The (Current year) General Political/Salma Hayek discussion Thread Part V

[Phase2]

131 Posts since the last pic of Salma Hayek was posted in

The (Current year) General Political/Salma Hayek discussion Thread Part V

 

[jamil]

Odd, I don't remember saying it (CU) was justified. I merely stipulated that poltics is not immune from Newton's third

You’ve made it sound like you were defending it. If not then I guess we’re in agreement that it’s ****ty.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Oh wait, sorry. Thought he said Simo Hayha. My bad.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Historically, corporations had limited lives....at least at the time our Constitution was written. A corporation is not a person...and yes I've heard all the arguments I need to about that a corporation is comprised of people.

A corporation is not a human. It is not a citizen. It requires no passport for crossing borders. It does not die for its country. In today's multinational environment, it really doesn't have a country. It shouldn't be able to vote or avoid campaign spending limits imposed upon individuals.

SuperPacs spent over $2 billion on the 2016 elections. There is a great deal of data on election spending available. What I've gleaned from the data is that in most cases (over 80%), those who spend the most, win the election.

Most importantly, corporation spending buys congressional and adminstration influence.

Eliminate it. Period.

It's a chicken and egg thing. People will donate to the person they think will win inorder to get their lucrative contracts and friendly laws and regulations and what not. Then having more money gets you more name recognition. If you're an unlikable ass, all that name recognition does it make sure people won't vote for you. Be likable, have a lot of money (and promise people free ****!). That will get you elected every time. People are dumb. The deepest their voting research goes, is which cable news outlet gives them the most confirmation bias. The candidate pushed by that news outlet is the one they vote for. Easy peasy.

I agree that PACs should be shut down. It just promotes cronyism. Our PAC donates to as many candidates as it possibly can. The person who we want to be elected is the one who will get us the most contracts. Our PAC really doesn't give two ****s about anything else. It's a hell of an investment though. You can see 1000% returns on your investment in a congress-critter.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Even if you shut down PACs though, the money will find a way to get spent on advertising somehow.

 

[Alpo]

I agree that PACs should be shut down. It just promotes cronyism. Our PAC donates to as many candidates as it possibly can. The person who we want to be elected is the one who will get us the most contracts. Our PAC really doesn't give two ****s about anything else. It's a hell of an investment though. You can see 1000% returns on your investment in a congress-critter.

Exactly. I saw the same thing at our company when I was in a position to know.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Forget whether there is a thread that would be better for this, but Stone was just sentenced to 40 months prison and a $20K fine.

 

[Alpo]

And the pardon will be signed in 3...........2..........1..........

 

[Kutnupe14]

Oh wait, sorry. Thought he said Simo Hayha. My bad.

I got a kiss from a Finnish gal in Europe, after she asked me what I knew about Finland, and gave his name. The White Death, #1 badass of all-time. Chris and Carlos aren’t even in the same universe.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

NEW: Twitter is experimenting with adding brightly colored labels directly beneath lies and misinformation posted by politicians and public figures, according to a leaked demo of new features sent to @NBCNews.

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1230562995798855684

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I got a kiss from a Finnish gal in Europe, after she asked me what I knew about Finland, and gave his name. The White Death, #1 badass of all-time. Chris and Carlos aren’t even in the same universe.

No doubt! And all with iron sights because he didn't want to take the chance of sun glinting off of a scope to give away his position.

 

[Ingomike]

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1230562995798855684

They are fu****g publisher exercising editorial judgment and the exemption must be removed!

 

[BugI02]

unintentional Doppelpost

 

[BugI02]

You’ve made it sound like you were defending it. If not then I guess we’re in agreement that it’s ****ty.

Nope. More and more I'm coming to believe our politics are really governed by blood fued and honor killing - Trump impeachment as revenge for Clinton which was revenge for Nixon yada yada

The vision doesn't end well

Edit: Given my view that progressive forces opened that contolling political donations can of worms, I do feel CU was poetic justice. The road to hell and all

 

[BugI02]

View attachment 84187

 

[jamil]

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1230562995798855684

Oh. I'm sure that's going to be fair and honest.

 

[jamil]

Nope. More and more I'm coming to believe our politics are really governed by blood fued and honor killing - Trump impeachment as revenge for Clinton which was revenge for Nixon yada yada

The vision doesn't end well

Edit: Given my view that progressive forces opened that contolling political donations can of worms, I do feel CU was poetic justice. The road to hell and all

I really don't think that Nixon evoked much revenge anxiety. That doesn't' really belong in this conversation. Everyone in both parties pretty much looked at the evidence and said, ya, that mother****er did it. Republicans of course were more reluctant, saving face and all. But had that impeachment commenced through the end, it would have stood as the only bipartisan, justified impeachment in our history.

I don't think that politics are governed by blood feud and honor killing. I mean it is to the extent that it's tribal. But the exact mechanics are closer to the elites thinking that the election was stolen from them because they obviously did not accept the results. And they're trying to correct it. That has consequences too.

But none of that has anything to do with CU's justification. Tit for tat isn't a particularly helpful way to decide what policies to follow. I mean you can cling to the instinctive tribal response if you want. But I'd rather try to override that program and run it through a more rational one.

 

[BugI02]

I disagree. The BCRA was a lopsided damper on campaign finance that was detrimental to conservatives. In what's become the time honored tradition of what gets done when one side lacks the votes to undo or modify legislation, it was taken fro a trip through the court system culminating with SCOTUS, and SCOTUS blew it up

It would have been better if the BCRA was written in a more even handed way or challenged immediately, but these things have a long cycle time. Politics seems to have a delayed blowback action. The next place I think you're likely to see this is when some lower court imposed 'fair' legislative district drawing makes its way to SCOTUS because of the very clear authority most legislatures possess to perform this function. Fair is only a concern to the party out of power

 

[actaeon277]

Am I stuck in groundhog day?
I just saw an article, what if Trump refuses to leave office?

Seems I saw the same thing, but with the previous Pres.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Am I stuck in groundhog day?
I just saw an article, what if Trump refuses to leave office?

Seems I saw the same thing, but with the previous Pres.

True, but unlike the last president, the current one has used rhetoric about a rigged election, if he lost, that could possibly be used as justification.

Should a president leave office if he’s defeated in an election he believes is “rigged?”