a general electorate.
"He honeymooned in Russia" is just a terrible attack and the rest is watered down badly by a) always talking about how much a communist he is b) being in historical weeds c) his response as Jeffe said.
I can't fathom looking at a post that says - with video evidence - that he praised Castro's regime on video, that he bought into a bunch of Potemkin village nonsense in Russia, and that he said in an easily-clippable soundbyte that it was a good thing for people to have to wait in bread lines and then somehow concluding that the attack being outlined is 'he honeymooned in Russia'.
Those are like the only four words in the entire post that aren't hugely damaging to a general electorate.
You act like I only spoke about the honeymoon thing or something. The constant misrepresentation here is getting really old. I think "he spoke well of Castro" and the like might struggle to gain ground for the same reason that "socialism!" has started to wear thin as an effective attack as well. Red baiting just ain't what it used to be. A lot of people will look at something like that and go...."ok but I can't afford health care".
However, I do think it stands a chance of being more effective in the primary than the general given general liberal attitudes towards anything Russia/USSR right now. There hasn't been much incentive for anyone to attack Sanders yet for a couple reasons.
Posts
The iron wall between foreign and domestic policy is a myth. You can see that in the immigrant children concentration camps on our soil.
Our foreign policy machine has already been dismantled by Trump. The state department is in shambles. We need to rebuild it at this point.
Why?
No one has any reason to use it right now. The GOP was pro-Sanders last election (in that they didn't think he'd win so they wanted him to weaken Clinton as much as possible) or this election (because he's not Biden and that's who they are going after) and Democrats know it's not really gonna work for them.
Like, even if you think that video is fake there's no shortage of things (legitimate and bullshit) one could dredge up about Sanders if you wanted to go at him hard. But we don't see any of them really because he has not yet been in a position where anyone has seen the need to bother. Same as for basically all the candidates this year who aren't Biden.
Off the top of my head, if they weaken Mr. Sanders they boost Ms. Warren, which hurts Mr. Biden
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.
Oh please. The people brutalizing immigrants are not people who were running around brutalizing foreigners first. They are just standard home-grown all-american racists who probably never even left the country.
The defence industry doesn't need wars to be huge and influential. And Blood for Polls is one of those ideas that sounds good but does not seem to actually be a deliberate strategy by anyone and more just a thing that is taken advantage of when it happens. Because the ship that is foreign policy is very large and does not turn on that kind of a whim.
Like, the first point is the best one here and if you actually wanted to do something about it you'd need a policy of almost completely dismantling the US's defence and foreign policy apparatus. Which is well outside what anyone getting close to the Presidency is gonna be proposing and is very much isolationist to boot.
Given the actions taken during WWII if nothing else, I find this kind of reasoning deeply flawed. The two concepts don't seem to actually be correlated.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Tweet is from the Texas Civil Rights Project, a nonprofit group of attorneys focused on, among other things, voting rights, fighting racial and economic discrimination and reforming the justice system.
Text:
Basically, today Castro and the Texas Civil Rights Project are organizing a big, public event, with press on hand, to force the the border patrol and the Trump administration to follow its own rules and allow asylum seekers who qualify for exemptions under "Remain in Mexico" to enter the U.S.
The whole tweet thread is worth following.
He also has praised Castro's regime on video after traveling to Cuba and trying to meet with him. There's video of him honeymooning in the Soviet Union with Communist Party officials giving him the Potemkin village tour, after which he came back and said bread lines were a good thing (again on video).
There's absolutely no question Sander's has a shipping container full of skeletons and damaging video on foreign policy and otherwise.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Here's Castro's take on twitter:
Text:
Good on Castro. Fingers crossed that "review" isn't just "ten second glance, DENIED."
Anyway, good on Castro. I don't watch the candidates live right now, so I'm not sure why he doesn't get much traction. I like everything he's done during the campaign in print, he's seems like a great guy to have on our side.
According to the TCRP, it was less than 15 minutes per person:
Text:
This Reddit thread has the rest of the US politicians talking about it, including quite a bit of the GOP.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Corporation selling out basically everything they have to get a piece of that Chinese economy is basically the entire story of chinese entry into the global economy sadly. Nice to see the potential nominees talking about it at least.
In the interview I read with Sanders that I mentioned some pages upthread, he was specifically asked about this event, and his response was basically, "Yeah, and?"
Say what you will about Sanders, he owns his beliefs. I don't doubt his character at all, even if I would prefer him outside of the Oval Office.
I think he doesn't get traction mostly because there is an embarrassment of strong candidates right now. And unfortunately, his signature issue isn't as popular as other candidates' signature issues.
Though maybe he wouldn't test as much on that front as I'd hope, given some of his positions on Senate norms.
Jenn is just a blogger but the newspaper clipping appears to be legit.
(Jenn corrects herself in a later tweet that this article was published one year after Warren left the job, not two.)
So IDK what the truth is, and honestly don't really care much, but I suspect this one will stick around since it plays well with her earlier comments about her ancestry in attack ads.
Emily is a writer, formerly of Vox.
Tweet text:
This doesn't contradict the newspaper article saying that teachers were all forced out after five months of pregnancy, because Warren was offered an extension in April and then resigned in June 1971... and her child was born in September.
So she was offered an extension and then, later, when it was obvious that she was pregnant, she was forced to resign.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Quite possibly, I don't know, and like I said, it doesn't really matter to me much. My point more was that there are enough crumbs here that supporters should expect this one to stick around, especially if she makes the general.
No, it's only going to matter if the media acts like it matters. This is a non-story.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Well yes, it'll only matter if the media takes GOP attacks seriously and on good faith. So.....
Man, Sanders bought into the Russian lie? What a fuckin rube.
I don't think it's watered down by any of that. That stuff is all a major and easy line of attack if anyone actually wanted to bother.
(Direct link to plan)
Well, gee, if lobbyists don't like it I guess he better reconsider
I didn't. Did someone else?
If only I knew which to believe!
Hey guys, let's tweet about this issue until the media picks it up and runs with it, that'll definitely suss out the truth of the matter.
I can't fathom looking at a post that says - with video evidence - that he praised Castro's regime on video, that he bought into a bunch of Potemkin village nonsense in Russia, and that he said in an easily-clippable soundbyte that it was a good thing for people to have to wait in bread lines and then somehow concluding that the attack being outlined is 'he honeymooned in Russia'.
Those are like the only four words in the entire post that aren't hugely damaging to a general electorate.
You act like I only spoke about the honeymoon thing or something. The constant misrepresentation here is getting really old. I think "he spoke well of Castro" and the like might struggle to gain ground for the same reason that "socialism!" has started to wear thin as an effective attack as well. Red baiting just ain't what it used to be. A lot of people will look at something like that and go...."ok but I can't afford health care".
However, I do think it stands a chance of being more effective in the primary than the general given general liberal attitudes towards anything Russia/USSR right now. There hasn't been much incentive for anyone to attack Sanders yet for a couple reasons.