We Are A Center Left Country

[Tiberius]

2 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

So we should throw more women in jail for better representation?  

That's a dumb point 

 

The majority of people should have a say in making and enforcing the laws. Ever hear of the Enlightenment? 

7 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Left or Right, Bush, Obama, or Trump.  When I look at my life I just have to say I don't notice any difference.  I go to work every day, pay my taxes (which keep going up), pay my bills, try to save a couple bucks, and go about my business and go out of my way not to bother anybody..  Same with all my neighbors, friends, co-workers, and acquaintances.  I think that's the way it is with most people no matter where they live or whatever their background and make up might be.  Maybe the people on the fringe left or right one percent see it differently but I suspect the majority of Americans feel just like I do.  If everybody just did that we might not have any problems or certainly a lot fewer.  But there's always somebody trying to push their crap on somebody else.

I know lots of liberals and lots of conservatives and they don't support fringe elements on either side of the isle.  Nobody sits around and suggests we need more poverty or more racism and bias, or more poorly uneducated citizens or more homeless or worse healthcare for people.  The debate is about the solutions and how to go about it all.

Most of this left/right is just election year political theater.  And no matter who wins the election the next day me and everybody else will get up and do it all over again.  Like it was once said "Meet the new boss.  Same as the old boss".      

It's real. There are differences. I get the false equvilency to deflect from the main point though. Bad rhetorical device

 

So Biden and Trump are the same? 

[All_Pro_Bills]

45 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

That's a dumb point 

 

The majority of people should have a say in making and enforcing the laws. Ever hear of the Enlightenment? 

It's real. There are differences. I get the false equvilency to deflect from the main point though. Bad rhetorical device

 

So Biden and Trump are the same? 

And what is the main point?  Your argument is its morally acceptable for the majority to impose their will on the minority but not the other way around.  How far are the willing to go?  And who will stop them if they go to far?  Most people are middle of the road and most people don't embrace or participate in the current political activism.  And many who do go along with it do so because its fashionable and their livelihood depends on the opinions of others or they lack the courage to speak their mind.

 

As for Trump and Biden being the same the answer is both are funded and bankrolled by more or less the same "Davos" crowd of billionaires and elites.  As were Obama and Bush.  So yes the results from either are going to be at the core the same.

 

  

[WEATHER DOT COM]

19 hours ago, DFT said:

 

 

Hello,

 

This is a friendly notice to inform you that the following post was created by a troll(s) on this forum.  The creator of this post has no intentions of having an adult conversation on the topic they’re intending to create.  While the content or expressions listed by said poster may reflect an actual perspective, the perspective is overshadowed by this posters history of creating topics that are meant to instigate, spam and disrupt an otherwise civilized political conversation.  You can view the content against the poster’s reputation to make an informed decision for yourself (if you choose).  The best way to remove said posters, spam and instigation from a forum is to not respond beyond this message.  Thank you.  

 

Spam

[RochesterRob]

Just now, wAcKy ZeBrA said:

 

  This spam was brought to you by a fool.

  FIFY.

[Tiberius]

8 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

And what is the main point?   

 

  

That the will of the majority is being subverted 

[Orlando Tim]

2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

 

The majority of people should have a say in making and enforcing the laws. Ever hear of the Enlightenment? 

Where do you live? Do your local laws not reflect your beliefs? When I lived in NY I felt they did not therefore I moved to Florida. What national law do you see changing that effects you that you can not deal with locally?

[Tiberius]

28 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

Where do you live? Do your local laws not reflect your beliefs? When I lived in NY I felt they did not therefore I moved to Florida. What national law do you see changing that effects you that you can not deal with locally?

National laws of course affect me. I have less of a say, my vote counts for less, than a person who lives in a small rural state. Not fair. That will have to change. 

 

 

[All_Pro_Bills]

33 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

National laws of course affect me. I have less of a say, my vote counts for less, than a person who lives in a small rural state. Not fair. That will have to change. 

 

 

Your beef is simply with the electoral college because it enabled Trump's victory in 2016.  And the popular vote went to Clinton because of big majorities in large "Blue" states.  So the solution is to change the rules?  That requires a change to Article II section 1 of the Constitution.  And any change to the Constitution requires a 2/3 majority of states to ratify.  It seems doubtful 2/3rds of the states would agree to that change.  So just deal with it and hope your party doesn't ignore the swing states like Clinton did in 2016.  

 

[SoCal Deek]

3 hours ago, Tiberius said:

National laws of course affect me. I have less of a say, my vote counts for less, than a person who lives in a small rural state. Not fair. That will have to change. 

 

 

You do realize that the Senate is not representative of population, right? Don't tell me you missed that day in school also? Did you EVER attend class?

[Chef Jim]

2 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Your beef is simply with the electoral college because it enabled Trump's victory in 2016.  And the popular vote went to Clinton because of big majorities in large "Blue" states.  So the solution is to change the rules?  That requires a change to Article II section 1 of the Constitution.  And any change to the Constitution requires a 2/3 majority of states to ratify.  It seems doubtful 2/3rds of the states would agree to that change.  So just deal with it and hope your party doesn't ignore the swing states like Clinton did in 2016.  

 

 

Interesting how very few have had any issue with the EC until Trump.  Had the results been reversed and Trump won the majority and Clinton won the EC would ANY of those crying on the left have had a problem with it?  Rhetorical question of course.  

[Koko78]

2 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Interesting how very few have had any issue with the EC until Trump.  Had the results been reversed and Trump won the majority and Clinton won the EC would ANY of those crying on the left have had a problem with it?  Rhetorical question of course.  

 

Oh don't worry, they hated it in 2000 as well.

[B-Man]

 

 

 

LEFT_________________________________________________________________CENTER_________________________________________________________RIGHT

                                                                                                                                                             

 

 

 

 

 

"That's not true" ------- 

 

 

 

 

 

[Alaska Darin]

11 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

Oh don't worry, they hated it in 2000 as well.

It's almost like they don't understand the Constitution.

[Koko78]

4 minutes ago, Alaska Darin said:

It's almost like they don't understand the Constitution.

 

They do... right up to the point where it becomes inconvenient for them.

 

Then suddenly...

 

[Tiberius]

14 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

You do realize that the Senate is not representative of population, right? Don't tell me you missed that day in school also? Did you EVER attend class?

Lol, yes, that’s my whole point you idiot 

[US Egg]

[SoCal Deek]

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

Lol, yes, that’s my whole point you idiot 

Am I an idiot for stating a FACT? Or am I an idiot for not knowing what the fxck you’re blathering on about now? Give it a rest Tibs. Go find a little third world country somewhere where you can start your ‘revolution’.

[Tiberius]

Just now, SoCal Deek said:

Am I an idiot for stating a FACT? Or am I an idiot for not knowing what the fxck you’re blathering on about now? Give it a rest Tibs. Go find a little third world country somewhere where you can start your ‘revolution’.

Your fact is 100% totally correct and I agree with it. You made my argument for me, thanks. 

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, Tiberius said:

Your fact is 100% totally correct and I agree with it. You made my argument for me, thanks. 

So you’d like to ‘defund the senate’?

[Tiberius]

Just now, SoCal Deek said:

So you’d like to ‘defund the senate’?

Realizing his error, he reverts to asking really stupid questions. 

[SoCal Deek]

2 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Realizing his error, he reverts to asking really stupid questions. 

What error? You said I was correct, but just didn’t understand your higher level of thinking. How’s the revolution going? You just about done with your manifesto? Or does mom have to go buy you more paper. ...crayons.

[Alaska Darin]

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

Am I an idiot for stating a FACT? Or am I an idiot for not knowing what the fxck you’re blathering on about now? Give it a rest Tibs. Go find a little third world country somewhere where you can start your ‘revolution’.

You know the reason he behaves this way?  Because you're giving him the attention he so desperately needs because his mommy wanted nothing to do with him. 

[Tiberius]

36 minutes ago, Alaska Darin said:

You know the reason he behaves this way?  Because you're giving him the attention he so desperately needs because his mommy wanted nothing to do with him. 

How dare I state my opinion and defend it. Such strange behavior on a political message board 

 

 

[Tiberius]

Nice of Bloomberg to help citizens gets their rights back. Voter suppression needs to stop, so the center left coalition can take the country in their direction 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

3 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Nice of Bloomberg to help citizens gets their rights back. Voter suppression needs to stop, so the center left coalition can take the country in their direction 

 

...citizens?....convicted felons?......is Mini-Mike going to HELP THEIR VICTIMS?........ok...er...well...uh...okay.....BUT just Dems, right?......you're a gem..........

[Tiberius]

17 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...citizens?....convicted felons?......is Mini-Mike going to HELP THEIR VICTIMS?........ok...er...well...uh...okay.....BUT just Dems, right?......you're a gem..........

Just Dems, that’s all. The good guys. 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

2 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Just Dems, that’s all. The good guys. 

 

...I'd bet Biden has a Cabinet "position" for you already.....

[Tiberius]

25 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...I'd bet Biden has a Cabinet "position" for you already.....

And you and @Reality Check have your fav position too, huh? 

[Reality Check]

37 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Just Dems, that’s all. The good guys. 

 

[ComradeKayAdams]

Random PPP Note: While deliberately avoiding the main board and anything related to the Buffalo Bills this early morning, I decided to scan a few of the PPP pages beyond the first one. What I found were a bunch of interesting threads like this one that deserved a lot more TLC than they initially received. I also noticed a bunch of old threads whose titles are very similar to ones on the first page. So consider this your friendly reminder to look through pages 2+ more often!

 

On 9/22/2020 at 11:09 PM, B-Man said:

We are a Center - Right country.

 

Tibsy's fantasies notwithstanding

 

 

The U.S. Remained Center-Right, Ideologically, in 2019

news.gallup.com › poll › remained-center-right-ideologic...

 

 

Jan 9, 2020 - 

 

Everyone should pay careful attention to the details here! This 2019 Gallup poll asked only for political self-identification and did not get into actual voting history or stances on specific political issues. These are clearly separate things! The country may be noticeably center-right when it comes to political labels, but it leans slightly center-left (modern American standard…not the European one) on election day (examples: House of Reps composition, Presidential popular vote) and polls noticeably center-left on many important issues (off the top of my head: mid-/late-term abortion, unions, minimum wage laws/UBI, marijuana, health care, environment, education, regime change wars/military interventionism, economic nationalism/protectionism, progressive taxation, corporate financial contributions to campaigns).

 

I place greater importance on voting history and on individual public policy stances than I do on political self-identification (or party registration). That’s because I don’t think the average American even has a good understanding of the meaning of already vague political labels. Lots of polling data has been compiled on this topic in support of my assertion. My personal canvassing experiences in the NYC metro area during the Democratic primaries also support these polling results. The cognitive dissonance I witnessed between labels and policies was astounding for these words: “liberal,” “progressive”, and “socialist.”

 

Super minor contention with the poll: Gallup is normally very reliable, used a large sample number (29,000), and ended up with national results similar to others I’ve seen (something like 35% conservative, 40% moderate, and 25% liberal on average). But did the telephone surveys include cell phones too or just landlines? If the latter, would this skew the results in any way?

 

Also, note the age demographic breakdown of these polls. Historically speaking, a portion of the U.S. population always turns more conservative with increasing age. The most obvious explanation is that people tend to accumulate wealth and have families as they get older, and so they become less willing to “share” that household wealth via assumed higher taxes from the political left. My question, though, is what happens when people DON’T accumulate wealth and have children with increasing age at nearly the pace of previous generations? Because this is exactly what’s happening now with Millenials (thanks to the Great Recession and to neoliberalism) and potentially with Generation Z in the post-pandemic years ahead. Just something to ponder...

 

On 9/23/2020 at 9:00 AM, Tiberius said:

Nope, this is a center left people, ruled by a right wing government, for now 

 

Thank god fore what? That the minority can run roughshod over the majority of the citizens? That's sick 

 

We are living under a tyranny of the minority for sure, but the real minority to be worried about is way smaller than the sum of Trump voters. The one-party corporate oligarchy is the true problem! Our government primarily serves to represent the interests of the 621 verified American billionaires. The interests of the rest of the 200+ million voting-eligible citizens are subordinate.

 

This is not to say, however, that a viable solution would be to throw out the republic in favor of a true democracy. Although I’m definitely not a strict Constitutionalist and would make a number of changes to the U.S. Constitution if I could, I do rather like the stability its main framework has provided for so long (unlike, say, Italy’s). I would not want to tamper with key structures that serve as bulwarks against tyranny of the majority, such as the Electoral College, bicameralism, and the federalist system. Most (but not all!) major policy changes should come about slowly and only after much (rational) deliberation. And the bulk of policy change should originate at the state level and be resolved there, if possible.

 

The best protections against extreme versions of tyranny of the minority end up being the same as those against tyranny of the majority: improved electorate education, greater first amendment freedoms, and increased civic engagement (voting, activism, etc.) so that all politicians at every level of government are constantly held accountable. Or that’s the theory behind how things should work, at least. A constitutional amendment may also be necessary to overturn the Supreme Court’s decision on Citizens United v. FEC. In any case, Democrats and fellow lefties must stop wallowing in the political victim role and start putting in the work to figure out how to energize the base and win over independents, moderates, and apathetic voters. Their votes are there for the taking in every state…yes, even in the dark red ones! 90+ million voting-eligible Americans don’t even vote!!!

[SoTier]

A thoughtful and insightful post as usual, RKA.

 

I see the majority of the American people lacking real commitment to any political ideology.  In general, they are pragmatists who love their country and are willing to sacrifice for it; who don't like to pay taxes but will raise them on themselves to support institutions, policies, and goals that they think are important; who struggle with accepting social change but get around to it eventually if grudgingly.  

 

I think the sound and fury of the ideological wings of the two parties, spurred on by 24-7 media coverage and social media, have obscured the fact that the bulk of Americans want a country that works for them, their families and friends, and for their communities.  When they feel that the country isn't working, they abandon whatever political label they may have embraced previously to vote for the opposition.

[SoCal Deek]

SoTier the divide in this country is clear. We have one group of people who want their government to leave them alone so they can pursue life, liberty and happiness. And we have another group that isn’t happy and is willing to secede their liberty to that same government in hopes of ‘flattening the curve’. The one thing that just about everyone secretly agrees on is that our representatives are no longer fighting FOR the people. Their fighting WITH each other. That’s pretty much it in a nutshell. 

[Wacka]

3 hours ago, RealKayAdams said:

Random PPP Note: While deliberately avoiding the main board and anything related to the Buffalo Bills this early morning, I decided to scan a few of the PPP pages beyond the first one. What I found were a bunch of interesting threads like this one that deserved a lot more TLC than they initially received. I also noticed a bunch of old threads whose titles are very similar to ones on the first page. So consider this your friendly reminder to look through pages 2+ more often!

 

 

Everyone should pay careful attention to the details here! This 2019 Gallup poll asked only for political self-identification and did not get into actual voting history or stances on specific political issues. These are clearly separate things! The country may be noticeably center-right when it comes to political labels, but it leans slightly center-left (modern American standard…not the European one) on election day (examples: House of Reps composition, Presidential popular vote) and polls noticeably center-left on many important issues (off the top of my head: mid-/late-term abortion, unions, minimum wage laws/UBI, marijuana, health care, environment, education, regime change wars/military interventionism, economic nationalism/protectionism, progressive taxation, corporate financial contributions to campaigns).

 

I place greater importance on voting history and on individual public policy stances than I do on political self-identification (or party registration). That’s because I don’t think the average American even has a good understanding of the meaning of already vague political labels. Lots of polling data has been compiled on this topic in support of my assertion. My personal canvassing experiences in the NYC metro area during the Democratic primaries also support these polling results. The cognitive dissonance I witnessed between labels and policies was astounding for these words: “liberal,” “progressive”, and “socialist.”

 

Super minor contention with the poll: Gallup is normally very reliable, used a large sample number (29,000), and ended up with national results similar to others I’ve seen (something like 35% conservative, 40% moderate, and 25% liberal on average). But did the telephone surveys include cell phones too or just landlines? If the latter, would this skew the results in any way?

 

Also, note the age demographic breakdown of these polls. Historically speaking, a portion of the U.S. population always turns more conservative with increasing age. The most obvious explanation is that people tend to accumulate wealth and have families as they get older, and so they become less willing to “share” that household wealth via assumed higher taxes from the political left. My question, though, is what happens when people DON’T accumulate wealth and have children with increasing age at nearly the pace of previous generations? Because this is exactly what’s happening now with Millenials (thanks to the Great Recession and to neoliberalism) and potentially with Generation Z in the post-pandemic years ahead. Just something to ponder...

 

 

We are living under a tyranny of the minority for sure, but the real minority to be worried about is way smaller than the sum of Trump voters. The one-party corporate oligarchy is the true problem! Our government primarily serves to represent the interests of the 621 verified American billionaires. The interests of the rest of the 200+ million voting-eligible citizens are subordinate.

 

This is not to say, however, that a viable solution would be to throw out the republic in favor of a true democracy. Although I’m definitely not a strict Constitutionalist and would make a number of changes to the U.S. Constitution if I could, I do rather like the stability its main framework has provided for so long (unlike, say, Italy’s). I would not want to tamper with key structures that serve as bulwarks against tyranny of the majority, such as the Electoral College, bicameralism, and the federalist system. Most (but not all!) major policy changes should come about slowly and only after much (rational) deliberation. And the bulk of policy change should originate at the state level and be resolved there, if possible.

 

The best protections against extreme versions of tyranny of the minority end up being the same as those against tyranny of the majority: improved electorate education, greater first amendment freedoms, and increased civic engagement (voting, activism, etc.) so that all politicians at every level of government are constantly held accountable. Or that’s the theory behind how things should work, at least. A constitutional amendment may also be necessary to overturn the Supreme Court’s decision on Citizens United v. FEC. In any case, Democrats and fellow lefties must stop wallowing in the political victim role and start putting in the work to figure out how to energize the base and win over independents, moderates, and apathetic voters. Their votes are there for the taking in every state…yes, even in the dark red ones! 90+ million voting-eligible Americans don’t even vote!!!

Did you buy  the unabomber's  shack?

[Gary M]

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

. The one thing that just about everyone secretly agrees on is that our representatives are no longer fighting FOR the people. Their fighting WITH each other. That’s pretty much it in a nutshell. 

 

And that is why they all hate Trump

[Tiberius]

5 hours ago, RealKayAdams said:

Random PPP Note: While deliberately avoiding the main board and anything related to the Buffalo Bills this early morning, I decided to scan a few of the PPP pages beyond the first one. What I found were a bunch of interesting threads like this one that deserved a lot more TLC than they initially received. I also noticed a bunch of old threads whose titles are very similar to ones on the first page. So consider this your friendly reminder to look through pages 2+ more often!

 

 

Everyone should pay careful attention to the details here! This 2019 Gallup poll asked only for political self-identification and did not get into actual voting history or stances on specific political issues. These are clearly separate things! The country may be noticeably center-right when it comes to political labels, but it leans slightly center-left (modern American standard…not the European one) on election day (examples: House of Reps composition, Presidential popular vote) and polls noticeably center-left on many important issues (off the top of my head: mid-/late-term abortion, unions, minimum wage laws/UBI, marijuana, health care, environment, education, regime change wars/military interventionism, economic nationalism/protectionism, progressive taxation, corporate financial contributions to campaigns).

 

I place greater importance on voting history and on individual public policy stances than I do on political self-identification (or party registration). That’s because I don’t think the average American even has a good understanding of the meaning of already vague political labels. Lots of polling data has been compiled on this topic in support of my assertion. My personal canvassing experiences in the NYC metro area during the Democratic primaries also support these polling results. The cognitive dissonance I witnessed between labels and policies was astounding for these words: “liberal,” “progressive”, and “socialist.”

 

Super minor contention with the poll: Gallup is normally very reliable, used a large sample number (29,000), and ended up with national results similar to others I’ve seen (something like 35% conservative, 40% moderate, and 25% liberal on average). But did the telephone surveys include cell phones too or just landlines? If the latter, would this skew the results in any way?

 

Also, note the age demographic breakdown of these polls. Historically speaking, a portion of the U.S. population always turns more conservative with increasing age. The most obvious explanation is that people tend to accumulate wealth and have families as they get older, and so they become less willing to “share” that household wealth via assumed higher taxes from the political left. My question, though, is what happens when people DON’T accumulate wealth and have children with increasing age at nearly the pace of previous generations? Because this is exactly what’s happening now with Millenials (thanks to the Great Recession and to neoliberalism) and potentially with Generation Z in the post-pandemic years ahead. Just something to ponder...

 

 

We are living under a tyranny of the minority for sure, but the real minority to be worried about is way smaller than the sum of Trump voters. The one-party corporate oligarchy is the true problem! Our government primarily serves to represent the interests of the 621 verified American billionaires. The interests of the rest of the 200+ million voting-eligible citizens are subordinate.

 

This is not to say, however, that a viable solution would be to throw out the republic in favor of a true democracy. Although I’m definitely not a strict Constitutionalist and would make a number of changes to the U.S. Constitution if I could, I do rather like the stability its main framework has provided for so long (unlike, say, Italy’s). I would not want to tamper with key structures that serve as bulwarks against tyranny of the majority, such as the Electoral College, bicameralism, and the federalist system. Most (but not all!) major policy changes should come about slowly and only after much (rational) deliberation. And the bulk of policy change should originate at the state level and be resolved there, if possible.

 

The best protections against extreme versions of tyranny of the minority end up being the same as those against tyranny of the majority: improved electorate education, greater first amendment freedoms, and increased civic engagement (voting, activism, etc.) so that all politicians at every level of government are constantly held accountable. Or that’s the theory behind how things should work, at least. A constitutional amendment may also be necessary to overturn the Supreme Court’s decision on Citizens United v. FEC. In any case, Democrats and fellow lefties must stop wallowing in the political victim role and start putting in the work to figure out how to energize the base and win over independents, moderates, and apathetic voters. Their votes are there for the taking in every state…yes, even in the dark red ones! 90+ million voting-eligible Americans don’t even vote!!!

A little structural reform is called for at times. Adding a new state or two would be a good start, as the Senate is just not a working for the majority of the citizens of the country. It's an advantage that benefits one side too much. That needs to change 

[Westside]

12 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

A little structural reform is called for at times. Adding a new state or two would be a good start, as the Senate is just not a working for the majority of the citizens of the country. It's an advantage that benefits one side too much. That needs to change 

In other words. I lost and want to change the rules so I can win. Grow up you big baby. Elections have consequences. 

[Tiberius]

@westside2 We are taking everything 

Just now, westside2 said:

In other words. I lost and want to change the rules so I can win. Grow up you big baby. Elections have consequences. 

Yes, they do. And we are going to make sure more PEOPLE are counted 

[Westside]

Just now, Tiberius said:

@westside2 We are taking everything 

Yes, they do. And we are going to make sure more PEOPLE are counted 

Oh yeah, what people hitler? You gonna exterminate those who don't agree with you? Good job comrade.

[Dragoon]

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/lizzo-celebrates-6-months-vegan-142700788.html
 

You see that? Damn you liberals! Y’all are the ones pushing this grotesque nonsense on all of us. That picture is a crime against humanity. What the hell is wrong with you savages?! Shame!

[Tiberius]

3 minutes ago, westside2 said:

Oh yeah, what people hitler? You gonna exterminate those who don't agree with you? Good job comrade.

Nope, just out vote them on an even playing field. Why do you hate fairness? Oh ya, because you can't win if its fair. 🤣

2 minutes ago, Dragoon said:

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/lizzo-celebrates-6-months-vegan-142700788.html
 

You see that? Damn you liberals! Y’all are the ones pushing this grotesque nonsense on all of us. That picture is a crime against humanity. What the hell is wrong with you savages?! Shame!

🕺