Biden

[Kung Wu]

The Washington Post ran an opinion piece on how the MSM has been tougher on Biden than Trump.

It's behind a paywall so I won't bother linking it, not that it's worth reading anyway.

The left not only invented the strawman argument, they use it at hypersonic speeds.

They slowly drop articles to alter history and create doubt for future generations searching the past. It's honestly scary the propaganda coming out of the main stream media. If I'm a Democrat I would be very concerned about how my party was being hijacked by win-at-all-costs leftists that DO NOT have the average Democrat's or American's interest at heart.

[Shockm]

They slowly drop articles to alter history and create doubt for future generations searching the past. It's honestly scary the propaganda coming out of the main stream media. If I'm a Democrat I would be very concerned about how my party was being hijacked by win-at-all-costs leftists that DO NOT have the average Democrat's or American's interest at heart.

To expand your post and combine mine from a couple of posts ago, I should have said that All Hell Will Break loose again, and MSM will say that “Mostly Peaceful Riots” are taking place every single day.

[wufan]

They slowly drop articles to alter history and create doubt for future generations searching the past. It's honestly scary the propaganda coming out of the main stream media. If I'm a Democrat I would be very concerned about how my party was being hijacked by win-at-all-costs leftists that DO NOT have the average Democrat's or American's interest at heart.

The internet has created a real memory hole.

[ShockerPrez]

You have to wonder about the sanity of 40% of the country at this point.

[N Crestway]

Think Joe is doing an image makeover. When discussing Russia's threat to the Ukraine and NATO countermeasures, he was speaking in the lowest, most forceful voice yet. He seems to be imulating some movie star like Robert DeNiro who is macho and has liberal credentials. Or is this the real Joe Biden... but I kind of doubt it.

[SubGod22]

If I'm a Democrat I would be very concerned about how my party was being hijacked by win-at-all-costs leftists that DO NOT have the average Democrat's or American's interest at heart.

Another reason the two party system sucks. Not all Dem or Dem ideas are horrible. The same xould be said for those in the GOP. But there's such a massive divide in what they believe at their core that the parties have so much conflict within themselves that neither party is truly representative of any real core values or ideals. And as each party gets stretched even more extremely by those on the fringes it will only get worse.

Our government would be much more representative if they didn't just throw everyone into these two piles no matter how extremely different many are from the others. Though an actual educated voting base that looks beyond letters would also help. Both sides are equally guilty of such behavior.

And yes, I know getting beyond two parties is very complicated with how things currently are, but that doesn't change how beneficial it would be overall to all Americans and the country as a whole.

[wufan]

Another reason the two party system sucks. Not all Dem or Dem ideas are horrible. The same xould be said for those in the GOP. But there's such a massive divide in what they believe at their core that the parties have so much conflict within themselves that neither party is truly representative of any real core values or ideals. And as each party gets stretched even more extremely by those on the fringes it will only get worse.

Our government would be much more representative if they didn't just throw everyone into these two piles no matter how extremely different many are from the others. Though an actual educated voting base that looks beyond letters would also help. Both sides are equally guilty of such behavior.

And yes, I know getting beyond two parties is very complicated with how things currently are, but that doesn't change how beneficial it would be overall to all Americans and the country as a whole.

If one presidential candidate represents 30% of my ideas and one represents 20%, and a third represents 40%, maybe I vote for the 40% guy, but the 20% guy wins. Why am I beholden to Mr 20%?

If my guy wins, should I be happy that I’m being 40% represented?

Better than a three party system would be if the federal gov had less power and it didn’t ****ing matter!

[SubGod22]

If one presidential candidate represents 30% of my ideas and one represents 20%, and a third represents 40%, maybe I vote for the 40% guy, but the 20% guy wins. Why am I beholden to Mr 20%?

If my guy wins, should I be happy that I’m being 40% represented?

Better than a three party system would be if the federal gov had less power and it didn’t ****ing matter!

That is also true. Though I've also never voted for someone who represents less than 50% of my views. I'm not sure I could knowingly vote for anyone who represents less than 80% of my views. As far as I'm concerned the more parties the better, and I'd really encourage a move to ranked choice voting so that the winner at least has some level of support among the majority.

And this wasn't just about the presidency. The president isn't supposed to have much power at all. The representative part of government is where this would matter as they're the ones who actually have the power, or are supposed to. And you're absolutely correct that our federal government has far more power than they were ever supposed to. Part of that could be remedied by repealing the 17th ammendment and putting that representation back to the states as it was originally intended. How the states willingly gave up their representation I'll never fully understand.

But none of it changes rhe fact that under the two party system, most people don't really have representation. Even the people they vote for and win don't represent many of them when it comes down to it. I believe about 40% of the population is registered as independent or other, but the two big parties dominate. Until that changes, and it may not, we will continue down the same destructive path we've been on for decades.

[wufan]

That is also true. Though I've also never voted for someone who represents less than 50% of my views. I'm not sure I could knowingly vote for anyone who represents less than 80% of my views. As far as I'm concerned the more parties the better, and I'd really encourage a move to ranked choice voting so that the winner at least has some level of support among the majority.

And this wasn't just about the presidency. The president isn't supposed to have much power at all. The representative part of government is where this would matter as they're the ones who actually have the power, or are supposed to. And you're absolutely correct that our federal government has far more power than they were ever supposed to. Part of that could be remedied by repealing the 17th ammendment and putting that representation back to the states as it was originally intended. How the states willingly gave up their representation I'll never fully understand.

But none of it changes rhe fact that under the two party system, most people don't really have representation. Even the people they vote for and win don't represent many of them when it comes down to it. I believe about 40% of the population is registered as independent or other, but the two big parties dominate. Until that changes, and it may not, we will continue down the same destructive path we've been on for decades.

Take it down to the state level: my argument holds even if they are more representative: 70/50/40%. My options are that I’m 70% represented, 50 or 40 depending on who wins. States need less power.

Take it down to my school board where party isn’t even listed in most cases. does NO party improve my representation if MY folks don’t win?

Why did the states hand over so much power? Better question is why did the people?

[pinstripers]

https://twitter.com/BBCYaldaHakim/status/1467440893565280265

Nearly four months since the Taliban seized power, Afghanistan is on the brink of a mass starvation that aid groups say threatens to kill a million children this winter

[wufan]

https://twitter.com/BBCYaldaHakim/st...40893565280265

Nearly four months since the Taliban seized power, Afghanistan is on the brink of a mass starvation that aid groups say threatens to kill a million children this winter

That’s terrible. Question for the US military: Are we non-interventional or world police?

[1972Shocker]

An Inconvenient Truth: IRS Data Prove Trump's 2018Tax Cuts and Jobs Act Was Boon for Middle- and Working Classes, Not So Much for the Wealthy

https://redstate.com/heartlandinstit...ealthy-n488368

That can't be correct. Just ask Chuck and Nancy.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) issued a press release on the eve of TCJA’s passage, claiming it would “stuff even more money in the pockets of the wealthy and the biggest corporations, while raising taxes on millions in the middle class.”

Schumer also claimed TCJA is “slanted toward the wealthy and powerful, and rains tax increases upon millions of middle-class citizens.”

Even more over-the-top was Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) assessment of the bill prior to its passage. According to Pelosi, the TCJA “is simply theft–monumental, brazen theft–from the American middle-class and from every person who aspires to reach it.”

Pelosi added, “The GOP tax scam is not a vote for an investment in growth or jobs, it is a vote to install a permanent plutocracy in our nation.”

While debating TCJA on the House floor, Pelosi described TCJA as “the worst bill in the history of the United States Congress.” She added TCJA would lead to “Armageddon,” as well as “the end of the world.”

MEASURING THE EFFECTS OF THE REPUBLICANS’ TAX CUTS AND JOBS ACT ON PERSONAL INCOME TAXES

https://www.heartland.org/publications-resources/publications/measuring-the-effects-of-the-republicans-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-on-personal-income-taxes

[asiseeit]

My take on the two party system and why it is better. I take you back to when Perot ran and
split the Republican vote allowing slick to win. There were far more conservative votes but the
Liberal won. Don't think the liberals/progressives have forgotten that formula for winning. They
could very well fund a 3rd party candidate that would siphon votes away from the Republican #1.
BTW, the same could be said when Rader helped the Republicans win. The bottom line is those
with enough power and money can sway elections by propping up candidates with just enough
popularity to change election outcomes. Voters need a clear choice and with the nation as divided
as it is now that is more important than ever.

[SubGod22]

Except there have been studies that showed Clinton would have won even without Perot. It's a BS excuse used by establishment parties to convince people that there are no other options.

If either establishment party wants the votes of those who vote third parties, run better candidates.

Though I do enjoy how libertarians and others are told their votes don't matter and at the same time being accused for why one candidate lost. Both sides blame third parties every time they lose. And as far as libertarians go, they're pretty evenly split on which side they might lean towards, but for the most part both establishment parties are too far away from their core beliefs, especially the candidates they nominate, to earn the support of those that vote third parties.

it's a shame that we live in a free country, but outside of the most authoritarian dictatorships, we have the fewest representative parties at the national level because the system is set up poorly.

If you want to get away from people "spoiling" elections with their votes or feeling forced to vote for the lesser of two evils, we need to move towards ranked choice voting.

[wufan]

Except there have been studies that showed Clinton would have won even without Perot. It's a BS excuse used by establishment parties to convince people that there are no other options.

If either establishment party wants the votes of those who vote third parties, run better candidates.

Though I do enjoy how libertarians and others are told their votes don't matter and at the same time being accused for why one candidate lost. Both sides blame third parties every time they lose. And as far as libertarians go, they're pretty evenly split on which side they might lean towards, but for the most part both establishment parties are too far away from their core beliefs, especially the candidates they nominate, to earn the support of those that vote third parties.

it's a shame that we live in a free country, but outside of the most authoritarian dictatorships, we have the fewest representative parties at the national level because the system is set up poorly.

If you want to get away from people "spoiling" elections with their votes or feeling forced to vote for the lesser of two evils, we need to move towards ranked choice voting.

Democracy. It’s awesome as long as you win!