ilovefuzz.com

Eh? That's not how it works here. You have to recheck your eligibility every six months, but as long as you continue to qualify, you can keep your benefits indefinitely.

jirodreamsofdank wrote:That other poll... shows exactly what I said?

That's what I'm saying, it didn't, imo.

jirodreamsofdank wrote:Her policies are very popular, even among Republicans.

jrfox92 wrote:

NSFW: show

"Some members of Congress are proposing a 'Green New Deal' for the U.s. They say that a Green New Deal will produce jobs and strengthen America's economy by accelerating the transition from fossil fuels to clean, renewable energy. The Deal would generate 100% ofthe nation's electricity from clean, renewable sources within the next 10 years; upgrade the nation's energy grid, building, and transportation infrastructure; increase energy efficiency; invest in green technology research and development; and provide training for jobs in the new green economy. How much do you support or oppose this idea?

Note the curious way that they poller decided to describe the GND, also, the time period.

My argument was that the question asked in the poll is misrepresentative of AOC's actual GND by omitting all the relevant information and thus the whole premise that the poll indicates actual support for her policy is false.
Add to that, the poll was made months before anyone even knew anything about the GND, which further cements my view that it doesn't actually support your claim.
This was the only poll I found regarding your claim. Since you made the claim, I posit that it's your responsibility to provide these supposed "polls" you saw, because all you've done is make claims with no actual basis as far as I can tell.

"Note the curious way that they poller decided to describe the GND, also, the time period"

that's not "curious," it's a laudable attempt to de-fang the Republicans' hysterical propaganda.

By....not accurately describing it?

They don't call it "political science" for nuthin'.

Couple interestin' articles:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... ce/583072/

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... ce/582106/

jirodreamsofdank wrote:snip

You are missing my whole point - no party has gotten their entire platform passed IN A SINGLE PIECE OF LEGISLATION. If the GND didn’t have that fourth point tacked on the end (guaranteed high paying jobs, free healthcare, free higher education, the now-removed “unable or unwilling to work” piece, etc) we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Introduce that as a separate bill and make a fuckton of noise about it; don’t play bullshit politics with climate change.

Yes, I know the GND is a non-bonding resolution, but thanks to all the non-climate shit being thrown in anything that resembles it will not pass. The GOP is obviously not going to sign on with it, and a majority of Dems don’t like it either.

And “make the opposition party vote against it?” Why? Congress has had shitty approval ratings and for the most part hasn’t given a fuck about what their constituents want for decades. They vote against what the people want and yet they keep getting re-elected. 2018 saw a huge freshman class, but that was mostly a rebuke against Trump; AOC, Tlaib, etc. all represent extremely liberal districts and are not the norm form most Americans, who still identify as either conservatives or moderates (see the Gallup poll I posted). Why waste time on some bullshit morality measure that won’t yield any results? Break these up so each measure can get more attention, making as much noise as possible for each one, and you’ll have much more success in getting people behind it, or at the very least voting in people who do. This all-right-now has not and does not work, as you keep showing by mentioning the Tea Party has to spend a decade getting their shit passed.

This is my problem with the extremes on both sides - they want everything immediately and are unwilling to budge on it. The Tea Party eventually learned to spread it out, and it still remains to be seen if the progs will learn that lesson.

Damn, for once being branded as one of the Democrats' rising stars, Beto has been dragged through the mud these past 24 hours. I personally think he should have gone after Cornyn's Senate seat to gain more legislative experience prior to running for the white house, (it'll be insanely easy to win; Cornyn doesn't have the same support as that carpet-bagging snake oil salesman for some reason) but maybe he's hoping he can hop on as the VP running mate? Either way, HUGE gamble on his part; if he blows this I don't think he'll have an easy time being re-elected to a national position, at least in Texas.

Bassist_Diver wrote:

jirodreamsofdank wrote:snip

You are missing my whole point - no party has gotten their entire platform passed IN A SINGLE PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

As I keep trying to explain, the GND, Medicare for All and an increase in taxes on the wealthy aren't "a single piece of legislation."

Which is to say, your criticism of Ocasio-Cortez is fundamentally incoherent.

And “make the opposition party vote against it?” Why?

Because it's a good thing to make your opponent defending doing something unpopular.

2018 saw a huge freshman class, but that was mostly a rebuke against Trump; AOC, Tlaib, etc. all represent extremely liberal districts and are not the norm form most Americans, who still identify as either conservatives or moderates (see the Gallup poll I posted).

"I'm a moderate" is meaningless, everyone is taught that this is the sensible, forthright position to be. It's "common sense."
Now dig into the numbers on where people actually stand on issues.

This is my problem with the extremes on both sides - they want everything immediately and are unwilling to budge on it. The Tea Party eventually learned to spread it out, and it still remains to be seen if the progs will learn that lesson.

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.

Well the GND has been amended since I last read it ~ a month ago and a lot of the provisions that basically list her entire platform has been removed, so you are correct that it has been broken into separate legislation.

As for everything else, we're going around in circles so I'm dropping it and focusing on other things - like why TF is the DNC ripping each other apart already and basically ostracizing people they deem "aren't <position left of center> enough" based on certain factions of the party.

as part of my attempts to do small things to make the world a better place, i just wanted to tell y'all about the guy on Twitter who called Milo Yiannoupolous "Yolo Minneapolis." you're welcome.

dubkitty wrote:as part of my attempts to do small things to make the world a better place, i just wanted to tell y'all about the guy on Twitter who called Milo Yiannoupolous "Yolo Minneapolis." you're welcome.

OMG, I’m so tempted to find a stock photo of a twink and start a Twitter account with that name just to see how many shitty flesh sacks follow it.

Those Missouri bills requiring AR15 and handgun ownership. They won't pass, but somebody needs to look into that dude's offshore accounts.

The idea is stupid but not surprising to me or abnormal for a reactionary, it's just trying to 'own the libs' by playing up the "well-regulated militia" clause.