Another Dem pickup
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/11/08/gop-rep-karen-handel-concedes-one-of-georgias-hardest-fought-congressional-races-to-first-time-candidate-democrat-lucy-mcbath/?utm_term=.d020eba659a4
Thank you for your service.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/08/politics/brian-kemp-resigns-secretary-of-state-georgia-governor-race-stacey-abrams/index.html
Brian Kemp is confident that he's rigged the election enough.
@lope Are you ever going to actually address this or admit you were mistaken?
my god i hope this decision bites him back on the ass.
I would not compromise on climate change, I would compromise on health care, I would compromise on immigration, but not on the inhumane treatment of immigrants and/or terrorizing them (I did address this one), I would not compromise on the 14th unless a substantial amount of people showed that to be the way they want to see things.
I would compromise on the wall even though it's a huge waste of money if the compromise involved means of increasing government revenues (through defunding other things, ie military, or raising taxes (unfortunately republicans would probably never let this happen)), I would not compromise on gerrymandering and have address this point, and I would vote no on kavanaugh (how exactly would one compromise on this? it's just a senate vote).
Happy? Compromise is a two way street. To compromise on immigration, I would expect democrats to get a benefit as well. I get the republicans rarely compromise and actively avoid it, but I still think the democrats should try. Sorry.
You do realize that Obamacare was already a compromise and that's the entire reason it sucks as much as it does, right?
That's the issue there though. Their attacks on immigration are only getting more and more severe. To the point where they're literally attacking the Constitution itself to try and get their way. So you really can't compromise here with them. Any actual reasonable actions you can take to curb immigration issues are not valid actions in their eyes.
There's a lot of reasons not to compromise here though. It'd be entirely ineffective, it'd be a waste of money, and so on. We could better spend those funds on other actually useful shit. And coming from the party who's ostensibly for financial responsibility it seems exceedingly irresponsible.
They did. Remember how Obama started out with a Democratic majority in Congress? They tried to compromise with the republicans constantly. It didn't work. In fact it did the opposite of work. It only made the Republicans dig in their heels even harder out of spite. You cannot compromise when the other side's idea of compromise is "you give me what I want."
They did try. It didn't work and it instead backfired. So to continue insisting they try to compromise is naively idealistic and completely ignores the actual reality of the situation. I agree, compromise is a good thing. IF the opposing side is actually interested in trying to come to an understanding.
This seems to be the bit you have yet to actually take away from what everyone's been saying when it's far and away the single most important detail here.
Why, and how? Can I ask you to elaborate on this bit?
Okay, so democrats give in to what the republicans want
The republicans say "Thanks for doing our bidding" and continue to obstruct every fucking piece of democratic legislation because that's their STATED GAME PLAN.
To continue insisting they avoid compromise is naively pessimistic and completely ignores the actual reality of the situation.
This seems to be the bit you yet to actually to take away.
How you can ignore what's been laid out in front of you so many times, is beyond me dude. Just read.
The republicans, as a party policy, have stated openly that they will do anything, and everything to obstruct democratic policies. They WON'T compromise. How the fuck do you not get this dude?
This is their OPENLY STATED POLICY. And you keep ignoring that they've stated this themselves.
Compromising with a malicious party who does not seek to play the game honestly, means you have surrendered the game.
Watch like, ONE ten minute video on the basics of game theory dude.
Can we like, video chat? Because I think you're failing to see my point here.
I watched the Vox video too, I know the reds have a game plan to not compromise.
But please, how in the world, can you believe things will get done if both sides refuse to do anything?
If you want to go on call or something I'll argue more but I'm done typing.
The issue is that it's the fucking Republicans who have been actively avoiding compromise this entire fucking time for christ sake. How is this so difficult for you to understand? It is completely naive to believe that a party who went from outright obstructionism to outright courting fascism would inexplicably turn around and want to actually compromise on anything. The Democrats would waste a shit load of time trying and failing to compromise with them when instead they could be focused on doing shit that might actually come to fruition instead.
Because the Republican idea of compromise means "do what I want" and that's it? When the other side gets all of what it wants, that's not exactly a compromise.
Nah, the one acting like a child is the one digging his heels in and refusing to understand how naive it is to keep trying to compromise with someone who has refused to compromise the last hundred times you've tried to do so. At some point you have to call it quits and stop wasting time.
So what do you expect to get done, if you play into the eagerly awaiting arms of the republicans here?
So, their OPENLY STATED STRATEGY is to be a party of obstructionism.
So, what do you expect them to give the democrats, should the democrats give them anything?
Literally all I've asked you to do this entire argument is think about this logically, not emotionally. All you keep doing is saying "THIS ISN'T FAIR THOUGH!" which is just an emotional response.
Logically, why would the party of obstructionism compromise on obstructing the goals of the dems? This is CONTRARY TO THEIR STATED GOAL.
Yet you're mad at the dems, and not the republicans.
Because even as a democrat yourself, you've fallen for republican talking points.
I don't think you and I voice chatting, or whatever would change the facts of the matter here. I'll happily do that with you tonight when I'm not at work, but I am entirely insistent that you will not win that argument.
Because many Republican ideas are not worth compromising on, like the several ones you listed. We agree, for example, there's no "giving republicans a little of what they want" when it comes to inhumane treatment of immigrants. When one side continuously dehumanizes them, and the other says "maybe don't do that", meeting them in the middle and saying "let's dehumanize immigrants, but only a little bit" isn't a reasonable compromise. It has the virtue of being in the middle, that alone does not make it sensible, and only works if you assume both sides to have equal merit. That's the gist of what we're saying. Same thing for the wall, health care, or taxes
Alright. You guys are right.
Let's just have the senate refuse everything the house says and have the house refuse everything the senate says.
Let's just do that for the next few years.
Whatever, I guess things will change.
We're just telling you the fact.
if the democrats compromise on the republican agenda, the republicans will not compromise on the democratic agenda.
If the democrats compromise, the republicans won't.
THAT'S ALL. You keep refusing to even recognize this.
It isn't that people are failing to see your point, its just that your point has no basis in reality and is little more than a naive soundbite to take responsibility away from the people that are the real problem.
No one is arguing that both sides should do nothing, so who are you talking to?
To us? Are you saying that's what I've been arguing? Because it's not, you are really misrepresenting the discussion. Not a good look when your point is that we only work things out if we concede on some things
For someone so jazzed up about "COMPROMISE" you sure are uncompromising in your depiction of the discussion we've had so far
Lope, argue or don't, but don't act like no one understands your arguments when you aren't even replying to the actual arguments made in this thread.
You all need to concede and compromise, you will get nothing done if you just give up and declare the other side as wrong
Also, after not compromising on anything, I am now giving up and declaring you all wrong
Thinking on it, how do you compromise on the wall anyways? You build... Half a wall? Cause that seems not only like it'd be even less effective than the whole thing (amounting to basically no effectiveness from what I can tell as opposed to minor effectiveness) and waste half the money which is already estimated to be billions of dollars.
"should we compromise on climate change?
And compromising on climate change would seem fairly stupid. One side keeps trying to deny it's an issue, the other side wants to take adequate steps to fix it. So a compromise would be taking some effects to fix it but nowhere near enough to actually do anything thus blowing a bunch of time and money making both sides unhappy?
defunding health care?
Healthcare? Obamacare is already a compromise as it is, that's why it's so shitty. But if we compromise any further then it's basically the old system but more expensive. So again, not actually a compromise.
the systematic terrorizing of asylum seekers?
We... Terrorize some asylum seekers but not others? I'm honestly not sure where you could even begin to compromise here.
the abolishing of the 14th amendment?
We only grant citizenship to half of foreigners born here? We only half revoke the amendment? (Whatever that would actually entail.)
gerrymandering?
We allow some gerrymandering but only some? Cause that totally wouldn't be actively abused by the GOP, regardless of it being a completely shitty idea in the first place.
the nomination of petulant manchildren to the supreme court?
We only nominate petulant men, petulant children, or manchildren but not petulant manchildren?
should we compromise on the labeling of longtime allies like fucking canada as "national security threats"?
We label some longtime allies as national security risks but not others? That would be incredibly inconsistent and would harm other nations taking us seriously even more than Trump and the current GOP already has.
should we compromise on presidential pardon power being used to raise political allies like joe arpaio above the law?
We allow compromising some political allies but not others?
The issue here is most of this shit cannot be realistically compromised on to any degree and these are all major points of the GOP in Congress at the moment. If they actually bring forth anything that can be realistically compromised on and are actually willing to compromise on it without perverting it into something that has almost none of the net benefits of either choice but most of the negatives then sure, do so. But at this point it's naive to think that they would bring forth anything worth compromising to begin with, let alone them actually being willing to compromise. This is the party that rejected compromise then constantly cried about how the other side wouldn't compromise.
@lope I'd honestly like to hear how you would approach that. You seem to be preaching compromise at any cost but I legitimately cannot see a way to compromise on most of this and the rest of it might be a compromise on a technical level but would benefit no one while being a net negative which would obviously make nobody happy.
Woah I missed that Kris Kobach was defeated for Governor of Kansas, hahahahahaha
Trump's now looking for him or Chris Christie as Attorney General now tho
Almost all the super close uncalled races are going Dem lmao
https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1060882098955927552?s=20
...so, the Blue Wave happened after all then?
We knew it was a Blue Wave on election night. Now we're just seeing how high it got. It still won't be the Blue Tsunami some of us were hoping for (that would have involved taking the Senate) but it's still a tremendous accomplishment.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
