Funny events in anti-woke world

Generals

Elite Member
May 19, 2020
571
305
68
That's reddit, that person is probably 15 and making crap up for fake internet points. I don't know, I can't sleuth it, their account was suspended.

That's all lovely. I went ahead and did Wikipedia level reading on healthcare in Belgium, and can only imagine the horror people would react with if "For example, not paying contributions is one such exit and another is homelessness (social security is only available to people with an address)" was describing Medicaid. Also, your universal healthcare is you pay upfront and get reimbursed for most of it?

To be clear, US healthcare financing is a disaster, and I'm sure Belgium does a better job of that for many of the reasons you're saying, but what gets me is that oft repeated line that "every other nation has universal healthcare", when all that means is that every other nation has at minimum some money available to any citizen that covers some percentage of the cost of normal procedures. Americans are ignorant, left-wingers are no exception, and they imagine people everywhere else just walking into and out of the hospital without ever taking out their wallet because of the propaganda machine. People don't understand that "Medicare for All" would instantly be one of the most comprehensive and expansive universal health insurance programs on the planet, if not the most, and would still not actually solve many of the problems causing the high costs.
Heh it's true we need an address for a lot of things (which also why homeless people lose access to a lot of other social benefits) but I doubt a homeless person will be refused by a hospital (never heard of that) and would given any bill. I mean... where are they going to send the bill to?

It is true we pay up front for typical doctor's appointments however hospitals usually only charge you for post insurance prices for actual hospitalizations (this does not include a doctor's appointment at the hospital). In France however they changed the system and the patient no longer has to pay whatever is covered and it is the doctor who has to ask the state to reimburse him. So it can also work like that.

I mean, medicaid doesn't sound bad, but the fact anyone who doesn't have can basically go bankrupt on medical bills if they're unlucky is just horrible. And the worst part is that I feel that with political willpower the US could be the country which benefits the most from "universal healthcare". Imagine the bargaining power of the US federal government... Which pharma company would want to lose such a huge customer?
 

XsjadoBlayde

~ just another dread messenger ~
Apr 29, 2020
3,500
3,621
118

WASHINGTON — During the summer of 2018, as Richard Seddon, a former British spy, was trying to launch a new venture to use undercover agents to infiltrate progressive groups, Democratic campaigns and other opponents of President Donald J. Trump, he turned for help to a longtime friend and former colleague: Erik Prince, the private military contractor.

Mr. Prince took on the role of celebrity pitchman, according to interviews and documents, raising money for Mr. Seddon’s spying operation, which was aimed at gathering dirt that could discredit politicians and activists in several states. After Mr. Prince and Mr. Seddon met in August 2018 with Susan Gore, a Wyoming heiress to the Gore-Tex fortune, Ms. Gore became the project’s main benefactor.

Mr. Prince’s role in the effort, which has not been previously disclosed, sheds further light on how a group of ultraconservative Republicans employed spycraft to try to manipulate the American political landscape. Mr. Prince — a former C.I.A. contractor who is best known as the founder of the private military firm Blackwater and whose sister, Betsy DeVos, was Mr. Trump’s education secretary — has drawn scrutiny over the years for Blackwater’s record of violence around the world and his subsequent ventures training and arming foreign forces.

His willingness to support Mr. Seddon’s operation is fresh evidence of his engagement in political espionage projects at home during a period when he was an informal adviser to Trump administration officials.

Mr. Seddon’s recruitment of Mr. Prince to help him secure funding is just one of the new details about Mr. Seddon’s operation revealed in documents obtained by The Times and interviews with people familiar with his plans. They provide additional insight into the ambition of the operation to use undercover operatives to target Republicans seen as insufficiently conservative, as well as to, as one document describes it, “research, penetrate and infiltrate the radical left networks.”

The Times previously reported that, in 2016 and 2017, Mr. Prince recruited Mr. Seddon to join the conservative group Project Veritas to teach espionage skills to its operatives and manage its undercover operations. Mr. Prince also allowed Project Veritas to use his family’s Wyoming ranch for training. Mr. Seddon launched his privately funded spying effort after leaving Project Veritas in 2018.

It is unclear how many potential donors Mr. Prince might have approached for money for Mr. Seddon’s venture besides Ms. Gore. Separately, Ms. Gore unsuccessfully tried to raise money for the project from Foster Friess, a billionaire Wyoming businessman, during a January 2019 meeting, three people said.

During the 2018 meeting with Ms. Gore, according to one person familiar with it, Mr. Prince and Mr. Seddon said the goal of the private spying operation was to gather dirt both on Democrats and “RINOs” — slang in conservative circles for “Republicans in name only.” The plan was to begin in Wyoming, they said, and expand operations from there.

Over two years, Mr. Seddon’s undercover operatives also developed networks in Colorado and Arizona, and made thousands of dollars in campaign donations posing as Democrats, both to the Democratic National Committee and individual campaigns. Funneling money surreptitiously to campaigns through other donors — known as straw man donations — would violate federal campaign finance laws.


Mr. Prince is separately under investigation by the Justice Department on unrelated matters, according to people familiar with the case. The scope of that investigation is unclear.

Mr. Prince declined to comment. Mr. Seddon and Ms. Gore did not respond to messages.

The documents give new details about efforts to manipulate the politics of Wyoming. While the state is currently solidly Republican, Mr. Seddon and Ms. Gore believed it was in danger of turning toward the Democrats, as Colorado has.

One target in particular was Gov. Mark Gordon, who was viewed as a RINO in some Wyoming conservative circles.

After Mr. Gordon won a close Republican primary battle against Mr. Friess, the billionaire, in August 2018, Mr. Friess blamed his loss on Democrats switching parties on Election Day to vote for Mr. Gordon.

“It seems like the Democrats have figured out this party switch deal to their advantage,” Mr. Friess wrote in an email obtained by Wyofile, a political news site in Wyoming. He added, “With Trump getting 70 percent of the vote, it shows how the Democrats have been able to control our elections with putting on a Republican coat.”

Mr. Gordon took office in January 2019. A document that month said that Mr. Seddon’s operatives had “identified three potential sources in the new governor’s administration and have begun accelerated cultivations with a view to early recruitment.”

Later in January, the operatives wrote that they had “successfully recruited another source with a role in the new governor’s administration,” adding that the “source has agreed to provide insights, help expose corruption and assist with eventual placement of undercovers.”


According to the documents, Mr. Seddon’s operatives also aimed to dig up information on Steve Harshman, the Republican speaker of the House in Wyoming at the time, who was also seen by some conservatives as not sufficiently supportive of Mr. Trump. One February 2019 report said that a “new undercover will be joining the team” and tasked with targeting Mr. Harshman.

Months later, in June 2019, a report said “we are expecting a big haul, including new lines of intelligence on the Republican side of the house.”

The documents also show that, beyond Ms. Gore, other prominent Republicans in Wyoming were involved in Mr. Seddon’s spying operation.

One of the documents indicates that Marti Halverson, a former Wyoming state lawmaker, provided a list of people for the operatives to target. The list included John Cox, then the director of Wyoming Department of Workforce Services, and Scott Talbott, then the director of the Wyoming Game and Fish Department. The document is dated December 2018 and said that Mr. Talbott was “another of the names of corrupt individuals from Marti.”

Reached by phone, Ms. Halverson said: “Frankly, I have nothing to say on the subject.” She then hung up.

ezgif.com-gif-maker-137.jpg

Mr. Seddon used other former Project Veritas employees to help with the Wyoming operation, including James Artherton, a British operative code-named “kimchi” who was involved in a Project Veritas plan targeting an editor for The New York Times in London in 2017.


One of the undercover operatives also got a job working for a consortium of wealthy liberal donors — the Wyoming Investor Network — which had made a strategic decision to support Republican moderate candidates over those more closely aligned with Mr. Trump’s agenda, the documents say. The job put her in a position to gain valuable information about which Republican candidates the group was supporting with independent advertising.

Mr. Prince has previously been involved in trying to find dirt on Democratic politicians. In 2016, Republican operatives believed they had obtained deleted Hillary Clinton emails from the dark web, and sought Mr. Prince’s assistance to authenticate them, an episode investigated by Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel in the Trump-era Russia inquiry.

The special counsel’s report said that Mr. Prince “provided funding to hire a tech adviser to ascertain the authenticity of the emails. According to Prince, the tech adviser determined that the emails were not authentic.”

Later that year, Mr. Prince turned to Mr. Seddon to help train the Project Veritas operatives. The two men had known each other since Mr. Prince’s days running Blackwater, and shared an affinity for guns and the American West. Mr. Seddon owns a cabin that he keeps stocked with guns, food and other supplies as preparation for a cataclysmic event in the United States.

During a meeting in a Las Vegas suburb last April of employees of Ms. Gore’s organization, the Wyoming Liberty Group, Mr. Seddon pitched a proposal to build a website where other so-called preppers could buy their own supplies and communicate with each other in the event of what he called a “Black Swan” moment — a major terrorist attack, another pandemic or a civil war.

Ms. Gore ended up rejecting the proposal because it was too expensive — people with knowledge of the plan said it would start in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
 

The Rogue Wolf

Stealthy Carnivore
Legacy
Nov 25, 2007
16,999
9,694
118
Stalking the Digital Tundra
Gender
✅
“(Trumpcare) will allow insurance companies to require people who have higher health care costs to contribute more to the insurance pool that helps offset all these costs, thereby reducing the cost to those people who lead good lives, they’re healthy, they’ve done the things to keep their bodies healthy. And right now, those are the people who have done things the right way that are seeing their costs skyrocketing.” - Republican Senator Mo Brooks, promoting Trumpcare (which is still just two months away)

Because, you know, good people don't get sick. So if you get sick, you're a bad person and you deserve to go broke.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
7,318
970
118
Country
USA
I mean, medicaid doesn't sound bad, but the fact anyone who doesn't have can basically go bankrupt on medical bills if they're unlucky is just horrible. And the worst part is that I feel that with political willpower the US could be the country which benefits the most from "universal healthcare". Imagine the bargaining power of the US federal government... Which pharma company would want to lose such a huge customer?
That's actually one of the causes of the insane prices (maybe not root causes, but somewhere in the chain). Drug companies have to offer the government a gigantic discount to continue having them as a customer, so they jack up the list price. The give insurance programs rebates to cover the difference and keep their business. And then you end up with a drug that costs $17 for a bottle, the patient pays a $10 copay, and the list price if you want it out of pocket is $800. Nobody is actually paying the $800, it's a meaningless number that is there to meet the discount demands of big entities with bargaining power.
 

bluegate

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 28, 2010
2,410
1,020
118
and then used all the same tactics as them. The bullying, belligerent campaigning, the partisan villainizing, even the refusal to accept election results he doesn't like.
That's totally all democratic behaviour and totally rejected by republicans, right? Right?

Republicans have been falling over themselves to fallate the guy for his actions.
 

Hades

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2013
2,369
1,802
118
Country
The Netherlands
Excepts that's dramatically not true. The only half-truth is healthcare, and most countries' "universal healthcare" is a lot more limited than people care to admit. Almost everywhere else in the world has tougher immigration laws, stricter abortion laws, less social safety net, etc, etc, etc. These places you think are doing swimmingly have more in common with Republican policy positions than Democratic ones. They have voter id laws, they often have religious education in schools, the idea the Democrats are just trying to be like the rest of the world is a lie.
Nah. Healthcare, more advanced social security, gun control are all things the rest of the world already has but Republicans insists cannot or shouldn't be done. Its also worth noting that ''religious education'' in other countries doesn't mean the same as the pseudo theocracy Republicans seem to strive for. I had a religious education and never got in any contact with wacky religious fundamentalist ideas akin to those of the Republicans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Agema

Do everything and feel nothing
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
9,306
6,586
118
People don't understand that "Medicare for All" would instantly be one of the most comprehensive and expansive universal health insurance programs on the planet, if not the most
Indeed. Just imagine how proud you guys could be about it.

and would still not actually solve many of the problems causing the high costs.
Maybe not, but at least people would have healthcare access and much less bankruptcy.

And it would perhaps deal with at least some of the problems causing high costs: if the complaint is merely that it does not do enough to reduce costs as people may like, it's not a good reason to reject it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Hades

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2013
2,369
1,802
118
Country
The Netherlands
That idea has never been a literal statement, but rather an assessment of his behavior. Trump was registered as a Democrat and was friends with Democratic politicians, and then used all the same tactics as them. The bullying, belligerent campaigning, the partisan villainizing, even the refusal to accept election results he doesn't like. The man is so close to being Lyndon Johnson 2.0, which if you know my position on Lyndon Johnson means that Trump is a giant douche. There is nothing Donald Trump has done that wasn't done by Democratic politicians before him, the only difference is that the media mobilized against Trump instead of in defense of him.
LBJ and Trump are about as different as night and day in the grand scheme of things. Similar in the terms that they both had horrendous personalities and were abusive to woman but as politicians they are wildly different people. LBJ came from poverty and due to this seemed to have a genuine ideological desire to combat poverty. Trump got born with a silver spoon in his mouth and set up an administration exclusively for the rich, and by the rich. LBJ is known as the civil rights president and got the civil right acts through because he believed it was right even if it would cost him electorally. Trump meanwhile has a famously adversarial relation with minority communities and he wouldn't ever do the right thing at his own personal expense, in fact his whole presidency is him doing the exact opposite and letting his own private interests take precedence over what his country needed.

Throughout history you have horrible persons who also sincerely try to use their power to do good. LBJ was one, Trump wasn't.
 
Last edited:

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,514
7,106
118
Country
United States
That's actually one of the causes of the insane prices (maybe not root causes, but somewhere in the chain). Drug companies have to offer the government a gigantic discount to continue having them as a customer, so they jack up the list price. The give insurance programs rebates to cover the difference and keep their business. And then you end up with a drug that costs $17 for a bottle, the patient pays a $10 copay, and the list price if you want it out of pocket is $800. Nobody is actually paying the $800, it's a meaningless number that is there to meet the discount demands of big entities with bargaining power.
Except everywhere else, nobody pays the $800. In the US, people *do*.

My roommate was perfectly healthy for 10 years until his kidneys started failing, now he owes $50,000 and rising for a week in the hospital. Maybe if he had an annual physical that didn't cost $300 he'd've found it before it became a problem. He's been trying to get a sleep study for 6 months, it took two months for an ultra sound, and we don't even know if he's gonna need a transplant yet, so don't give me any shit about "waiting times" either.
 

bluegate

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 28, 2010
2,410
1,020
118
Except everywhere else, nobody pays the $800. In the US, people *do*.

My roommate was perfectly healthy for 10 years until his kidneys started failing, now he owes $50,000 and rising for a week in the hospital. Maybe if he had an annual physical that didn't cost $300 he'd've found it before it became a problem. He's been trying to get a sleep study for 6 months, it took two months for an ultra sound, and we don't even know if he's gonna need a transplant yet, so don't give me any shit about "waiting times" either.
Yeah, but Hillary's Emails, some country in Afrika has it worse, euhm... Democrats did it all.
 

Buyetyen

Elite Member
May 11, 2020
3,129
2,362
118
Country
USA
And it would perhaps deal with at least some of the problems causing high costs: if the complaint is merely that it does not do enough to reduce costs as people may like, it's not a good reason to reject it.
The all or nothing fallacy is a quintessential part of Republican rhetoric. Any solution that is not 100% effective is the same as 0% effective, and is thus not worth attempting in the first place. This way, the status quo can weather challenges better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thaluikhain

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
7,318
970
118
Country
USA
LBJ came from poverty and due to this seemed to have a genuine ideological desire to combat poverty.
Lyndon Johnson grew up 10 miles from a city donated by and named after his family. He was encouraged to enroll in college at the age of 15, at a time when <4% of the population had any college experience. He chose to quit school for a time and instead went to Southern California to bum off his lawyer cousin for a year, before re-applying to go to college. That's not poverty.
LBJ is known as the civil rights president and got the civil right acts through because he believed it was right even if it would cost him electorally.
LBJ did literally the opposite of that. He signed the civil rights acts because he believed it was good for him electorally, even though he himself could not have cared less.

“As long as you are black, and you’re gonna be black till the day you die, no one’s gonna call you by your goddamn name. So no matter what you are called, [n-word], you just let it roll off your back like water, and you’ll make it. Just pretend you’re a goddamn piece of furniture." - Lyndon Johnson

" These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. " - Lyndon Johnson

He also put out this advertisement to deliberately tie Barry Goldwater to racism: http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1964/kkk
Because racism was not a winning election platform in 1964. Civil rights was a winning platform. He did the right thing if it personally benefitted him.
Throughout history you have horrible persons who also sincerely try to use their power to do good. LBJ was one, Trump wasn't.
LBJ is among the most heinous individuals in US history. He was a vocal racist, a sexist womanizer, he cheated his way into the senate, he was put on Kennedy's ticket to carry the segregationist vote, he put the US military into Vietnam, he justified the Vietnam War with the length of his penis, he approved the Kerner Commission only while threatening to chop off a man's penis if it made him look bad. The Civil Rights Act was Kennedy's project, if any Democrat deserves credit it's Kennedy. The Great Society programs are everything wrong with the American welfare system. The man was told by the Kerner Commission that black Americans wanted to live in better neighborhoods, so he built the projects instead. It is insane that this man retains a reputation for having done good.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
7,318
970
118
Country
USA
And it would perhaps deal with at least some of the problems causing high costs: if the complaint is merely that it does not do enough to reduce costs as people may like, it's not a good reason to reject it.
I agree with the principle that better is better, but you have to do a cost benefit analysis. If you could implement Medicare for All and nothing else changes except for how the money changes hands, and medical spending goes down just part of the way, that's still an easy sell. But that's unlikely, lots of things would change, and now our healthcare is dependent on the federal bureaucracy. Who is already not very good at managing Medicare.
My roommate was perfectly healthy for 10 years until his kidneys started failing, now he owes $50,000 and rising for a week in the hospital. Maybe if he had an annual physical that didn't cost $300 he'd've found it before it became a problem.
I have sympathy for your friend, but what annual physical do you expect to catch potential future kidney issues in a person who self-reports as completely healthy?
Nah. Healthcare, more advanced social security, gun control are all things the rest of the world already has but Republicans insists cannot or shouldn't be done.
You're wrong about more "advanced social security", lots of Europe has looser gun control than the US (once you account for state and local ordinances), and I've rambled about healthcare plenty. Even then, you've come up with fewer issues to contrast than I did to compare. My point is not to claim Europe is further right than America, my point is that the picture most people have is that Democrats are already to the right of the rest of the world and trying to pull America leftwards to be like other places, but all those other places would align somewhere between Republicans and Democrats depending on the issue.
 

Kwak

Elite Member
Sep 11, 2014
2,357
1,892
118
Country
4
That's reddit, that person is probably 15 and making crap up for fake internet points. I don't know, I can't sleuth it, their account was suspended.

That's all lovely. I went ahead and did Wikipedia level reading on healthcare in Belgium, and can only imagine the horror people would react with if "For example, not paying contributions is one such exit and another is homelessness (social security is only available to people with an address)" was describing Medicaid. Also, your universal healthcare is you pay upfront and get reimbursed for most of it?

To be clear, US healthcare financing is a disaster, and I'm sure Belgium does a better job of that for many of the reasons you're saying, but what gets me is that oft repeated line that "every other nation has universal healthcare", when all that means is that every other nation has at minimum some money available to any citizen that covers some percentage of the cost of normal procedures. Americans are ignorant, left-wingers are no exception, and they imagine people everywhere else just walking into and out of the hospital without ever taking out their wallet because of the propaganda machine. People don't understand that "Medicare for All" would instantly be one of the most comprehensive and expansive universal health insurance programs on the planet, if not the most, and would still not actually solve many of the problems causing the high costs.
 

Generals

Elite Member
May 19, 2020
571
305
68
You're wrong about more "advanced social security",
Dunno, University cost me +/- 650€ tuition fee p.a. (may have increased slightly since than), we have lifelong unemployment benefits, etc.

lots of Europe has looser gun control than the US (once you account for state and local ordinances),
Switzerland perhaps, which other country?


anbut all those other places would align somewhere between Republicans and Democrats depending on the issue.
Aaah, no.
Democrats like Biden would definitely be considered right wing (except on the "woke" axis perhaps). But i'll admit someone like Bernie Sanders would likely fit well among Western European left wingers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrCalavera

Hades

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2013
2,369
1,802
118
Country
The Netherlands
Lyndon Johnson grew up 10 miles from a city donated by and named after his family. He was encouraged to enroll in college at the age of 15, at a time when <4% of the population had any college experience. He chose to quit school for a time and instead went to Southern California to bum off his lawyer cousin for a year, before re-applying to go to college. That's not poverty.
The Johnson family had been prominent in the past but during LBJ's childhood they had fallen on hard times after his father lost most of their money on bad cotton investments.

LBJ did literally the opposite of that. He signed the civil rights acts because he believed it was good for him electorally, even though he himself could not have cared less.

“As long as you are black, and you’re gonna be black till the day you die, no one’s gonna call you by your goddamn name. So no matter what you are called, [n-word], you just let it roll off your back like water, and you’ll make it. Just pretend you’re a goddamn piece of furniture." - Lyndon Johnson

" These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. " - Lyndon Johnson

He also put out this advertisement to deliberately tie Barry Goldwater to racism: http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1964/kkk
Because racism was not a winning election platform in 1964. Civil rights was a winning platform. He did the right thing if it personally benefitted him.
Johnson remarked that upon the introduction of the Bill that he had lost the south for the Democrats for a generation. And this came to pass with the South still being a Republican stronghold to this day. Nixon would later very successfully use the racial anxiety prompted by the end of the Jim Crow era to style himself as the ''law and order'' president. Goldwater didn't lose because it wasn't a winning ticket. He lost because he was easy to paint as an extremist. Put a more moderate spin on his ideas and you have what the Republican party ended up going with, and very successfully at that.

It is insane that this man retains a reputation for having done good.
Maybe because his domestic policy hosts two very admirable pieces of work? The civil rights acts and the war on poverty, two areas that no matter ones view of them are very hard to be openly against. And while you credit Kennedy with the civil right acts it was being strangled by Democrats during his administration with it being Johnson who would eventually browbeat them into submission on the topic.

You're wrong about more "advanced social security", lots of Europe has looser gun control than the US (once you account for state and local ordinances), and I've rambled about healthcare plenty. Even then, you've come up with fewer issues to contrast than I did to compare. My point is not to claim Europe is further right than America, my point is that the picture most people have is that Democrats are already to the right of the rest of the world and trying to pull America leftwards to be like other places, but all those other places would align somewhere between Republicans and Democrats depending on the issue.
Quite frankly I don't think most people would think of Democrats trying to pull the country to the left. Outside the US its traditionally seen as a thoroughly right wing party. Them introducing healthcare not so much being a shift to the left as merely introducing something any civilized country should have acquired decades ago.

There's a reason the Republicans tend not to get much sympathy in European countries even if those countries lean to the right. Because the Republican party isn't just right wing but right wing to an extreme degree, and in ways that feel very alien to most Europeans. Any dutch right winger would feel weirded out by the very fierce resistance of gay rights, just as any french right winger would be confused as how even the concept of health care seems to be a dealbreaker. I don't see any western European country that would align ''between the democrats and Republicans'' because the Republicans are a really alien party once you get outside the American bubble.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
7,318
970
118
Country
USA
Dunno, University cost me +/- 650€ tuition fee p.a. (may have increased slightly since than), we have lifelong unemployment benefits, etc.
We have state schools and community colleges that are all but free to those who live in the community. We just also have very expensive private schools that people pay ridiculous amounts of money to eat the overpriced food and live in a refrigerator box sized room. But that doesn't mean affordable higher education isn't available. We have dozens of public programs for unemployment, disability, food, housing, education, work training, etc.
Switzerland perhaps, which other country?
Looking back at my phrasing, I overstated my case on this one. I intended to mean that gun ownership is easier in a lot of those places, particularly like the Nordic countries, and follow up at this point with good rant about the web of different regulations put on federal, state, and local levels that makes legal gun ownership a giant pain in the butt here... but what I actually said was wrong, so I'll concede the point.
Aaah, no.
Democrats like Biden would definitely be considered right wing (except on the "woke" axis perhaps). But i'll admit someone like Bernie Sanders would likely fit well among Western European left wingers.
Bernie Sanders would fit well among Western European left wingers in exactly the same way he fits in with American left wingers. He stakes his spot out at the leftmost edge of mainstream opinion. No western nation has enacted policies further left than Bernie is comfortable with. And center-left parties all around the world have politicians like Joe Biden, who is not right wing.
The Johnson family had been prominent in the past but during LBJ's childhood they had fallen on hard times after his father lost most of their money on bad cotton investments.
A family so rich it creates towns for itself losing most of their money is still a wealthy family.
Johnson remarked that upon the introduction of the Bill that he had lost the south for the Democrats for a generation. And this came to pass with the South still being a Republican stronghold to this day. Nixon would later very successfully use the racial anxiety prompted by the end of the Jim Crow era to style himself as the ''law and order'' president.
He did say that, but he was wrong. Nixon lost in the South. Robert Byrd stayed in office until 2010. The south didn't really start shifting away from the Democrats until the 80s, when the Bible Belt got predictably a little upset about Roe v Wade, and was not a reliable Republican stronghold basically until after 9/11. They swung solidly for Carter and even split for Clinton the first time, and state elections lagged behind national ones.
Maybe because his domestic policy hosts two very admirable pieces of work? The civil rights acts and the war on poverty, two areas that no matter ones view of them are very hard to be openly against. And while you credit Kennedy with the civil right acts it was being strangled by Democrats during his administration with it being Johnson who would eventually browbeat them into submission on the topic.
Johnson himself credited Kennedy with the Civil Rights Act. Which he did cynically to get it passed so that he could claim credit for it in time for the election, but if you're gonna doubt his words on that, you may as well start doubting more of them.
Quite frankly I don't think most people would think of Democrats trying to pull the country to the left. Outside the US its traditionally seen as a thoroughly right wing party. Them introducing healthcare not so much being a shift to the left as merely introducing something any civilized country should have acquired decades ago.
We do have healthcare here. It's pretty good stuff, too. We just have a different payment scheme. Regardless, this "even the Democrats are right wing compared to the rest of the world" claim is exactly what I'm refuting. I understand it's a common sentiment, that doesn't make it remotely correct. There are nations with monarchies in place that think are left of the US overall...
There's a reason the Republicans tend not to get much sympathy in European countries even if those countries lean to the right. Because...
...of the New York Times, basically. People don't know what they don't know. Find a public discussion about voter ID laws, you can find all sorts of people around the world upset about the racism until the realize they have stricter voting laws where they live. Same with immigration. Same with abortion. Same with all the social issues Republicans get painted as horrible bigots over. And what's left after that? "Well, we'd like to tax people less." I suppose that is fiscally conservative compared to Western Europe, but you'll still get plenty of sympathy for that in any country. Republicans get no sympathy from places where they can't talk to Republicans and get their news passed through the Democratic news filter.
 

Buyetyen

Elite Member
May 11, 2020
3,129
2,362
118
Country
USA
...of the New York Times, basically. People don't know what they don't know.
No, that's horseshit. I've talked to a lot of Europeans and all of them glance askance at the Republicans for exactly the reason Hades described. Even more conservative Europeans think you guys are nuts. No, there is no conspiracy on the left to make Republicans look bad. You do that just fine on your own with your policies and candidates.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
12,364
6,495
118
Country
United Kingdom
...of the New York Times, basically. People don't know what they don't know. Find a public discussion about voter ID laws, you can find all sorts of people around the world upset about the racism until the realize they have stricter voting laws where they live. Same with immigration. Same with abortion. Same with all the social issues Republicans get painted as horrible bigots over. And what's left after that? "Well, we'd like to tax people less." I suppose that is fiscally conservative compared to Western Europe, but you'll still get plenty of sympathy for that in any country. Republicans get no sympathy from places where they can't talk to Republicans and get their news passed through the Democratic news filter.
This is absolutely false. Most of the Republican Party platform would be considered utterly beyond the pail here in the UK, and this isn't a matter of distortion; I've heard their platform straight from the horse's mouth and can say that with certainty.

Throughout the UK, pretty much everyone I spoke to, left or right, were continually horrified by what Trump came out with (and Palin before him). And that was after hearing and reading direct quotes. The response he himself elicited, I'm sorry to tell you, was revulsion. And that was not through media filter; the same was true during the debates, and listening directly to him (and her).

Most of us heard directly what Trump and Palin had to say and concluded that the people following them were jingoistic idiots. Including the Conservative Party supporters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
7,318
970
118
Country
USA
No, that's horseshit. I've talked to a lot of Europeans and all of them glance askance at the Republicans for exactly the reason Hades described.
Right, they think poorly of Republicans because they believe things that aren't true.
No, there is no conspiracy on the left to make Republicans look bad.
You really don't think people try to make their political opponent's look bad?