What happened to the immigration thread?

[ousdahl]

since we're all scratching at the same sniff here, lemme just respond with one post.

Good response, Shirley! I particularly like the historic context.

I like fish's airbag analogy too.

and I value zsn's takes around here. You have a timing and economy to your responses, and in doing so seem to say more with less.

so, looking ahead, I think the question to ask is:

what strategies and mechanisms and such do dems have planned to avoid future failures yet? How do dems achieve future successes (against the cultish tail in question that is otherwise prone to wagging the dog here)? What's the tweak to the airbag design here to prevent that particular fatality from happening again?

[jfish26]

since we're all scratching at the same sniff here, lemme just respond with one post.

Good response, Shirley! I particularly like the historic context.

I like fish's airbag analogy too.

and I value zsn's takes around here. You have a timing and economy to your responses, and in doing so seem to say more with less.

so, looking ahead, I think the question to ask is:

what strategies and mechanisms and such do dems have planned to avoid future failures yet? How do dems achieve future successes (against the cultish tail in question that is otherwise prone to wagging the dog here)? What's the tweak to the airbag design here to prevent that particular fatality from happening again?

The answer is: elect more Democrats. And today's journey into outer space is about you saying that maybe we shouldn't be doing that.

[DeletedUser]

what strategies and mechanisms and such do dems have planned to avoid future failures yet?

JFC.

This sounds like a question a middle school student would ask a politician coming in to speak to their 7th grade class.

Whatever you did during those 3 days where you didn't dominate this section of the board, go back to doing that. This ain't it. Sometimes it okay to read what other people say, think about it, and then remain silent if your understanding of the topic is several tiers below the others.

I try to do it too.

Dominate the fishing thread. I'll handle the golf and hump day activity threads.

[ousdahl]

This sounds like a question a middle school student would ask a politician coming in to speak to their 7th grade class.

you say that like it's a bad thing!

Whatever you did during those 3 days where you didn't dominate this section of the board

I mean, if you're tired of having me "dominate" this section of the board (your word), have you considered just not engaging me here any more?

You know maybe just, like...read what I say, think about it, and then remain silent.

[MICHHAWK]

i for one am thankful that you have the courage and the conviction to ask the thoughtful questions.

keep doing gods work. for all our sake.

[DeletedUser]

This sounds like a question a middle school student would ask a politician coming in to speak to their 7th grade class.

you say that like it's a bad thing!

Whatever you did during those 3 days where you didn't dominate this section of the board

I mean, if you're tired of having me "dominate" this section of the board (your word), have you considered just not engaging me here any more?

You know maybe just, like...read what I say, think about it, and then remain silent.

I think we all try, but some of it is just so dumb it's hard to remain silent.

Especially when it sure feels like some of it comes from you seemingly thinking you're coming from a place of intellectual superiority to some of these posters and are presenting a "gotcha".

I'm not trying to be a dick (but no kiddie gloves either). You don't bother me much, I think you mostly mean well. But the abuse you take does seem to bother you. So I am just presenting some friendly suggestions.

And yes, having conversations with adults while sounding like a middle schooler is a bad thing imo. I think you lack some of the nuanced understanding of some of these topics you're desperate to discuss with some of these guys.



If your entire purpose is to prove the Dems aren't perfect either, then I think all but 1 or 2 of the active posters here would agree.

[ousdahl]

The answer is: elect more Democrats.

in the context of this discussion on how exactly to counter cultism in politics, I'm just not sure that this - what amounts to some call for unwavering partisan loyalty in itself - is as appealing or persuasive as you seem to think it is.

But, I know I know...I'm just a nihilist, a misinformation satellite, a Putin parrot, an unconscious mouthpiece of right wing extremism, and so on.

[ousdahl]

If your entire purpose is to prove the Dems aren't perfect either, then I think all but 1 or 2 of the active posters here would agree.

if that's the case, then boy there is a lot of fuss from a lot more than 1 or 2 of you anyway.

[jfish26]

The answer is: elect more Democrats.

in the context of this discussion on how exactly to counter cultism in politics, I'm just not sure that this - what amounts to some call for unwavering partisan loyalty in itself - is as appealing or persuasive as you seem to think it is.

But, I know I know...I'm just a nihilist, a misinformation satellite, a Putin parrot, an unconscious mouthpiece of right wing extremism, and so on.

You need to be persuaded that math is math?

[DeletedUser]

The answer is: elect more Democrats.

in the context of this discussion....blah blah blah

The context was you asking some dumb question about strategies and mechanisms. Did you forget?

Those goal posts always sway with you, but that was a heavy gust.

I get it. When you're brainstorming outloud, and trying to decide what your stance is, while simultaneously trying to lead a discussion, these things happen.

[DeletedUser]

You need to be persuaded that math is math?

Strategies and mechanisms, bro.

[jfish26]

If your entire purpose is to prove the Dems aren't perfect either, then I think all but 1 or 2 of the active posters here would agree.

if that's the case, then boy there is a lot of fuss from a lot more than 1 or 2 of you anyway.

You are stumbling through the same error as in the Ukraine thread.

Voting 100% Democrat does not mean one thinks the Democrats are 100% right, or that 100% of Democrats are good.

Assigning 100% of the blame for the Ukraine war to Putin does not mean one thinks the Ukrainians are 100% right, or that 100% of their or our actions are good.

[ousdahl]

ohh, numbers!

kinda seems like the one who needs to be persuaded that math is math is...who, exactly?

[twocoach]

What you just said really makes no sense and shows a lack of understanding about how bills are passed, how politcla influence and pressure is applied, and what sitting members of congress have to balance when thinking about being reelected.

what political influence and pressure has been applied?

By Trump, he applied his influence and pressure to nix a bipartisan agreement even tho he wasn't even in office at the time.

By dems, tho? What influence and pressure did they apply to try and pass that bipartisan agreement, thus countering Trump and the cult?

"what political influence and pressure has been applied? "

Do you mean besides the hundreds of person-hours spent in direct negotiations with the GOP to craft the bill in the first place?!?

The Dems don't go into their own room and work by themselves, come out with their final version and then cross their fingers that the GOP will be OK with it. Likely dozens of drafts, negotiation sessions and concessions were made and agreed to prior to the final version was created that was voted on.

People who stated that they were good with what they had backed out of their commitment at the direction of Trump, period. Holding the Dems responsible for the GOP being liars and bad faith negotiators is comically stupid. So yes, what jfish stated was the only real strategy that is guaranteed to work is to get enough Democrats elected that you don't need the votes of the liars and spineless GOP Trump sycophants to pass a vote.

[ousdahl]

I mean, if you really wanna consider the history behind this particular issue...

dems were pushing for, of all things, more money to the war machine.

Pubs held out unless they got the tougher border policies they wanted.

Dems conceded the tougher border policies, and pubs blew up the deal anyway.

Then both parties agreed on more money to the war machine anyway.

And now dems are bragging about how they're tougher at the border than pubs.

and here I am, the only one left who can remember when tougher border policies were considered xenophobic, and the kinda stuff dems pleaded for our votes to counter, rather than champion as an initiative of their own.

Let me take another opportunity to request you guys search this very thread for "hollowed-out carcasses." The point remains oh so relevant to this discussion, and so many others.

[DeletedUser]

What twocoach said. And/Or elect Pubs who aren't unwilling to do what is best for ALL people they represent.

[DeletedUser]

I mean, if you really wanna consider the history behind this particular issue...

dems were pushing for, of all things, more money to the war machine.

Pubs held out unless they got the tougher border policies they wanted.

Dems conceded the tougher border policies, and pubs blew up the deal anyway.

Then both parties agreed on more money to the war machine anyway.

And now dems are bragging about how they're tougher at the border than pubs.

and here I am, the only one left who can remember when tougher border policies were considered xenophobic, and the kinda stuff dems pleaded for our votes to counter, rather than champion as an initiative of their own.

Let me take another opportunity to request you guys search this very thread for "hollowed-out carcasses." The point remains oh so relevant to this discussion, and so many others.

All. Over. The. Place.

Hands up. Side to side. Rollercoaster ride.

[MICHHAWK]

checks and balances. get rid of them. then/than you can do whatever you want. whenever you want.

[DeletedUser]

"The only one left who can remember...."

You think you're a lot smarter than you actually are.

[ousdahl]

I mean, if you really wanna consider the history behind this particular issue...

dems were pushing for, of all things, more money to the war machine.

Pubs held out unless they got the tougher border policies they wanted.

Dems conceded the tougher border policies, and pubs blew up the deal anyway.

Then both parties agreed on more money to the war machine anyway.

And now dems are bragging about how they're tougher at the border than pubs.

and here I am, the only one left who can remember when tougher border policies were considered xenophobic, and the kinda stuff dems pleaded for our votes to counter, rather than champion as an initiative of their own.

Let me take another opportunity to request you guys search this very thread for "hollowed-out carcasses." The point remains oh so relevant to this discussion, and so many others.

All. Over. The. Place.

Hands up. Side to side. Rollercoaster ride.

who?

you?

yea.

my discussion is entirely on point here. Don't let your floundering take away from that.