I'm having a hard time understanding the scenario... Mueller is a life-long Republican, just from what i've seen every job he's held was basically an appointment via a Republican President, and is being attacked by the Republicans for being biased against the Republican President?

Unfortunately, you got it.

I get the process and what is happening, Wouldnt it be better for the dems to wait until he is out of office and go after him? Sure, the house will vote to impeach because the dems control it, but the senate wont.

Waste of time and money.

Wonder if this congress will do anything substantial to help us.

Have there been any significant bills passed or even drawn up?

This country is a mess. When do the huddled masses step up and ask the government to fix this country? Or do we just let corporations run us over until this country turns into the movie Brazil or 1984?

The House has passed a lot of bills. For example they recently passed a bill for a $15 minimum wage.

However they don't get a lot of buzz because the media would rather focus on Trump's latest tweet.

Yet won't ever see the light of day in the Senate. 🤷‍♂️

SCHIFF: “Trump and his campaign welcomed and encouraged Russian interference?”

MUELLER: “Yes.”

SCHIFF: “And then Trump and his campaign lied about it to cover it up?”

MUELLER: “Yes.”

That's it right there.

This is actually depressing to follow.

We know (or can clearly gather from testimony) that a lifetime republican that was cheered by fellow Republicans for being the person chosen to lead the investigation into Trump believes Trump should be impeached and indicted.

His campaign encouraged foreign interference in our election and rewarded Russia for helping him win.

Trump was actively requesting people in his administration lie to and mislead Mueller.

Trump knows he very well could be indicted if he loses in 2020 so the incentive to seek foreign influence is far greater this time around and the country's hopes in stopping that influence sit with Mitch McConnell.

Don Jr is very likely still under investigation based on Mueller's reluctance to talk about him.

We have a felon that at least indirectly coordinated with foreign governments to win an election and we don't seem to be in any rush to impeach and 40% of the country don't give a shit because liberals are the monster under their beds that they fear.

Yeah, the democrats need to impeach and force Republicans to defend this garbage.

I don't think Ken Buck expected this answer

The video of another key moment:

Buck: "Could you charge the president with a crime after he left office?"

Mueller: "Yes."

Buck: "You believe that you could charge the president of the United States with obstruction of justice after he left office?"

Mueller: "Yes."
Via ABC pic.twitter.com/REBbQsSMYl

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) July 24, 2019

Facts don't matter. The narrative shifted among right wing media during the investigation that every single investigator, including and especially Mueller, are Democrats with an agenda. That's now the republican line on this.

FOX NMews currently covering the Puerto Rico situation, including airing parts of an interview with the governor from Monday. Yet today was a big win for Trump.

It was very obvious early on this was going to be their tactic today.

Is there anyone, outside of Trump, more despicable than Jim Jordan?

All today did was prove how fucked we are as a country. I refuse to believe anyone outside of extremely stupid people watched the first part of his testimony and didn't conclude Trump obstructed justice. Yet FOX news will spin it and brainwash their viewers he didn't, and Trumpers won't care regardless.

We truly are screwed.

So now Dems hem and haw and then don’t impeach, right?

Unfortunately, I'm not sure he cracks the top 5 out of the current GOP. I mean McConnell, Steve King, and Nunes are easily worse. You also have Trump. So Jordan, at best, would be fight with someone like Matt Gaetz or Lindsey Graham to make the top 5.

They don't want to alienate the white supremacist voters they're hoping to win over next November.

I think white supremacist is harsh and unwarranted. I would say pro-white. And is there really an issue with this? What is the most attacked person in the country today? White males.

Call me what you want after that statement, but I stick by it. I am either a white supremacist nor a sexist. But, damn, you cant put a race and/or gender down and expect equality or equity. Especially if they are the ruling class.

Is Trump a mess? Ah, yes. But trying to play his game is stupid, you wll lose.

Figure it out and he loses the 2020 election. Continue on this path and he wins easily.

Yeah, it's difficult being a white male today living in glorified concentration camps on the border, being singled out by cops on a daily basis, or attacked regularly because of your religion.

See, Im not saying any of those things happen. Im saying the narrative of the country is that all white males are white supremacists and racist.

Your response is exactly the problem. This is what Im talking about. And ask a white male christian about being attacked because of his religion.

I was pretty anti-impeachment because we all know it is an exercise in futility, but after today and seeing peoples reactions I say go for it. Battle lines are drawn and no one is crossing sides. You either love Trump or you hate him. There is nothing that can happen that will change anyones mind. I would rather have them do the ethically correct thing at this time.

I literally have never felt attacked as a 50 something white male, because I can interact with anyone with mutual respect. And if you feel attacked because of the musings of idiots on social media who also choose to but everyone in a box I don't know what to tell you.

Yes, a plurality of white male Christians tend to have a persecution complex. As do GOP white males in general. The group with most of the county's assets and education feel picked because people are tired of bad Christians using the bible as a reason to take other people's rights away. The rest of the GOP is being grouped in as guilt by association. If they don't like it, maybe it's time to take their party back instead of kowtowing to Trump.

Trump made clearly racist comments to 4 members of congress and the primary group that didn't see the comments as racist were boomers. My mom and most of my family fall into that group. They have racist and bigoted tendencies and don't realize it. Therefore, because they feel they're not racists and are ok with Trump's statements then the statements must not have been racist. That's largely why we are where we are now. People refuse to acknowledge their racist and bigoted thoughts and behavior and feel that with Trump in office they can double down on it rather than keep quiet.

I've stated on here before that if the Dems lose an election because they alienate racists by calling them out then so be it. No one should keep quiet when others spread hate.

BINGO!

Perception is reality.

I have no problems with anyone. Do I think people streaming into our country illegally is a problem? Yes, I do. Do I have a problem with Immigrants coming into our country following the procedures our country has put in place? Nope, I welcome you.

Does this make me racist? The dems think so.

And therein lies the problem.

Different perceptions of reality cause this divide.

Are those 4 female congresswomen being targeted unfairly by Trump? Yes. Is he pandering to the least common denominator? Yes. Is Trump pandering to his less educated base? Yes.

Does this make me, as a white male, feel attacked by the dems? Yes. Am I one of the least common denominators? No. But my percption is my reality. Right or wrong.

Do I feel like I will ever be stopped by the police for just driving? Nope, I feel pretty safe.

See the problem. I get what Trump is doing, and its wrong, but the dems are feeding right into it and alienating a group that might vote for them.

Say or feel what you want. Im a midwesterer is a rural area. I am surrounded by Trump supporters. And i get how they feel. I dont agree, but understand.

This is ludicrous. If you mean to say all white, Christian, Republican males are being characterized as white supremacists and racists than I might secede your point....but that is an entirely different point.

Well there are plenty of folks on the left that do think all Republicans are racist and white supremacists.

Consider that it's practically impossible to change those people's minds (and apparently yours) as long as they are getting any and all courting messages from the Democrats filtered entirely through a Republican propaganda machine.

Yes. You are absolutely right.

And consider that all urban folks are getting their messages filterd through a Democrat propaganda machine.

And right now, the message being filtered plays into Trumps hands and not the dems. See the 2016 election. HRC had more votes but not in the right places.

See the issue?

Yeah, there are plenty of woke white males. But they live live in urban areas. Where their votes dont matter.

Sure. At this point if someone casts a Republican presidential vote I definitely think they are actively and clearly supporting systemic racism. Right now the other Republican bogeymen seem to be free health care and uppity women, which aren't exactly convincing arguments for why a hardcore conservative would hold-their-noses to vote for 4 more years of watching Trump hump the defecit into the ground.

I guess there is the Republican presidential voter who strictly wants the Republicans to continue breaking the political and judicial system in favor of the Republican machine, but that seems like splitting hairs.

It's true. Thanks to Trump's economic policies the rural white males are also now collecting even more of the revenue that comes out of those urban areas while their own resources collect dust and teeter on collapse. So yay urban money goes to rural white dipshits whose votes have been weighted by the Republican machine while whispering in their ears that they aren't getting the proper respect from the ACTUAL folks that are collectively paying more than their share.

We agree those dipshits have been given too much power, we do not agree that catering both the Republican AND Democratic party to their every Fox-fed whim is some kind of solution.

Im for a multi-party system. One that caters to the people. I hate that both parties have spend policies and no idea of how to regulate what they are doing.

If Im a millionaire I dont give a shit about cost. And think that no one else does.
Im in favor a balanced budget party and a flat tax party. Where is that?

I like Warrens forgive college debt, but why stop at 100k? My family is just over that thresh hold and these loans are going to kill my family. We are $130k and, unfortunatlely, we bought into the American dream of credit.

This is crippling to our family. But we wouldnt qualify.

Why does the Middle class get left out? Are they not the backbone of the country?

This is a bad statement. There are conservatives that feel the dems spend money on the wrong things, that doesnt make them racist. But what is their alternative? So they get lumped into a bad category and feel disrespected and they vote against the party that they feel is the disrespect is coming from.

This country is f$#cked. We are going down a bad road. But it is a road big government and corporations want us to go .

Power to the people.

Not actively vote an open racist accused of allowing foreign tampering and obstructing justice into the position of ultimate global power regardless of your feelings? It's easily done, through a variety of methods, or even none at all.

See, this is felt as the dems propaganda. There are many gop voters who think HRC was in bed with the russians to defeat the gop candidate.

Its all propaganda. It is who is best at it who wins and right now the is Trump.

I do sometimes feel like I'm shoehorned into a box as a white male on any issue where I don't give the "woke white male" auto-response.

That said, no well in hell do I equate that to racism. That's just "stupid Dem" ism.

I'll say this, if the Dems are going to the cross over four ridiculously extremist Congresswomen, they're stupider than I thought. Trump is about as terrible a person as has ever bern elected to any position in U.S. history, but he chose well to attack the clueless "face" of new socialism and Dem progressiveness in AOC and the idiocy of Ohar and her rhetoric.

To be fair, I suspect any conventional testing of the intelligence of said GOP voters would come under the national average by a not insignificant amount.

I'm as anti-Dem as they come, and I never thought HRC conspired with the Russians. I just thought she was a terrible candidate (from a GOP values position).

Well, they would be if one party in particular hadn't decided to circle the wagons around attempts to undermine workers' unions (which, y'know, were major drivers in the creation of the middle class in the first place). They would be if one party in particular didn't prize investor profits over a living wage. They would be if one party in particular didn't look at emergent technologies and say "becoming global leaders in those technologies would mean disadvantaging coal and we need to win elections in West Virginia and Pennsylvania."

And so on. The Republican Party doesn't give the tiniest good goddamn about the middle class. If they did, they wouldn't blow a trillion dollar hole in the budget deficit to give the wealthy a payoff and then tell the other 99% "sorry, there's nothing left for you, and in fact we have to cut what we've been spending on you to pay for that tax cut."

They're pretty good at messaging, though. "Yeah, you got next to nothing out of this, but imagine if the DEMOCRATS had been in control!" And so it goes.

The Democrats haven't exactly been forceful, competent champions for the middle class, whatever their intentions, but there's a difference between being shitty at marshaling public support for their economic vision and telling the public to keep voting for tax cuts for the rich, because maybe next time the horse will sing.

tarcone, your post history is quite clear about why you will NEVER vote for a democrat for president, so please quit your BS posturing.

It is anathema to your way of thinking. Your Trump-ian statements of "I know a lot of people who think" x, y, and z are transparent.

The truth is that those who support Trump and the GOP right now have decided that supporting a man and a party who are ok with co-opting racism, division, and undermining the very Constitution they have sworn to protect by taking every oversight function and breaking them need to be comfortable with that fact. If you're not, then speak the fuck up, or do something radical to change the party. If you are, then own it, but you also have to own the racism that comes with it.

And this is not that stupid "politically correct" racism that was more just like coded language and lazy thinking for white people. This is by God, KKK-endorsed, 1960's segregation-era RACISM with a capital R.

Because if you don't speak out, you're complicit,, you're ok with it and frankly the rhetoric is tired.

I guess I'll follow that up by saying I don't get how someone can say that "pro-white" is not racist. It is by definition. You are favoring one race over others. It's right there in the fuckin' name, mate.

Racism: the belief that members of different races or ethnicities should be treated differently.

Own it, it's ok.

Would you consider someone who is "pro-black" or "pro-woman" a racist or sexist?

No, because all that "pro-black" or "pro-woman" groups want is to achieve equality with the white male. There are some radicals that are racist for sure, but the large majority want just this. That's really the opposite of racism or sexism, isn't it?

*whispers*

race is a social construct

Well this is certainly one of the most casually racist things I've seen on this board.

(yes, I'm contrasting this with JIMG's open racism)

Exactly. Do people not realize that racism by definition requires a notion of a superiority or inferiority? To be "pro-black" or "pro-woman" is to generally advocate for equality (there are definitely a few Black Separatists who are supremacists out there - generally tend to be of a strange we were the kings and scientists in Africa and the white man stole everything from us because they know we are the better race). To be "pro-white" is to perpetuate supremacy (and to fight against equality, which is chipping away at white privilege by its very nature).

At this point I would honestly be very interested to hear someone explain how & why Christian values are better represented by the Republican party than the Democrats.

There used to be a pretty clear set of values that were attributed to the religious right, but as the Republican representatives have collectively ground those values into dust the only actual American Christian ideals that I can see the GOP representing in this day and age are anti-abortion and anti-gay-rights. Both of those issues, whose interpretations are highly questionable in the first place, collectively take up about 3-4 paragraphs worth of the New Testament if I recall.

Tbh, I don't recall any anti-abortion statements in the New Testament at all.

Warren's plan doesn't stop at $100k. $100k is just where the 100% forgiveness stops. Then it's a sliding scale up to $250k. At $130k, you'd still get most of them forgiven.

What are you talking about? The Dems have been at open war with that group. Pelosi and AOC have not gotten along well at all. Are you suggesting they should've ignored a racist attack on their own members just because of policy disagreements?

It's kind of depressing that Trump has only 1 Republican nomination challenger.

I guess that's the way of the world in 2019, but it'd be nice if someone else in the party stood up for sanity, decency, etc. And not just someone who I don't think was even in the party last election cycle.

You'd think Bill Weld could do well in New Hampshire, but he's just been so quiet and has no money and no real name recognition anymore.

When will the people that control almost all the money, land, and political power in this country catch a break.

The GOP should see Will Hurd as a rising star, but after yesterday, I expect he's done for.

If these things were owned collectively by race then that statement might mean something.

So where is the attack on white men? As a white man, I feel pretty comfortable. I'm given advantages financially and legally. I've never had anyone say anything negatively to me about being a male or being white. Never dealt with sexual harassment or assault. Never been seen as a terrorist, illegal, or criminal because of my skin color.

I just need someone to explain what attacks I've had to endure that are so bad? Because to me, it sounds like a bunch of whiny snowflakes wanting to play victim.

They are being attacked 'in the narrative'. I'm willing to secede that point if any conservative white males can tell me why white-males-being-attacked-in-the-modern-narrative is vastly more concerning than non-white-males-being-physically-financially-and-judicially-attacked-for-hundreds-of-years-of-reality?

So Epstein was found injured and semi-conscious in his jail cell today. Looks right now he might have tried to hang himself, or make it look like he did in order to get a transfer to a new facility:


Jeffrey Epstein Found Injured in NYC Jail Cell After Possible Suicide Attempt: Sources - NBC New York

Silly rabbit. Don't you know when conservatives whine about being under attack it is a legitimate threat from the despicable libs?

Snowflake is only reserved for those on the left who are offended by the actual racist POTUS and his myriad of shenanigans.

That slope isn't particularly slippery for me. I'm definitely willing to concede that white men are being attacked in "the narrative"......with the assumption that that the only narrative they are listening to is being called in from the same house.

I'm not sure being attacked in the narrative is any different than calling out historical privileges - social and financial - and the benefits that continue to accrue from that today.

Of course, I'd also contend that some people trying to make it solely about being 'pro-white' is ok because they are coming for us are trying to obscure that poor whites are being treated like crap by the same people who are calling themselves their saviors.

You are correct that the Dem party leaders have not gotten along with them. I retract.

I was going a different route with that based off of what Atocep was saying and didn't really go back to compare it to what I was responding.

Can y'all just cede the point and not secede it.
I got nothing else....

Because he asked the questions a rep should, instead of impugning Mueller's character or political grandstanding? Why would that put him in a bad light?

The South will rise again in this debate! (that bothered me too)

Your second question is answered by your first.

Mr. van Winkle, I've got some bad news about what's become of the GOP while you've been asleep.

SOVEREIGN CITIZEN. I live on this point now, and y'all will respect my rights as I draw them up.

I believe the GOP will revert to something closer to its original ideals or will eventually.become a fringe party. Either way, if Hurd has the quality he appeared to at the hearing, he will be just fine.

He's most likely going to have to do it as something other then a congressman though. He just barely held his seat in 2018 and the district should be even more dem friendly in 2020. He has won a lot of respect for being his own person though, so he might hold on.

Trump has a ninety some percent approval rating amongst the GOP. The party is Trump and there will be plenty of people in line to be the next Trump, especially if the Dems let him get away with everything.

I'm not sure how you are defining, original ideals, but I'd love to see evidence for believing the party is going to change post-Trump.

This may be the most difficult election for me to vote on in my lifetime. I can't say I've struggled that long with any of my votes (96 - B Clinton, 00 - W, 04 - W, 08 - McCain, 12 - Obama, 16 - H Clinton). But if Warren or Sanders get the democratic nomination, I have the following dilemma:

1. Vote for Warren or Sanders who I like more personally, but whose fiscal policies I completely disagree with. I will certainly pay significantly more in taxes (using Bernie's plan as a reference) and see changes to health care and entitlements that it may take years to recover from.

2. Vote for Trump and bring back a buffoon and a horrible human being to the White House. But, the practical impact of his buffoonery will be negligible and won't have to deal with the actual fiscal issues of Sanders/Warren.

If you could guarantee me a republican congress for 4 years, I would probably bite the bullet and vote for Sanders or Warren. Still, this is really a cruddy position to be in. I'm really hoping a democrat that I can get behind ends up winning the nomination.

I can absolutely guarantee 41 GOP votes in the Senate and I feel pretty confident the Dems won't get rid of the filibuster.

Say wha? He may be a buffoon, but he's done quite a bit of non-negligible things and if you just mean fiscally, his tax cuts have exploded the deficit and may lead to a major correction a few years from now (especially since he's reduced enforcement).

Aside from making a mockery of the office and possibly setting precedents for more nefarious intended successors, what is in your opinion, the biggest non-negligible impact he has had?

Might be pie in the sky, but in my experience, when things go extreme, they tend to bounce back to center.

As for the ideals, I'm more thinking McCain-esque fiscal conservatism (which I agree with) and social fundamentalism (which I don't).

I've mentioned the tax cuts for those who are fiscally conservative minded. Though I think the roll back of the climate policies is massive (though there seems to be some pushback as auto makers today made a deal with California to have higher vehicle efficiency standards). In Trump's first year in office he mostly focused on rolling back Obama era climate policies - removing some wilderness protections for National Parks, taking away environmental limitations on fracking, targeting rules on endangered wildlife, gutting the EPA.

That's probably the biggest. The labor rolebacks (including ACA rollbacks - Dept Labor enforces those) are pretty large as well.

We now torture children and kidnap children as a matter of policy.

If the ACA lawsuit kills it, that will be huge as there's no backup plan for what happens.

The US has given up it's traditional role as an advocate for human rights. We're comfortable letting other countries torture and kill their own citizens.

The damage done to our traditional allies and alliances will take a long time to fix. Other countries won't trust that this was a one-off.

The tariffs are probably easily reversed, but they've done real damage to the economy and to our trading relationships.

I think that building a financial policy around reducing demand for American farmed goods, depleting their workforce and covering the difference from out of the government coffers might have horrible, non-negligible effects that ripple for years.

If Trump wins in 2020, 'nuff said.

If Trump loses, he'll be around for another 4-8 years to run again or play GOP kingmaker. I think the GOP party is the party of Trump for another 10 years or so (or until he passes).

I think we know that if Trump loses, he's going to claim the election was stolen from him and fight the results. And then will run again in 4 years on the stolen result thing.

Unless he gets crushed. Even then he may run again

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Supreme Court appointments is currently biggest right now. No doubt there is an impact, just unknown exactly how it will play out over the next 20 years.

If it happens (e.g. second term), the Wall & Immigration "reform" would be a very strong contender.

Other possibilities ...

Re-working of the China trade/IP deal, eliminating NK threat, continued economic growth & rising stock market ...

He'll be 78 years old by 2024. The people around him could probably prop up an increasingly senile Trump if he wins in 2020, but if he loses that election being able to run in 2024 seems like a tall task.

Sweden has let the US black community down I guess.

Trump: Sweden has 'let our African American community down' in A$AP Rocky case

Oh my goodness, what are we going to do? [/sarcasm]


That's like saying if Justin Bieber got arrested in Sweden, then Sweden let the Caucasian American community down.

Could you imagine the shitstorm of criticism if Obama had tried this hard to free a rapper accused of assault?

Were any GOP complaints made in good faith?

About same age as Biden and Sanders now. Both surprisingly spry for being ancient.

A lot of the stuff can be fixed. I can't imagine we'll see another President this far to the left on foreign trade. Immigration is fluid. I'd say the biggest impact he has had are:

Tax cuts - This is more about massively increasing the deficit. I just don't know how it ever gets under control with revenues so low and a refusal to cut military spending. And it's tough to implement tax increases on a populace.

Rollback of environmental regulations - Probably too late anyway and most of these people will be dead by the time the world has to deal with the consequences. But hitting that acceleration button isn't helping.

Race relations - White supremacists has been pushed to the fringes of society for decades and it reversed quickly. Many work alongside him in the office and it's seen as socially acceptable to be blatantly racist. This has led to a rise in right-wing terrorism in the country and I have a feeling will continue to fuel violence and division. Then again, maybe it was always there and he's just the guy willing to say the quiet parts out loud.


With all that said, if he doesn't start a war, he's better than W. I know it's a low bar, but some bad policy and being an embarrassment to the country isn't as bad as starting a forever war that kills so many people. If he sticks to his "no wars" policy, I feel much better.

You would pay more in taxes but bring home more in your paycheck. People forget that with a national healthcare system, you aren't paying premiums out of every paycheck. You aren't paying your deductible. If you're in your 40's and a male, that's likely over $5k in savings (over $10k if it's for your family). I doubt your tax increase would be more than that.

All we have to do is look at other countries that do this. They pay significantly less for their healthcare and get better results.

I also don't know why Warren or Sanders would be bad fiscally for the country. Deficit has grown dramatically under the last 4 Republican Presidents. It's shrunk under the last 2 Democratic Presidents. Maybe it's time to give them a shot?

While we were talking about white people being the true victims, this high school student who is an American citizen was held in wretched conditions for 23 days for no reason.

No shower for 23 days: U.S. citizen says conditions were so bad that he almost self-deported | Immigration | Dallas News

Similarly, I might be terrified of the guy and his legacy, but prison reform is also one of my big personal issues and I think it could be argued that Trump has done more on that front than Obama did in his first term.

Biebs is/was Canadian

I read up on the reason for detention, and that's completely on his mom. I can understand why they questioned the validity of his documentation.

The conditions in which he and others were held? Unforgivable. I don't understand why it's so hard to treat detainees with basic human rights and kindness. We treat them much worse even than felons in maximum security prison.

The cruelty is the point.

It's not QUITE evil for the sake of being evil, but they're trying to make it a part of the reason NOT to come.

I think one of the things that is going to be lost post-trump is America's ability to act as a moral compass. It's more naked threats and bullying now

I don't think that even matters. We blast politicians all the time for protecting the wealthy, for protecting the dominance of white indviduals in the country, we talk about electing an open racist as a president and defending the action about being in part a fear of diversity and a fear of what's different. But then we come to economics and we ourselves do the same things we accuse politicians of.

We sit around here talking about how our 401k's are going up. Poor people don't have 401k's. We talk about how great high deductible health plans are. Poor people can't use those.

As individuals on this board, many of us making more that we could ever need to live completely happy lives. Fighting tooth and nail to make sure that your individual taxes do not go down one cent is an active act of accepting the healthcare crisis that we have, of the huge issue we have with poverty and lower income folks, many of whom are white of course, but we all know that income/healthcare and all that are far worse for a far higher % of minorities than they are for white folks. So to fight so hard and to vote based on your own paycheck, understand that is part of keeping those millions of underprivileged people down. Its not slavery, we're not burning crosses at anyone's doors. But we're actively participating in the same effort that we blame so many politicians for - ensuring that the poor and destitute remain that way so that the already comfortable don't have to make a single change.


I know there's nothing I can do to prevent responses of "not all white people" and "not me I don't have it THAT good" - I know, I know, some people have it less easy than others. But most of us here can afford healthcare, we have threads on retirement savings where most of us have at least some, albeit less than we'd want. We don't end up homeless if we get laid off and can't find a job the next week. And no one can tell you that you have to do differently. But these conversations occur in a vacuum, with zero thought of the fact that decisions of convenience and comfort for most of us, have life and death implications for millions. These conversations cannot occur in a vacuum. They have a very real impact on the lives of so many people to whom we, as a nation, should feel responsible for providing a base level of humanity.

You're hitting at the core of why I strongly suspect that far-left policies won't work long-term in a democratic society: people are self-centered. At some point, they're going to vote for their own pocketbooks, and if too much is taken away, they'll revolt. Yes, the "favor the 'haves' mentality is more out in the open on the right, but as you hinted in the post you deleted, establishment Democrats are also in the pockets of corporate interests and addicted to maintaining their own political power.


This isn't just who we are as Republicans or Democrats or Libertarians or Socialists or Progressives or Fascists or Anarchists or Americans.



It's who we are as humans.



What you're really talking about it is "how much life-long self-sacrifice will the general population take on for the good of others?" And I'd argue that the answer to that is "little beyond token inconveniences, even for many people who give lip service for wanting change to happen." Remember the discussion several pages back about how little people give to charity? Yeah, that. And speaking of charity, for further evidence of what I'm talking about, charitable giving by individuals dropped in 2018. It was the largest decline since the Great Recession. Why? I'm sure it's because more than a few people don't give out of the goodness of their hearts., but for the tax break, and when the tax break gets removed, they reduce/stop their giving.


It's who we are.

So are people in Sweden (say) not democratic or not people? ;)

How is it on his Mother? He had a birth certificate and social security card on him. He's 18. Why does an adult need their Mother to prove their citizenship?

Had to look it up. They do vote their pocketbooks too according to this link on Swedish voters.

Digging into the Pocketbook: Evidence on Economic Voting from Income Registry Data Matched to a Voter Survey

Wonder how much $2.5B buys ... but it is a start.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/26/polit...ion/index.html

His mother initially reported that he was born in Mexico because she felt like it would be the only way that he would be able to travel back and forth to family and with her, when he was born. That was on record, as was a couple of other choices that she made out of her own ignorance and fear that she felt like would be right. It really just made matters worse in this instance. I can totally understand how he was questioned and detained, but holding him for 28 days and not being followed up on was complete and total bullshit.

Not sure how I missed this today. The House Judiciary Dems have formally announced in federal court that an impeachment inquiry has begun. I think-confused as to what exactly they did today/what it means. But Jerry Nadler said they are now effectively in the midst of a impeachment inquiry.