https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/431610-kamala-harris-supports-decriminalizing-sex-work Kamala Harris's latest bid for attention is to pronounce "let them be whores" (to paraphrase her support for legalizing prostitution). Not that Congress would ever pass such a bill. From a policy standpoint I actually agree but it is such a long hail mary throw on an issue which would never pass... Well, I have to wonder, is she really this desperate to get traction? That is not a good sign this early.
It’s trying to get ahead of her abuse of power when she went after Backpage (before they went slimy) a week before the Senate election she won to drum up support from the “tough on crime” demographic, a case which was dropped almost immediately after the election. She’s rewriting the narrative to make it seem like it was about sex work (which she refutes with this move) rather than abuse of power.
Except Florida has always been a swing state like Ohio. It's always been a battleground state. Georgia and Arizona were states that the GOP could always count on as they were solid red. Now they're becoming tossup states. We'll see if the same holds true for the blue states that went Trump(Wisconsin and Pennsylvania) Were those flukes or can we consider those battleground states as well.?
There's a lot of people unhappy with SESTA/FOSTA. I assume at least some of them vote. If you're going to be for human rights, be for all human rights, I suppose.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...ill-to-study-issue-of-reparations-for-slavery Dems sure are busy trying to get Trump reelected.
I saw an i teresting show on PBS last night where they went through the family trees of three actors/directors. One of them Michael Moore and it turns out his first ancestor to come to America was a Scotsman in 1650 who was sold into white slavery as he backed the royalist side in the English civil war. One of the ways Cromwell dealt with supporters of the other side is he sold them into slavery in the American colonies. What do we do about free blacks who owned slaves and who worked as slave traders? I am sure Kamala Harris is waiting for her big government check despite the fact rhat her black side of her family is from Jamaca and never qere slaves in the US or even in North America. What a stupid, stupid idea which will do nothing but alienate white lower and middle class voters in those northern rust belt states which went red in 2016 and which dems must win back if they are to win in 2020. Trump is horrible and Dems seem determined to prove they cannot be trusted so what are we to do?
Tulsi Gabbard seems to be popular with Russians. Follow the thread for the other dem candidates stats.
They're what's known in the vernacular as "unwitting Putin puppets." Pretty much the exact thing McCabe recently accused Trump of being. They sow discord and repeat moonbat theories to help undermine confidence in US politicians and provoke suspicion at convenient targets without evidence. I refer to, collectively, the pop media, leftforge anti Gabbardites, and our leftist Russiaists.
Because remember, folks, reparations can only mean giving every black person in the country a big ol' check for lots of money. It can't involve spurring investment in neighborhoods that have been affected by redlining, or making college more affordable, or anything else. No, sir. It can only mean the simplistic strawman version that we have declared it to mean.
Go ahead and try to parse through 500 years of history and millions of family trees. It is a fool's errand.
'Russiaists'? You can do better than that. 'Russiacrats'. Also, your delusions would be amusing if they weren't so tragic
can someone bring back caligula or nero if we're gonna bring down this country we need to do it right
Because remember, folks, reparations can only mean giving every black person in the country a big ol' check for lots of money. It can't involve spurring investment in neighborhoods that have been affected by redlining, or making college more affordable, or anything else. No, sir. It can only mean the simplistic strawman version that we have declared it to mean.
Former President of Greenpeace Canada, Patrick Moore[/ur], has been going at AOC on Twitter over the Green New Deal.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna978331 You want four more years of Trump? Go ahead and nominate Bernie Sanders.
That's nice. AOC is 29, so she's not on the ticket to be President until at least 2024. And anyway, since Greenpeace Canada is against nuclear power, doesn't that make AOC your ally? You know, that whole proverb about the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Or are you siding with Greenpeace on this issue?
Somewhat true, trump is a commie who said he could kill someone in front of witnesses and still get a ton of votes and he appears to be correct. Of course, you are one of the dipshits that voted for his commie baby killing ass. I do have to wonder how many abortions he has paid for.
Greenpeace wants nothing to do with Patrick Moore, and hasn't had anything to do with him for quite some time. They and others consider him an industry shill. Also, "some has-been angrily tweeted at a person who actually matters" is a tiresome non-story.
This is where Warren is thinking ahead - she insists at every turn she's a "capitalist to my bones" and works to not suffer the label socialist. Which is good but I would add to that - her or any other non-Sanders candidate (he's already accepted the label so he can't) - a strong effort to point out that Republicans call everything they oppose socialist so the word has no meaning coming from them. GOP: "You're a socialist!" Dem: Meh, that's what you said about FDR when he passed Social Security, that's what you said about Johnson over medicare - are these socialist programs?" GOP: "no but..." Dem: "so how are we supposed to take you seriously when you scream socialism this time? You've been wrong before. I''m not a socialist but I'm absolutely a Roosevelt Democrat when it comes to taking care of the most vulnerable Americans" Stuff like that. Seen some of that already. Madness. Hopefully it's just early-season vinegar that will give way to practicality by next year.
There you have it, folks. When Republicans rail against "socialism," they're really talking about taking away your Social Security and Medicare. Remember that on election day.
If the government let you take the money you pay in social security taxes and invest it for your own retirement, you'd finish the game with a lot more money than you're supposed to get in SS benefits. Also, the government spent the social security trust fund on other stuff- kind of like most people, if actually given their social security taxes to invest, would go spend it on vodka, cellphones, cigarettes, and tats instead- which is okay (even if not smart) because it's THEIR money. Medicare. Yeah, I'd take it away. Where is it written in the Constitution that it's the government's job to pay for and ration your medical care? Why would you WANT the government handling your medical care? Remember what your last trip to the DMV was like?
