The Democratic Party's Slide Into Irrelevance
Attaching a poll ... Dems unfavorability rating increased from 45% to 57% during the Biden Administration.
I understand that, but I think no one arrested for a violent crime should be given the option of bail.
the option of bail is because sometimes you arrest innocent people, and depriving innocent people of freedom is horrendous.
So you need to minimize the damage you inflict on people BEFORE you know they are bad people basically.
I do agree with you that if proof of violent, illegal behavior is blatant (and in case of recidive) then bail shouldn't exist as a default, because you already know with a high degree of certainty that person is a bad person and deserves punishment, and everyone else deserves to be protected from that person existence.
But you could be arrested for a purported very violent and vile crime while you are not a violent criminal. And this actually happens fairly often. Both because the individual actually didn't commit the facts (or it wasn't possible to prove beyond reasonable doubt he did) or because he did act violently but the actions were legal (think self defense).
Think about every self defense case, you want everyone who harms his assailants to be arrested without bail if prosectutors indict him?
All that said, house arrest should be the default, with automatic life no parole if the terms of the house arrest are violated.
Does the federal government have enough legal power over DC and other states to do these things?
Congress has power over DC. The president can take power for up to a month if there's an emergency. Of course there's no actual emergency now, but Trump is pretending there is one. The same phony excuse he used to impose the tariffs that are now screwing with imports to the US.
Congress has power over DC. The president can take power for up to a month if there's an emergency. Of course there's no actual emergency now, but Trump is pretending there is one. The same phony excuse he used to impose the tariffs that are now screwing with imports to the US.
It's different: we'll get the tariff appeal decision soon (could be next week) and you'll see it's not the same at all.
The "up to one month" for D.C. is very clearly within what trump is doing. The IEEPA abuse to set tariffs worldwide clearly isn't.
It's different: we'll get the tariff appeal decision soon (could be next week) and you'll see it's not the same at all.
The "up to one month" for D.C. is very clearly within what trump is doing. The IEEPA abuse to set tariffs worldwide clearly isn't.
I'm sure the rules aren't exactly the same, but what is the significant difference?
that IEEPA doesn't allow to set tariffs randomly just because the executive thinks there is an emergency.
The word tariff isn't even in the statute at all lol.
Also the purported emergency was the trade deficit. Disregarding the ******ness of claiming the existence of a trade deficit is an emergency, some of the countries that got tariffed had no trade surplus with the USA (notably, Brazil). so the argument is even fully incoherent WITHIN the mistaken reading of the statute the admin is attempting to use.
While the Section 740 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act of 1973 does allow to federalize for an emergency, and actually washington DC crime rates ARE among the highest in the country.
Actually have been higher than all 50 states for what, more than 10 consencutive years?
that IEEPA doesn't allow to set tariffs randomly just because the executive thinks there is an emergency.The word tariff isn't even in the statute at all lol.Also the purported emergency was the trade deficit. Disregarding the ******ness of claiming the existence of a trade deficit is an emergency, some of the countries that got tariffed had no trade surplus with the USA (notab
Well you know that DC isn't a state, it's not even a whole city, so it's crazy to compare its crime rate with any states.
And according to the Justice Department, DC last year had its lowest crime rate in 30 years, so it's ridiculous to call it any kind of emergency.
Anyway, they aren't the same thing, but they're both based on a bogus emergency that Trump made up, when the situations were actually already getting better (fentanyl deaths were way down last year).
Well you know that DC isn't a state, it's not even a whole city, so it's crazy to compare its crime rate with any states.And according to the Justice Department, DC last year had its lowest crime rate in 30 years, so it's ridiculous to call it any kind of emergency.Anyway, they aren't the same thing, but they're both based on a bogus emergency that Trump made up, when the situa
problem with DC crime stats is that people are being prosecuted right now to attempt a fraud about them, they were manipulating the stats (allegedly).
Btw being the actual capitol so the seat of government, it should be among the safest places in the whole country. Congresspeople, elite judiciaries, top people in the secretariats and so on should live in full tranquility with their personal safety secured.
DC should have the best crime stats in the nation or close to it, even just as a form of respect for the embassies that it hosts. It's truly incredible we don't all agree with the fact that the capitol should show the best of the country and the threshold for what is acceptable should be sky high compared to everywhere else. And failing to do so is an actual emergency, it is a failure of national relationship (Israeli people just got killed there recently) , and a symbolic failure as a nation tbh
problem with DC crime stats is that people are being prosecuted right now to attempt a fraud about them, they were manipulating the stats (allegedly).Btw being the actual capitol so the seat of government, it should be among the safest places in the whole country. Congresspeople, elite judiciaries, top people in the secretariats and so on should live in full tranquility with th
Does Rome have the lowest crime stats in the country? London? Paris?
I haven't researched it at all, but I would guess that the capitols of no large contries have the lowest crime of the country, and that most are far closer to having the highest crime rate than the lowest.
Does Rome have the lowest crime stats in the country? London? Paris?
I haven't researched it at all, but I would guess that the capitols of no large contries have the lowest crime of the country, and that most are far closer to having the highest crime rate than the lowest.
When did the USA start to use inferior colonies of their empire as the benchmark to judge how it's proper to manage the USA?
lol yeah the logic in and of itself is absurd but the fact that we’re only hearing the argument after troops have been sent and like a decade of trump talking non stop about everything is not even good by apologist standards.
I think Bernie would have done better against Trump than Hillary did. I also think if Bernie was given the gift to not age and to be able to run again in 2028 he would be the best candidate so far.
How could you keep arguing Bernie would have done better and insist on leaning into left wing economics and identity politics when poll after poll show African and Hispanic Americans are completely disinterested in left wing economics and almost as disinterested in identity politics?
The only thing Bernie had going for him in a general election was he’s an angry old white man and that would resonate and feel familiar with a lot of people that voted for Trump. He would have been a worse candidate than Kamala and I am on record saying dumping Biden for Kamala was incredibly idiotic.
How could you keep arguing Bernie would have done better and insist on leaning into left wing economics and identity politics when poll after poll show African and Hispanic Americans are completely disinterested in left wing economics and almost as disinterested in identity politics? The only thing Bernie had going for him in a general election was he’s an angry old white man a
Because Bernie lit a spark amongst a lot of blue collar people in the Rust Belt when Bernie specifically talked about how he'd bring jobs back to those folks while Kamala...offered dog ****.
Bernie was somewhat of a populist, like Trump, who is pro unions, and healthcare for all which aligned with a lot of struggling minorities while Kamala insisted that she was going to be the first black/Indian woman to be prez. What a ****ing accomplishment, nobody actually gives ****.
Bernie had the advantage with the youth, even some of the Rogan basement dwellers with things like higher min wages, free college, while Kamala...offered horse ****.
In the main event, people still vote on economic frustration no matter how many fools here says otherwise. And they are only going to vote in accordance for something and not against something (see mandami) - which is the only thing Kamala had going for her because she had nothing.
Also, a bunch of libs coming to the conclusion that they prefer Kamala over Bernie isn't really sufficient data when you're running against the GOP.
Holy cow ... my Democratic Senator actually introduced a piece of legislation that I support and speaks to the plight of those being rent gouged by corporate landlords ...
https://www.aol.com/sen-rosen-proposes-b...
Maybe they're capable of learning ????
The only thing Bernie had going for him in a general election was he’s an angry old white man
Gimme a break, Bernie earned his stripes from the bottom up. He campaigned door to door in Burlington, Vt and he did a fantastic job as mayor there over several terms and used that as a platform to serve as their representative in Congress. The people in Vt like him better than any other state likes their elected Senator. He's popular and he's honest and he obviously cares about the plight of the working class. He was arrested during college protests at substandard housing for his black colleagues.
People love Bernie because of his policy preferences, honesty and humanity.
You can't name a federal politician in the US who is considered more honest than Bernie.
Holy cow ... my Democratic Senator actually introduced a piece of legislation that I support and speaks to the plight of those being rent gouged by corporate landlords ...
https://www.aol.com/sen-rosen-proposes-b...
Maybe they're capable of learning ????
Democrats will do anything except build more housing.
Is there evidence of distinct party association along these lines. I would have guessed that Democrats might be more amenable to affordable housing ?
Here's Bernie's plan issued in the runup to the 2020 primary. Calls for millions of new affordable housing units.
Also, a bunch of libs coming to the conclusion that they prefer Kamala over Bernie isn't really sufficient data when you're running against the GOP.
Sure there isn’t really any data on how sanders would do in a general because no candidate that raised so much money and did as bad as he did in primaries has ever made a general election. But it’s strange to say he would have won when he struggled so heavily to turn money into votes in the primary without even having the pressure of being enemies number 1 to the right wing noise machine.
Sure there isn’t really any data on how sanders would do in a general because no candidate that raised so much money and did as bad as he did in primaries has ever made a general election.
That's not true.
Kamala Harris raised a lot of money in 2020 and did so poorly in polling in that primary that she didn't even make it to the Iowa Caucuses .... dropping out before the first votes were even cast/
Kamala made it to the general election in 2024 with no track record of national electoral success. Even her victories in California ... she won because the Dems are so dominant in the state. She underperformed the party at large.
Bernie won the popular vote in the first 3 states in the 2020 primary.
He was light years ahead of Kamala in national election results and of the two .... she made the general election.
Gimme a break, Bernie earned his stripes from the bottom up. He campaigned door to door in Burlington, Vt and he did a fantastic job as mayor there over several terms and used that as a platform to serve as their representative in Congress. The people in Vt like him better than any other state likes their elected Senator. He's popular and he's honest and he obviously cares abou
Off the top of my head
Ron Paul (never mind , I was wrong)
Ron Wyden
Amy Klobuchar
Bernie Sanders has decided to remain married to someone who was defrauding the public.
Doesn’t sound legit to me
That's not true.
Kamala Harris raised a lot of money in 2020 and did so poorly in polling in that primary that she didn't even make it to the Iowa Caucuses .... dropping out before the first votes were even cast/
Right. Sanders raised like 10x the amount in 2016 and 2020. We don’t have any data on how a candidate that prolific at fund raising but that poor at getting votes would do in a general. Harris dropped out because of money. Sanders never had that issue which was how he was always able to stay in until the end.
2016 his performance was fine. Nobody knew who he was when the primary started. But the fact that he did as bad as he did in 2020 against a very beatable Biden is a huge red flag. I think progressives made a huge mistake trying to ram sanders down peoples throat when a better candidate could have won.
Candidates at the bottom of the field have a hard time raising money? You don't say.
Harris was polling with Tom Steyer, Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard in Iowa before she dropped out. There was almost no interest in her campaign.
