Jump to content
Carolina Huddle
rodeo

2020 General Election Candidates thread

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, TheBlue said:

If it was as simple and obvious as you claim it is then you should have no trouble demonstrating that right? Yet you aren’t. You do the same move you always do. Make a bombastic claim and offer no evidence to support it then say it’s the person who is challenging who is at fault for not agreeing. That’s pstall harbs level poo.

 

No it’s obfuscation on your part. The main issue is how long it would take to implement. Stay on task.

 

This isn’t pointless. You spreading legit lies and propaganda around one of the most popular policies proposals in the country while trying to push biden is very relevant. It’s self serving no doubt.

Bernie wouldn’t be able to roll out m4a on the timeline he campaigned on in reality.   It would be fought tooth and nail.   Too much money and people in power that would be fighting it.  I am not wasting time trying to prove how dysfunctional and horrible our government is... simply because you want it to not apply in this one instance 

Most Americans want gun reform too.  Some aspects of that poll even higher than m4a.  Americans want a lot of poo.  Doesn’t mean that then easily happens just because the people want it along with a POTUS. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, CRA said:

Bernie wouldn’t be able to roll out m4a on the timeline he campaigned on in reality.   It would be fought tooth and nail.   Too much money and people in power that would be fighting it.  I am not wasting time trying to prove how dysfunctional and horrible our government is... simply because you want it to not apply in this one instance

there are a lot of of establishment moneyed interests that would fight against it.... better to just give up and go along and not fight - CRA

Edited by R0CKnR0LLA
  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

biden wants to increase police funding. at least trump only wants to keep it where it is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, R0CKnR0LLA said:

there are a lot of of establishments moneyed interests that would fight against it.... better to just give up and go along and not fight - "CRA"

weird how it’s never too hard for trump to get what he wants. the president is a dangerous all powerful dictator when it’s a republican and a powerless loser when it’s a democrat. hmmmmm

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, rodeo said:

biden wants to increase police funding. at least trump only wants to keep it where it is

imagine in this moment campaigning on more money for cops and also the vp will probably be a cop. nothing but contempt.

  • Flames 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Quote

When proclamations are made that “voting is harm reduction,” it’s never clear how less harm is actually calculated. Do we compare how many millions of undocumented Indigenous Peoples have been deported? Do we add up what political party conducted more drone strikes? Or who had the highest military budget? Do we factor in pipelines, mines, dams, sacred sites desecration? Do we balance incarceration rates? Do we compare sexual violence statistics? Is it in the massive budgets of politicians who spend hundreds of millions of dollars competing for votes?

Though there are some political distinctions between the two prominent parties in the so-called U.S., they all pledge their allegiance to the same flag. Red or blue, they’re both still stripes on a rag waving over stolen lands that comprise a country built by stolen lives.

We don’t dismiss the reality that, on the scale of U.S. settler colonial violence, even the slightest degree of harm can mean life or death for those most vulnerable. What we assert here is that the entire notion of “voting as harm reduction” obscures and perpetuates settler-colonial violence, there is nothing “less harmful” about it, and there are more effective ways to intervene in its violences.

At some point the left in the so-called U.S. realized that convincing people to rally behind a “lesser evil” was a losing strategy. The term “harm reduction” was appropriated to reframe efforts to justify their participation and coerce others to engage in the theater of what is called “democracy” in the U.S.

Harm reduction was established in the 1980s as a public health strategy for people dealing with substance use issues who struggle with abstinence. According to the Harm Reduction Coalition (HRC) the principles of harm reduction establish that the identified behavior is “part of life” so they “choose not to ignore or condemn but to minimize harmful effects” and work towards breaking social stigmas towards “safer use.” The HRC also states that, “there is no universal definition of or formula for implementing harm reduction.” Overall, harm reduction focuses on reducing adverse impacts associated with harmful behaviors.

The proposition of “harm reduction” in the context of voting means something entirely different from those organizing to address substance use issues. The assertion is that “since this political system isn’t going away, we’ll support politicians and laws that may do less harm.”

The idea of a ballot being capable of reducing the harm in a system rooted in colonial domination and exploitation, white supremacy, hetero-patriarchy, and capitalism is an extraordinary exaggeration. There is no person whose lives aren’t impacted everyday by these systems of oppression, but instead of coded reformism and coercive “get out the vote” campaigns towards a “safer” form of settler colonialism, we’re asking “what is the real and tragic harm and danger associated with perpetuating colonial power and what can be done to end it?”

Voting as practiced under U.S. “democracy” is the process with which people (excluding youth under the age of 18, convicted felons, those the state deems “mentally incompetent,” and undocumented folx including permanent legal residents), are coerced to choose narrowly prescribed rules and rulers. The anarchist collective Crimethinc observes, “Voting consolidates the power of a whole society in the hands of a few politicians.” When this process is conducted under colonial authority, there is no option but political death for Indigenous Peoples. In other words, voting can never be a survival strategy under colonial rule. It’s a strategy of defeat and victimhood that protracts the suffering and historical harm induced by ongoing settler colonialism. And while the harm reduction sentiment may be sincere, even hard won marginal reforms gained through popular support can be just as easily reversed by the stroke of a politician’s pen. If voting is the democratic participation in our own oppression, voting as harm reduction is a politics that keeps us at the mercy of our oppressors.

https://www.indigenousaction.org/voting-is-not-harm-reduction-an-indigenous-perspective/

“harm reduction” rhetoric only perpetuates white supremacy. it is a white supremacist argument. it quite literally means to make white supremacy more tolerable; to make the outcomes marginally better for its victims. i don’t vote for white supremacists and i don’t entertain the arguments of white supremacists.

  • Flames 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lmao at this perfectly accurate headline. great candidate. i hear all those people started protesting nationwide because they wanted a president who didn’t tweet so much

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CRA said:

Bernie wouldn’t be able to roll out m4a on the timeline he campaigned on in reality

you have no evidence to support this. Please just concede that this is purely a speculative opinion. 

 

8 hours ago, CRA said:

It would be fought tooth and nail.   Too much money and people in power that would be fighting it.

Obamacare literally faced the same if not worse levels of opposition and was signed into law in two years. 

 

8 hours ago, CRA said:

I am not wasting time trying to prove how dysfunctional and horrible our government is... simply because you want it to not apply in this one instance 

you are making claims you cant support and balking when asked to prove them...because you know you cant. Saying purposely vague claims like the government is dysfunctional so it would take multiple presidental terms to enact healthcare reform is literally not even supported by historical evidence. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, GOOGLE JIM BOB COOTER said:

weird how it’s never too hard for trump to get what he wants. the president is a dangerous all powerful dictator when it’s a republican and a powerless loser when it’s a democrat. hmmmmm

you been paying attention? Our court system has a been a tool used over and over and over and over again to stop and delay Trump from doing certain things on a policy level. 

but there is no court you can take him to for destroying American institutions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh wow.  You can make a statement like there is wide thought diversity within the Latino community, but what in the hell is he thinking qualifying that against the AA community.  Furthermore why would you be claiming your VP candidate to be of a race that is less “diverse”.

Democrats should pray that debates are cancelled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what he means is "latinos voted overwhelmingly for Sanders over me so here is my excuse when they don't show up for me in November"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


4 minutes ago, rodeo said:

what he means is "latinos voted overwhelmingly for Sanders over me so here is my excuse when they don't show up for me in November"

also some of this as well

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just wondering out loud if any of the blue chuds would have had anything to say about it if bernie had said what biden said about “the african american community” and the “latino community”

i loved the never ending flow of bullshit articles by “journalists” who were “just asking questions” about bernie’s treatment of race related issues without ever providing any evidence. weird how those people shut right the fug up as soon as the party nominated the segregationist. hmmmmm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...