A thread for Democrats Only
POSTED BY: THGRRI
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 15:36
VIEWED: 755368
PAGE 35 of 725
Quote:Signym, your premise is that a President can change those things, but he can't in 8 years. Congress could, given a few years, but it won't. So long as there are 34 or more Republicans (or 34 Democrats) in the Senate, none of your hoped for changes will occur. It's the way the Constitution was written and the rules of the Senate.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Democrats should be willing to prosecute banksters for fraud, rein in the Fed, negotiate with drug companies for lower prices, increase manufacturing at home, and stop meddling abroad. Don't forget SECOND that under Saint Obama, the wealth gap kept increasing at the same rate as under Bush.
If I'm to believe the numbers, instead of the propaganda, when I see that trend reverse thanks to Democrats, THEN I'll believe that they have our interests at heart, Until then, it's all just DNC mouthing pious words and stupid people believing them
None of Signym's complaints can be fixed unless either the USA has a Parliament and 51% of the MPs are in a coalition that shares Signym's values or, under the existing Constitution, one party that agrees with Signym gets 67% of the seats in Congress. Trump can't fix it. Obama couldn't, either. The President never had the power to repair what ails the USA. We can't get 51% of the voters to agree with what is wrong, so it's not likely Congress will agree, either.
The majority is unhappy, but they can't agree what they are unhappy about. Is it too many foreigners in the USA? Minimum wage too low? Too many imports? Not enough government services or benefits? Too many prisoners? The wealthy are too wealthy? The poor too poor? The Pentagon budget too big? There is no majority agreement on anything important. And, this is the biggest requirement that voters need to live up to --- whatever the voters agreed to has to last longer than a one-day election. Whatever the majority of voters decide, the voters have to stand behind their decision for years. They can't just flip to the opposite side the next year and still expect that their opinion will be turned into reality by Congress.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Signym, your premise is that a President can change those things ..."
Funny, Signy wasn't talking about PRESIDENTS, but about DEMOCRATS, and the stupid people who believe them. Care to try addressing the actual argument?
HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Don't forget SECOND that under Saint Obama, the wealth gap kept increasing at the same rate as under Bush.
There he iz rite there!
And, to Sigz point, McConnel & frendz blocking absolutely everything Obama wanted relievez him uv any blame.
We can ritely ask 'where woud we be IF the republicanz allowed Obama'z infrastructure program' and the obvious ansr iz that the economy woud hav taken off like a rocket! The stoopid gops dont get to claim 'slowest recovery in history'.
We can ritely ask 'how much more competativ woud American manufacturerz be if they werent burdened with the employer based health insurans monstrosity'. The obvious ansr iz that American companyz woud be on top uv the world!
Apply that to EVERYTHING Obama wanted to do and you can see why the Republican party needz to be disbanded and all the congressmen and senatorz tossed in jail or deported.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"Signym, your premise is that a President can change those things ..."
Funny, Signy wasn't talking about PRESIDENTS, but about DEMOCRATS, and the stupid people who believe them. Care to try addressing the actual argument?
Quote:
sig
Don't forget SECOND that under Saint Obama, the wealth gap kept increasing at the same rate as under Bush.
Instead 1kiki, why don't you stop selectively reading what others post. Then you can respond intelligently instead of like an ass.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Don't forget SECOND that under Saint Obama, the wealth gap kept increasing at the same rate as under Bush.
There he iz rite there!
And, to Sigz point, McConnel & frendz blocking absolutely everything Obama wanted relievez him uv any blame.
We can ritely ask 'where woud we be IF the republicanz allowed Obama'z infrastructure program' and the obvious ansr iz that the economy woud hav taken off like a rocket! The stoopid gops dont get to claim 'slowest recovery in history'.
We can ritely ask 'how much more competativ woud American manufacturerz be if they werent burdened with the employer based health insurans monstrosity'. The obvious ansr iz that American companyz woud be on top uv the world!
Apply that to EVERYTHING Obama wanted to do and you can see why the Republican party needz to be disbanded and all the congressmen and senatorz tossed in jail or deported.
All true JO.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Signym's actual argument goes exactly like this:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"Signym, your premise is that a President can change those things ..."
Funny, Signy wasn't talking about PRESIDENTS, but about DEMOCRATS, and the stupid people who believe them. Care to try addressing the actual argument?
Quote:One hundred percent of Democrats in Congress would vote for removing Trump. But Democrats don't control 67% of Congress, so even with 100% of Democrats wanting it, that won't happen because the GOP doesn't want it to happen.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Democrats should be willing to prosecute banksters for fraud, rein in the Fed, negotiate with drug companies for lower prices, increase manufacturing at home, and stop meddling abroad. Don't forget SECOND that under Saint Obama, the wealth gap kept increasing at the same rate as under Bush.
If I'm to believe the numbers, instead of the propaganda, when I see that trend reverse thanks to Democrats, THEN I'll believe that they have our interests at heart, Until then, it's all just DNC mouthing pious words and stupid people believing them
As for Signym's goals, the Democrats aren't 100% for any. They might be 99%. So Signym's goals are even less possible than removing Trump because the Republicans in Congress will be 100% against anything from the Democrats. It is how the math works based on the Constitution, the rules of Congress, and the crazy GOP.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Democrats don't control 67% of Congress
Strange, you've come around to what I was pointing out to you two years ago.
governors
state senates
state houses
senate
house
president
This didn't happen overnight.
What are democrats doing wrong?
HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
... crazy GOP.
Completely subjective. To many people in the country, the Democrats have gone off the reservation.
Fix your own house before you keep bitching about it.
I've never been happy with the GOP my entire life, but there ain't no way I'm voting Democrat until they fix their shit. Talk to T about it. It's one of the very few things we actually agree on.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
www.theparisreview.org/blog/2018/01/15/remembering-martin-luther-kings
-radical-class-politics/
In a posthumously published essay, Martin Luther King, Jr. pointed out that the “black revolution” had gone beyond the “rights of Negroes.” The struggle, he said, is “forcing America to face all of its interrelated flaws—racism, poverty, militarism and materialism. It is exposing the evils that are rooted deeply in the whole structure of our society. It reveals systemic rather than superficial flaws and suggests that radical reconstruction of society itself is the real issue to be faced.”
But it had not started out that way. Over the course of a decade, the black struggle opened up a deeper interrogation of U.S. society, and King’s politics traversed the same course.
Indeed, in the early 1960s, the Southern movement coalesced around the clearly defined demands to end Jim Crow segregation and secure the right of African Americans to unfettered access to the franchise. With clear targets and barometers for progress or failure, a broad social movement was able to uproot these systems of oppression. King was lauded as a tactician as well as someone who could articulate the grievances and aspirations of black Southerners.
But despite the successful example of nonviolent civil disobedience across the South, it appeared to have little, if any, lasting impact on the edifice of racial discrimination that defined black life elsewhere. Indeed, the seeming permanence of black marginalization across the United States produced hundreds of urban uprisings in the middle of the 1960s. If King’s strategic genius in the South was deploying nonviolent civil disobedience to disarm Southern racists while coercing the political establishment into securing first-class citizen rights, it was a strategy that ultimately failed in cities such as Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Washington, D.C. In those places, obnoxious signs of Jim Crow were not the problem; rather, it was the insidious but obscured actions of the real-estate broker, the banker, the employer, the police officer, and other agents that maintained racial inequality.
As King’s attention drifted from the South to the entrenched northern ghettos, he faced denunciations and chastisement from former allies in the North. These people had supported him so long as he confined his demands to ending legal discrimination. Indeed, because Southern racism was rendered as antiquated and regressive, King was celebrated for helping to pull the South toward progress and modernity. But even as the civil rights movement was valorized for its intervention in the South, it was demonized when it brought its call for black power and liberation to the North—a dynamic that continues to the present day.
In King’s time, institutions in the North that preached racial neutrality but that were wholly complicit in racial subjugation appeared impervious to tactics that used confrontation and embarrassment to compel change. King was forced to reconceive his strategy.
www.theparisreview.org/blog/2018/01/15/remembering-martin-luther-kings
-radical-class-politics/
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah...
Kind of makes one wonder if the Civil War was about the "good guys" in the North trying to end slavery like we were taught in public school, huh?
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME