Search results

Again, do you have any reasoning for this? Something in particular he did?

The only thing I'd point out is that government is also a monopoly. Perfect world, I'd love an impartial god smite all the monopolists. In practice? This is used as an excuse to create monopolies. You seemed to have missed S'task's point. The views above should be normal for all sides, from D...

Eh, I would, in such a world, likely fall on the left adjacent sorta thing, @S'task is right. I believe in abortion up to 8-12 weeks, gay marriage, mass drug legalization, adult trans rights to pay for a transition, a lot of police/criminal justice reform, etc. Also, my personal behavior has...

Eh, those things aren't mutually exclusive though. I simply consider him as both. The same way one could be a libertine and a libertarian. If you don't like libertarians, then yeah, voting against Rand Paul is the correct choice, 10 times out of 10, because that's how often he'll vote...

First, thanks for stating an actual reason! Now personally, IDK if he qualifies, as he's for free trade. And I think his opposition to funding foreign wars is a good thing as well, but I get you disagree with that. Could I at least sell you on him being the person who held Fauci's feet to the...

I'm not sure that slur applies to that person. But the question remains, do you have literally any rational for these beliefs? Like actual things he's done? Otherwise you seem to have Rand Derangement Syndrome.

Do you have any actual reasoning behind this? Or are you just angry in general?

Stop hating on one of the only good senators? Ron Pauls done great work for the nation, unlike everyone else.

Yeah, in fairness McConnell was amazing at the parliamentary games (he's why Gorsuch is in office). His main problem was that he was of the GWB era, and so would compromise on fundamental things like gun rights, etc.

So I hope that Rand Paul replaces him, but I tend to doubt it. The important thing is that he's not replaced by a unipartyist.

Depends on the state and the position, but not for federal office. But more importantly, it might not apply here as the position (leader of the Republicans aka Senate Minority Leader) has it's own arcane rules, and also has no formal power, just informal power.

Yeah. It's also very frustrating IMO, as there being a good reason not to do incremental change for the better, well, stops incremental change for the better. And most things happen by incremental change. But reality stays frustrating no matter what I want.

Solving a problem badly or even partially is worse than not solving it when it comes to politics, because it destroys willpower to actually solve the problem.

So Mitch might be going. Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and some others seem to be starting a revolt. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/07/mcconnell-gop-rebellion-border-deal-00139972 Sadly, I'm not sure if there's a mechanism to spontaneously eject him.

The problem is that they don't have unlimited ability to cheat, and some states have secured elections. With people being far more alert to it this time, along with the US's state separation stopping bullshit from happening everywhere (ballot stuffing in CA won't affect the presidential election...

Well, if they win the election and get a majority in the house as well, then yeah. They'll run roughshod over our rights. The issue here was more "Will R's cuck?" And they held firm. There's always the chance that the D's win enough that it doesn't matter.

I'm saying that there's not enough time for them to repackage it prior to the election, and then Trump will do something far different. It's definitely a nice list of what they want to do, but remember that there were years between the Green New Deal and the Infrastructure stuff.

I actually tend to doubt this. The uproar was big enough that it was poisoned as an idea. They might get a few parts through, but not a lot of it. Also, Ronna McDaniels is going.

It'll stop our responsibility for it. It'll stop making it worse. The reason why they attack us, is because we are over there doing this horrific shit. This idea that somehow the US is innocent is just dumb. The US being there is exactly what harms our security. Going to Iraq and Afghanistan...

That you think "Iran's there, so we have to be there" is a valid argument says everything about you. That you think vague 'US interests' are worth this or this: tells us everything about where your priorities are. The US government is doing evil, funding Al Qaeda, starving kids. It needs to...