What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Democrats need to wake the hell up (2 Viewers)

timschochet said:
Well…I think you’re off on this. I don’t agree with Bernie a lot of the time (and I certainly don’t agree with his messaging here) but I don’t think he has the contempt for voters that you do. 
Click to expand...
Saying someone has contempt for voters doesn't imply that I do.  Where do you come up with this stuff.  Project on some one else.  

 
And he, Sanders, absolutely does have contempt for voters.  They voted in Manchin and near as I can tell Manchin ran on this, what shall we call it, theme, or platform?  The people voted him in and if Bernie ran against Manchin he would of lost in West Virginia.  

 
Hot Diggity Dog said:
Saying someone has contempt for voters doesn't imply that I do.  Where do you come up with this stuff.  Project on some one else.  
Click to expand...
No you misunderstood me. I’m not saying that YOU have contempt for voters, In saying that you think Bernie does. I disagree with that. 

 
timschochet said:
Bernie Sanders is on CNN slamming Joe Manchin: “He’s going to have to explain this to the people of West Virginia”. 
Or else what Bernie? You going to primary him? I get that liberals are frustrated but this is crazy talk. 
Click to expand...
So what. Trump slammed those that opposite him. The Republicans critize their own members who don't tow the line. The Republicans will take the house and prove once again they can’t govern either. Same as it ever was.

 
timschochet said:
That won’t happen. Too many young people, including both of my daughters, prefer the ideas of the progressives. Like it or not (I don’t) they’re the 
Click to expand...
You should have your daughters go through the Bill of rights and see what they disagree with.    That's what I do.

What about progressivism do they like?

What about federalism don't they like?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
quick-hands said:
You should have your daughters go through the Bill of rights and see what they disagree with.    That's what I do.

What about progressivism do they like?
Click to expand...
When AOC speaks she speaks to them, they believe. She is young like they are, she understands their generation. They want drastic action taken to fix climate change. They want drastic action to stop mass  shootings. They want drastic action to end George Floyd type incidents. They want immediate acceptance  of all minorities and LGBTQ. And they want poor people to be helped by the government, with no homeless and no one starving. 
 

You asked. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
When AOC speaks she speaks to them, they believe. She is young like they are, she understands their generation. They want drastic action taken to fix climate change. They want drastic action to stop mass  shootings. They want drastic action to end George Floyd type incidents. They want immediate acceptable of all minorities and LGBTQ. And they want poor people to be helped by the government, with no homeless and no one starving. 
 

You asked. 
Click to expand...
That is not what I asked.   

I have a 19 year old and a 15 year old.

Both of them know the 27 amendments.   Neither is progressive.    Not that it means they don't want the things your girls would like.   But they don't believe the govt can solve everything, or imo anything.

 
quick-hands said:
That is not what I asked.   

I have a 19 year old and a 15 year old.

Both of them know the 27 amendments.   Neither is progressive.    Not that it means they don't want the things your girls would like.   But they don't believe the govt can solve everything, or imo anything.
Click to expand...
You asked what it is about progressivism that they like. I tried to explain it to you. You don’t have to agree with it (I don’t, mostly, though I admire their wish list.) 

 
timschochet said:
I did ask them that. They said no. They just wish there were less guns. They have no solution how to achieve that outcome. 
Click to expand...
My kids wish a lot of the things AOC and you daughters wish.   But when they say that they know I'm gonna talk about the bill of rights.   And they hate that.   Especially  my son.

They both know I hate the 17th amendment  and why.

 
timschochet said:
You asked what it is about progressivism that they like. I tried to explain it to you. You don’t have to agree with it (I don’t, mostly, though I admire their wish list.) 
Click to expand...
I'm not arguing  Tim.   Sorry if I pissed you off.   You are a smart guy,   I thought you might use the BoR filter you use to discuss progressivism.   AOC clearly doesn't understand the bill of rights.

But I wish she did.    

 
quick-hands said:
My kids wish a lot of the things AOC and you daughters wish.   But when they say that they know I'm gonna talk about the bill of rights.   And they hate that.   Especially  my son.

They both know I hate the 17th amendment  and why.
Click to expand...
Why do you hate the 17th? 

I do, too. I hate it because it took the responsibility away from the state legislatures and decreased the effect of voting for truly local representatives at the state level. 

 
quick-hands said:
I'm not arguing  Tim.   Sorry if I pissed you off.   You are a smart guy,   I thought you might use the BoR filter you use to discuss progressivism.   AOC clearly doesn't understand the bill of rights.

But I wish she did.    
Click to expand...
You didn’t piss me off. 
 

I do disagree with you though. Most of AOC’s proposals, and progressive proposals in general, do not IMO directly contradict the Bill of Rights. 

 
rockaction said:
Why do you hate the 17th? 

I do, too. I hate it because it took the responsibility away from the state legislatures and decreased the effect of voting for truly local representatives at the state level. 
Click to expand...
I can’t imagine actually getting excited enough to hate an amendment to the Constitution. 
 

DAMN THAT 17TH AMENDMENT!! Did you see what it pulled this time? 

 
timschochet said:
I can’t imagine actually getting excited enough to hate an amendment to the Constitution. 
 

DAMN THAT 17TH AMENDMENT!! Did you see what it pulled this time? 
Click to expand...
Well, I don't get worked up about it, but the structure of the Constitution is and was there for a reason. You can't go willy-nilly kicking things out or changing them without deeply thinking about why the Founders did what they did. I think the Progressive Era ignored a lot of things that were crucial and important about the structure the Constitution bequeathed us. 

 
rockaction said:
Why do you hate the 17th? 

I do, too. I hate it because it took the responsibility away from the state legislatures and decreased the effect of voting for truly local representatives at the state level. 
Click to expand...
The house is the people's house.  The senate represents the states.     And should be a creature of the states.    We have two house of representatives  currently.    

 
timschochet said:
I can’t imagine actually getting excited enough to hate an amendment to the Constitution. 
 

DAMN THAT 17TH AMENDMENT!! Did you see what it pulled this time? 
Click to expand...
Sorry Tim.  But this is a really dumb comment.   I'd make you buy me a beer if u said it to my face.

 
timschochet said:
I can’t imagine actually getting excited enough to hate an amendment to the Constitution. 
 

DAMN THAT 17TH AMENDMENT!! Did you see what it pulled this time? 
Click to expand...
Besides what is more important  than the bill of rights to get fired up about?

If you aren't passionate about that. Do you really care?

 
By the way, when Wilson talks about diminishing the importance of voting, remember our last president and how ardently people defend his dismissal of the importance of voting and the federalist structure of the Constitution. While not as egregious as Wilson, his was a "get things done" presidency that saw little use for democratic norms. 

 
rockaction said:
Well, I don't get worked up about it, but the structure of the Constitution is and was there for a reason. You can't go willy-nilly kicking things out or changing them without deeply thinking about why the Founders did what they did. I think the Progressive Era ignored a lot of things that were crucial and important about the structure the Constitution bequeathed us. 
Click to expand...
The founding fathers would roll in their graves if they saw current gun culture in America.  That is, of course, because it is bananas.  

 
zoonation said:
The founding fathers would roll in their graves if they saw current gun culture in America.  That is, of course, because it is bananas.  
Click to expand...


While they certainly couldn't conceive of automatic weapons, high capacity magazines, etc. I think their larger disbelief in the culture in America today would be how often those guns are used by citizens on one another.

 
zoonation said:
The founding fathers would roll in their graves if they saw current gun culture in America.  That is, of course, because it is bananas.  
Click to expand...
The well regulated militia means everyone has guns

But we have a generational sickness in this country that isn't about guns, but the disrespect  of guns that didn't exist at the time of the founders.     Or my parents.    It will take a generation to solve.   

 
quick-hands said:
The well regulated militia means everyone has guns

But we have a generational sickness in this country that isn't about guns, but the disrespect  of guns that didn't exist at the time of the founders.     Or my parents.    It will take a generation to solve.   
Click to expand...
The rest of the civilized world has long since recognized that arming citizens is a profoundly dangerous and stupid idea.  And, of course, the numbers bear that out in terms of the exponentially more deaths you see in America from gun violence.  

 
Joe Bryant said:
Thanks. Can you elaborate on what you mean there?
Click to expand...
Sure.     But it's just how the government  was set up and how it is supposed to run..  The house represents the people and is directly elected.

The senate, all states being equal are treated equally and there representives where in the past appointed by the state governments.   And they looked out for the states interests.

The senate is currently just a more exclusive house of representatives.   They look out for there party because that's how they are elected.    It would be great if and a way to lesson the division of the country if we had the system back as designed.

 
zoonation said:
The rest of the civilized world has long since recognized that arming citizens is a profoundly dangerous and stupid idea.  And, of course, the numbers bear that out in terms of the exponentially more deaths you see in America from gun violence.  
Click to expand...
I don't care what they think.   If France laughs at us I don't care.    I wish the rest of the world realized the real problem is 18th century german intellectuals. 

 
quick-hands said:
I don't care what they think.   If France laughs at us I don't care.    I wish the rest of the world realized the real problem is 18th century german intellectuals. 
Click to expand...
It’s not just France.  It’s every first world country. But I take your point.    

American gun culture, underpinned by a draconian interpretation of the second amendment, is out of control, dangerous and responsible for mass casualties.  

 
quick-hands said:
Besides what is more important  than the bill of rights to get fired up about?

If you aren't passionate about that. Do you really care?
Click to expand...
I’m passionate about freedom of speech. I get being passionate about the 2nd. The ones on slavery, equality of treatment, absolutely. Brings me to tears, honestly. 
The 17th? Yawn. 

 
Besides- trust me when I say this- you don’t want legislators in Sacramento deciding who our senators are going to be. (Actually you don’t want them deciding much of anything,  but that’s a whole different point.) 

 
timschochet said:
Besides- trust me when I say this- you don’t want legislators in Sacramento deciding who our senators are going to be. (Actually you don’t want them deciding much of anything,  but that’s a whole different point.) 
Click to expand...
That was one of the reasons given to remove the state legislatures from voting on Senators. It was in part a reaction to party and machine politics. 

But for somebody who hates referendums and the like, you're sure just peachy with a directly democratic, unicameral-style legislature with not much of a nod to the distance between the people and their Senators. 

 
And so wasn't that the reason behind direct referendums in CA, which you hate. I looked into it a few years back and the main reason was that you couldn't trust state government because of machine and party politics, therefore, important issues should go directly to the people. 

And we know what an absolute cluster the referendum system is in CA. It's a product of the Progressive Era. 

 
quick-hands said:
Sure.     But it's just how the government  was set up and how it is supposed to run..  The house represents the people and is directly elected.

The senate, all states being equal are treated equally and there representives where in the past appointed by the state governments.   And they looked out for the states interests.

The senate is currently just a more exclusive house of representatives.   They look out for there party because that's how they are elected.    It would be great if and a way to lesson the division of the country if we had the system back as designed.
Click to expand...


Thanks. When do you think it started to change?

 
rockaction said:
That was one of the reasons given to remove the state legislatures from voting on Senators. It was in part a reaction to party and machine politics. 

But for somebody who hates referendums and the like, you're sure just peachy with a directly democratic, unicameral-style legislature with not much of a nod to the distance between the people and their Senators. 
Click to expand...
Not really. Truth is I’m pretty sold on your argument. I was just taking a cheap shot at Sacramento politicians. They deserve it. 

 
timschochet said:
Not really. Truth is I’m pretty sold on your argument. I was just taking a cheap shot at Sacramento politicians. They deserve it. 
Click to expand...
Yes, they do, from what I've seen, though I'm really an ingenue about CA politics and the workings of Sacramento. I'd probably be appalled and disgusted if I did know. 

 
rockaction said:
Yes, they do, from what I've seen, though I'm really an ingenue about CA politics and the workings of Sacramento. I'd probably be appalled and disgusted if I did know. 
Click to expand...
You can start with the billion dollar high speed train to nowhere. Last I checked, if it ever gets built, (sometime in the next 20 years) I can get to Fresno in 2 hours!! 

 
timschochet said:
You can start with the billion dollar high speed train to nowhere. Last I checked, if it ever gets built, (sometime in the next 20 years) I can get to Fresno in 2 hours!! 
Click to expand...
I do know about that. The high-leverage stops in Bakersfield and Visalia during Phase One will be just fine. Who needs the San Diego/L.A. line? We need to connect those other high-traffic areas! 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

timschochet
Don’t blame Manchin
2 3
Replies
115
Views
3K
The Commish
The Commish
supermike80
Republicans need to let the Democrats sleep in
Replies
31
Views
677
rockaction
rockaction
timschochet
How will Republicans handle inflation?
2 3 4
Replies
194
Views
5K
The Commish
The Commish

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top