***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[Armada]

Nah we can still use a purity test for a blatant racist like Bloomberg. That ain’t even a purity test that’s just maintaining standards. Let us not become like republicans and be willing to vote for anyone with a D next to their name. There are standards that the party should hold up and Bloomberg comes short of them. Far far short of them. I ain’t hear to waste time to see and hope if that clown is apologetic when there’s other candidates that are better and don’t have the **** record he does

 

[RustyShackleford]

Not gonna celebrate something Jeff Bezos did, I think I have voiced my displeasure with him enough for people to know I am not a fan. But I have no problem if others commend him. It is a significant amount of money. Donationing 7-10% of someone's net worth is significant. If a regular person did that they would definitely feel it.

The reason he is rightfully get this much flack is that he undermines effort to raise more revenue in order for society as a whole to make the necessary changes. This is something I pointed out to DWalk about the downsides to private donations. Not only is 10 billion not nearly enough, solving social and economic problems now are dependent of how altruistic the billionaire and millionaire class is. Some of the blowback from the Bernie crowd is because Bernie has this weird personal beef with Bezos. I doubt if Bill Gates made this commitment, there would be this much blowback. But If Bezos was out there acting like he is find with Amazon being tax and regualted fairly, people would be less upset. Bezos is ******* hypocrite, so I see not reason to celebrate him.

BTW, their is tons of blame to go around for the current state of affairs. However, Climate Change is not just a failure of capitalism, that is a convenient answer. A socialist economy could have us in this predicament. Not because workers have more power in a friend decisions means they will not rent week. Hell a bunch of social democracies are propped up by fossil fuel money. Unfettered capitalism produces disasterous results, but so does any economic system that is not well managed and organized.

All things considered, Climate Change is mainly a failure of government. To identify a problem, probably regulate it, and manage the economy in order to align incentives so a problem gets solved. Governments are economic actors, and they have been completely been asleep at the wheel. A market economy could have been organized to fight climate change. And of course firms have used their money and power to bend governments to their will in America and some other nations. However, look all over the world even in countries with different laws on lobbying and relationships between firms and government, and you will see similar inaction. So as always, no matter the economic system, good governance matters.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Obviously not my ideal candidate but we have future Supreme Court Justice appointments, as well as countless federal judges and a long list of other important items on the board champ. Now’s the time for the Democratic Party voters to put away all the purity tests for the time being and get rid of the worst President in modern history which is Trump. It’s time to start thinking about what’s important. Let’s see if Bloomberg is actually apologetic for his past actions and comments and makes up for his mistakes with tangible items.

So you gonna drop your purity test regarding Bernie?

If you so against purity test, I guess Kamala Harris got an apology coming her way too, right?

 

[Mark Antony]

makes up for his mistakes with tangible items.

Like what? (serious question) Don't say money.

 

[-Red-]

ruling corporations out of the potential solution set slows progress toward carbon reductions

there is an enormous amount of pent up private investment waiting to be made for utility scale wind and solar. Corporate customers want it, and so do increasing numbers of homeowners. It is the cheapest, cleanest power

the grid dispatches it to customers first, whenever the wind is blowing and the sun is shining, before other forms of generation, so that investors can predict with a high degree of certainty how much power they will be able to sell. It is an explosion of development waiting to happen

it isn’t happening because there is no transmission to get that power to market. the barrier to transmission is regulatory in nature. States veto transmission lines that would cross their territory or that would be built by entrepreneurs rather than utilities

why displace that private investment with a federal take over of this kind of development? why not address the transmission bottleneck instead? you believe that there is some way in which a federal takeover might build these facilities better or cheaper or faster than the market would if the transmission barrier could be overcome?

What we need is vastly increased government regulations, not a gutting of them. Obviously, this must be accompanied by vastly increased government investment as well, but the notion that unleashing market forces is what's going to save us from climate catastrophe seems exactly wrong to me.

 

[dacomeup]

Obviously not my ideal candidate but we have future Supreme Court Justice appointments, as well as countless federal judges and a long list of other important items on the board champ. Now’s the time for the Democratic Party voters to put away all the purity tests for the time being and get rid of the worst President in modern history which is Trump. It’s time to start thinking about what’s important. Let’s see if Bloomberg is actually apologetic for his past actions and comments and makes up for his mistakes with tangible items.

Bro you literally killed Kamala Harris in here for months with these same purity tests. Questioning her blackness, but now throwing support behind a guy who literally terrorized black New Yorkers, for just being black, myself included. This is important. This will always be important. Bloomberg was defending this as recently as 2015. A half-*** apology when he wants the nomination isn't going to change anything.

 

[RustyShackleford]

There is a difference between purity test and having standards.

I hated the way the Bernie crowd used purity test because they were often insincere, petty, and hypocritical. They were used to disqualify people that were on aggregate good actors but had flaws, while ignoring the fact Bernie was exactly that.

Mike Bloomberg has not proven to be a good actor on aggregate, and routinely fails to live up to the claimed standards of the liberals and the Democratic Party. So he should be disqualified from consideration in the primary.

If he pulls it out and folk then want to make a different calculation, then fine, but under 4% of the primary has taken place so far. It is too early for these "he is better than Trump" calculations. The whole damn field is better than Trump.

 

[handullz]

I’m all about that candidate that can’t BEAT Trump. That’s all that matters to me. So with that in mind to answer your question I would prefer a Bloomberg nomination.

Hopping off the Biden train, big fella?

so you, a black man, go from Biden,who pushed the crime bill, to Bloomberg, who instituted stop and frisk.


there’s a word for that. Like, when you start to believe your oppressor is on your side.

cant think of it, doe.

 

[RustyShackleford]

What we need is vastly increased government regulations, not a gutting of them. Obviously, this must be accompanied by vastly increased government investment as well, but the notion that unleashing market forces is what's going to save us from climate catastrophe seems exactly wrong to me.

Nah, we need market forces to align to fight climate change.

 

[-Red-]

 

[rolaholic]

Joe going at that POS's neck over faking the funk over his disingenuous Obama embracement tour he's conveniently been on all of a sudden

 

[-Red-]

Nah, we need market forces to align to fight climate change.

How is this supposed to happen, exactly? Market forces care about and will prioritize short-term profits over everything. And fossil fuels are still the cheapest thing around. There may be some attraction for the private sector to develop clean energy technology and infrastructure, particularly if they're granted (semi-)monopolies over various products and/or regions, but there's no way that can supplant business as usual in any meaningful sense nor with the kind of urgency needed. And why would that be preferable to the state intervening?

 

[RustyShackleford]

Joe coming at that POS's neck over faking the funk on that Obama embrace he's conveniently been on all of a sudden

If Joey got anything left in the tank, he needs to turn back the clock tonight and take Mike's head off like he did Rudy and Paul Ryan.

 

[boris]

Woman who accused Trump of rape says he is trying to delay her defamation suit and stall on giving DNA

Writer E. Jean Carroll's lawyers say he's also trying to delay her defamation suit against him. She claims he raped her in a department store dressing room in the 1990s.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[heelsandeers]

What we need is vastly increased government regulations, not a gutting of them. Obviously, this must be accompanied by vastly increased government investment as well, but the notion that unleashing market forces is what's going to save us from climate catastrophe seems exactly wrong to me.

not gutting anything. we need the federal government (rather than states) to site multistage transmission lines. that would enable rapid construction of a mostly-renewables grid quickly

it's a way to fix the transmission problem and let private investment cover new generation. It's what Texas did (about as red a state as there is) and they now have more wind power than any other state by a multiple of 3

the US government can and should be funding more climate science and climate mitigation research/implementation, no doubt about that

 

[storm2006]

theyre talking about at the primary stage, not the general election. the idea is to beat trump as the republican nominee and keep him from making it to general election to begin with.

1. That would make total sense but too many primaries were cancelled already.

2. If you read the way it’s worded, they are literally saying Bloomberg should run in the general election as a Republican to split up Republican votes such that the Dems would have the most.

That’s the irony/stupidity/hilarity of the tweet. They don’t even know how elections work

 

[wavycrocket]

And Nunes read this known disinformation and horse **** into the record smh

 

[rolaholic]

 

[handullz]

If Joey got anything left in the tank, he needs to turn back the clock tonight and take Mike's head off like he did Rudy and Paul Ryan.

Handsome Joe After a trip to Australia

 

[gry60]

this would have to assume that bloomberg wanted trump out of office AND didnt want to be president

Do you think they understand causes and consequences? Implications? Equivalencies? All those concepts are foreign to them.

 

[IATT]

dwalk31

 

[Present]

"What we need is vastly increased government regulations, not a gutting of them. Obviously, this must be accompanied by vastly increased government investment as well, but the notion that unleashing market forces is what's going to save us from climate catastrophe seems exactly wrong to me."

Nah, we need market forces to align to fight climate change.

Need everything.

Somehow Climate Change might be just the thing we need to wake people up and force them to realize that we, as humans, have always had more in common than we ever had in difference and perhaps rising sea water would away some of this hell we have created for ourselves.

Weve made the Earth WAY too comfortable for devils.

Tribalism aint got nothin on shared suffering.

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[dwalk31]

dwalk31

Tweet showing unavailable