Democrats

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Sat Mar 12, 2022 8:45 am

Post comparing extremes on both sides as bad. Still true.

Post by **Mike** » Sat Mar 12, 2022 9:19 am

Rep. Omar wrote:I opposed the Suspending Energy Imports from Russia Act, a bill that mandates a complete ban on Russian oil imports. The President clearly already has the authority to take this step - evident in that President Biden announced such a ban yesterday. But putting the specifics into statute with no sunset and no conditions for lifting the ban creates a dangerous scenario, one in which we are taking today’s policy question and making it tomorrow’s political question.

The last time Congress passed significant trade restrictions on Russia was the Jackson-Vanik Amendment of 1974. Like this bill, it was motivated by genuine concern for human rights and human security. It was not repealed until 2012, more than 20 years after the fall of the Soviet Union, well after its usefulness had expired. I have serious concerns that the Suspending Energy Imports from Russia Act will become yet another clear example where a policy stays on the books well past its utility because the political will to lift it has never materialized.

It seems that her concern is that A) this is superfluous and unnecessary, because Biden has the power to do this alone and has already, and B) Congress coding the ban into law without any conditions or time limit is reckless and irresponsible. Those seem like reasonable points that don't indicate a "fandom for Putin". But on the other hand, this is my first time hearing of this, and the full extent of my knowledge comes from the first result of a single Google search. I'm open to learning more.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Sat Mar 12, 2022 9:49 am

I don't know if you will agree with my assessment of her reasons, but I reject the first one because in other situations she has argued that Congress should act independently of the President and that the President shouldn't be exercising this authority alone (roll back to when Trump was doing comparable things). So I think that first reason is just smoke screen that she would be happy to abandon in a different situation.

And the second reason is implausible on its face: she thinks the United States is eager to ban oil imports of any kind for any reason? She who supposedly supports the green new deal and has been struggling to advance anything that makes the US even slightly less eager to consume oil? I find that zero-believable.

But then stack the strength of those two flimsy reasons against the reasons she supposedly agrees with to take this action: doing more to stop atrocities in Ukraine. She really thinks we should keep a steady stream of money flowing to Putin because she's worried that 15 years from now we might be doing the same thing? That is something Putin would be worried about, I guess, but who else? She's really going to be sad if climate change advances inexorably another decade and we've got some kind of limits on oil import? Hmmm. No past the smell test.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Sat Mar 12, 2022 9:51 am

Keep in mind, I also think she's a champion liar so I'm almost more suspicious of her reasons than most given a presupposition that I don't trust her.

Post by **Mike** » Sat Mar 12, 2022 10:25 am

I don't know. In the times she's been in the news for things other than Republicans hating her, I've found that I sometimes agree with her and sometimes don't. But the times I disagree with her, it seems like it's because she is obstructing things I would want due to what I view as her being overly cautious about the effects of legislation on traditionally marginalized peoples. Like, if I disagree with her, it's because she's blocking legislation for something I see as a remote possibility. I see her point, but I feel like we weigh risks and probabilities differently.

I'm curious to what makes you think she's a liar.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Sun Mar 13, 2022 12:38 pm

Maybe I'm being too cynical but I think often when she claims that she's doing something questionable because of supposed concerns about the effects on the vulnerable and innocent, following the money takes you to a more interesting motivational place. I don't think she's worse than others in this respect, but I think she's no different than worse others in this respect. These claims get exaggerated wildly by Republicans, but she really has been disciplined for using campaign funds inappropriately and then later misrepresenting what she was really doing. She has a pattern of avoiding or misrepresenting in response to people who point out a problem. The first response is usually to deny or say nothing and then when she finds out that people have the goods then she'll come up with some nice explanation of what was really going on, and the explanation is often proven false. The example where she was caught was in Minnesota when she served in the state legislature, and after the official investigation had to pay back money, but it was the initial dissembling followed by the fact finding that caught my attention. I suppose it's also coincidence that one of the things she was covering up was the use of campaign funds to support a trip to Estonia ostensibly to develop her leadership. Because it's normal for state legislatures to need to go to a place known for its massive money laundering from Russian oligarchs to develop leadership, but okay. I was annoyed about the recent stuff because she has also been opposing aid to Ukraine for a very long time.

In Congress she seems to have become more sophisticated - now she has managed to pay hundreds of thousands of campaign cash (I saw reports of millions but it's hard to know if that's accurate) to a consultant who just happened to later become her new husband, surprise! Even though just prior to that when she was asked about it, she completely denied all this and denied being in any relationship and insisted she was still with her previous husband. Meanwhile, she was caught having cozy dinner with the husband to be while she was still married to the other one, and that man was married to a doctor whose testimony in all this I find the most believable since she was the one bankrolling her husband before Omar got involved in bankrolling him. They have a 13-year-old son together. Omar allegedly (according to this woman, the doctor) gave presents to and met secretly with the son prior to his mom even knowing about the affair and the impending divorce and her husband's remarriage to Omar! So she was surprised in a particularly delightful way by this liar, and I suppose I can imagine myself in her position and tend to sympathize with that person's account more than the others.

I think it's b******* that she married her brother like the Republicans say, but there's also something completely fishy about that whole story and she's been caught in many lies related to it. Like she would claim not to know this person or he would claim not to know her and then they would find that they use the same address for some sort of tax filing or whatever. Just a long string of lies going all the way back to when they were both students at the same university. So there's something really funky about that situation because she was married to the one guy unofficially, and then supposedly met the other guy but they didn't get together, then she officially marries the first guy with whom she has kids, then she officially marries the other guy for a brief time, and then she goes back and marries the first one again. And that's what brings us up to this moment where she has an affair with her campaign consultant to whom she's paying enormous sums, and maybe that arrangement would have continued secretly except that they were outed as a couple and there were pictures to prove it and an angry ex wife filing legal papers.

In short, I was very much not a fan of this woman and that's on top of her being truly hostile toward Israel - I find it ridiculous that she accuses her Democratic Jewish colleagues in Congress of "harassing" her to the point that it is "unbearable". Yeah, right - This is because they were angry that she compared the US to Hamas. Maybe when you say b******* it has consequences.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Thu Apr 28, 2022 8:43 am

That feeling when you have to donate a large sum of money to a Republican candidate because the alternative Republican is opposed to democracy as a system of government, and there's no Democrat you can support even if you wanted to.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Thu Apr 28, 2022 11:07 pm

These idiots voting as a bloc
to protect the assets of Russian oil companies and their owners:

"Reps. Cori Bush (D-Mo.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Madison Cawthorn (R-N.C.), Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Chip Roy (R-Texas) voted against the bill"

poorpete · Post by **poorpete** » Tue May 03, 2022 2:36 pm

I see some hard-leftists I follow using the news as proof that supporting Democrats is worthless.

Like, the whole reason we're in this mess is because the GOP wins close races, and then stacks the decks with gerrymandering so they can win a larger percentage of close races. That's how a right supported by 2/3rds of America is going to be declared immoral by its highest court. And the answer is, vote for the Dems less? I guess that'll create the change we need?

What is their plan? If its to burn down their allies so a new order will be created, they're just another insurrectionist.

And of course I fall for this circular firing squad, just like they do, as we all know who we should be angry at, and instead we fight each other. Seeing tweets from last night, people seem to put a lot of fury into the Met Gala, which was happening at the same time. It's too tiring to be always mad at your opponents, just be mad at whatever's trending instead.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Tue May 03, 2022 6:16 pm

Difficult day. The grief of so many people over this is real and heartbreaking. There is nothing the slightest bit pro-life about these hypocrites.

poorpete · Post by **poorpete** » Wed May 25, 2022 12:41 pm

Some are angry that Schumer isn't forcing a vote on gun control today, but heard a good point. He'd do it in a second if he knew it was a lost cause. He likes making the GOP look bad. That he isn't forcing a vote is a sign that there's an appetite for actual action. And that's what we want more than cheep political points. ACTION, PLEASE!

Better than making the GOP look bad for voting against a bill is getting them to vote for that bill.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Wed May 25, 2022 1:12 pm

I honestly don't know what is going on anymore. All I know is that I'd like to try about twelve of the legislative solutions that Republicans have guaranteed me definitely will not work, because I'd like to see the proof in action and it's not going to be worse than what we have now. They definitely need to continue forcing votes on these issues, and more importantly, publicizing those votes.

Tahlvin · Post by **Tahlvin** » Wed May 25, 2022 4:21 pm

I love how the GOP mindset is that abortion rights are something that should be determined at the state level, not the federal level, but gun rights are something that should be determined at the federal level, not the state level. And yes, I know most of the GOP feels abortion rights SHOULD be determined at the federal level, and the state argument is just a means to an end.

Mando · Post by **Mando** » Wed May 25, 2022 5:25 pm

I am curious as to what would be voted on.

There's already background checks. The shooter passed theirs. Criminals tend to break laws.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Wed May 25, 2022 8:07 pm

I don't know what I would actually think of the pros and cons of a piece of legislation addressing these things, but there are lots of ideas. Raise the age limit. Limit the kinds of guns, the number of guns, the kinds of ammo, the amount of ammo, have purchases trigger more intensive scrutiny past certain amounts - i.e. make it equivalent to things like buying your allergy medicine.

Pick pretty much anything that the Texans regulate, like LGBT people or birth control or medical care to immigrants and regulate guns on some kind of even playing field with that until people get the message that we don't want more dead kids.

Post by **Mike** » Wed May 25, 2022 9:36 pm

Mando wrote: ↑Wed May 25, 2022 5:25 pm I am curious as to what would be voted on.

There's already background checks. The shooter passed theirs. Criminals tend to break laws.

I know you well enough to know that you are a compassionate human being, so I also know you didn't intend this, but your response very much comes off as, "I know that 20+ people just died in a school shooting, but there's really nothing more we can do about it."

First, responsible gun legislation is about more than just background checks. And it's also a much more complicated issue than just headline-making school shootings.

Our nation has some of the loosest gun laws of any developed nation, and we also have the greatest number of gun deaths per capita among developed nations. It's connected. Other countries with long histories of gun rights and gun ownership also ran up against mass shootings and increasing gun deaths. They changed their laws in response and gun deaths dropped. Australia, Norway, the UK, Canada, New Zealand. There's a connection.

A couple years ago I did a bunch of research. I wanted to find the states with the most and least restrictive gun laws respectively. As it turns out, The Gifford Institute (wanting more restriction) and Guns & Ammo Magazine (wanting less restriction) both ranked all 50 states and had general agreement on the topic, despite having vastly different criteria. I then compared gun death numbers (from the FBI) from the 5 most restrictive states to those of the 5 least restrictive. Turns out, gun deaths rates in states with looser gun laws were 2.3 times that of states with tighter gun laws. 2.3 times. There's a connection.

The restrictive laws in question?
--stronger background checks
--stronger child access protection
--stronger licensing requirements for concealed carry
--domestic violence restrictions
--allowance for extreme risk protection orders
--bans/restrictions on "military style" weaponry

None of these take away your guns. None of these keep you from owning a gun for sport or hunting or protection (unless you are mentally ill, have a history of domestic violence, or our justice system determines you pose an extreme danger to yourself or others). No electable mainstream politician in the last few decades has suggested that the government take away everyone's guns. That's not even on the table.

So we can quibble over the details of specific laws, but if the guidelines above were adopted in all 50 states, it would translate to 15,000-20,000 fewer deaths per year. Gun deaths and gun laws are absolutely connected.

All of this is to say: if you want to argue against gun laws, you cant do it on the faulty logic that gun laws have no real effect and criminals just ignore them anyway. That argument is not in any way supported by facts. If you want to argue against gun laws, you have to outline the concrete benefits of not having them and then explain how those benefits outweigh 15,000 lives per year. Tough sell.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Thu May 26, 2022 8:41 am

This should be a medium article or published in some other place where people can link to it, because you actually did the basic legwork that makes it possible for people to compare in an easy and accessible manner.

Post by **Mike** » Thu May 26, 2022 11:13 am

Thank you.

Part of my problem is that I wrote this on the old forums where I had links to all my sources. The info is still there, but the sources are no longer visible. The articles I linked were from 2019 and the death stats from 2016. I'd have to do a bit of research to fix it all up.

On the other hand, I've got 18 hours of bus travel upcoming. What else am I gonna do?

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Tue May 31, 2022 9:53 am

You should do it because this is one of those topics where people make all sorts of unsupported claims by cherry picking their statistics, and it's nice to have clear, general evidence that one basic choice about gun laws is correlated with these outcomes. Obviously there could be multiple causes or other differences between the states that would make these choices, but those don't matter relative to what general response to this state of affairs makes sense.

poorpete · Post by **poorpete** » Tue May 31, 2022 12:07 pm

I tried to look up a stat on bullet use for self-defense. Stats estimate around 2% of all instances of gun violence was in self defense.

One, that is piss poor. In all, a person who owns a gun is extremely unlikely to use their gun for self defense. Much much much more likely to use it against someone in anger or against themselves.

Two, it doesn't say how many bullets were needed for self-defense.

I want to know, when has a person needed 20 bullets to defend themselves? Extremely rare, right? When have they needed 100 rounds to defend themselves? Maybe once, ever? And how does that compare to the amount of times 100 bullets or 100 rounds were used to kill innocent people?

Post by **Mike** » Tue May 31, 2022 12:51 pm

The problem with the "Good guy with a gun" argument is that there are rarely numbers to disprove it. You can't prove or disprove the number of lives saved by the mere presence of a good guy with a gun. Therefore, no matter how solid the numbers showing that gun laws save lives, the opposition reliably responds with, "Yeah, but you don't know how many lives were SAVED because..."

bralbovsky · Post by **bralbovsky** » Wed Jun 01, 2022 10:30 pm

A question and a prediction:

If, as seems to have been the case, a number of trained (apparently poorly) and armed LE personnel were unwilling to confront in Texas, what makes them think a single armed teacher (despite potential dispositional advantages) would have given them a reliably better result?

If the states regulate that teachers should be armed or possibly armed, the perpetrators will always shoot the teachers first.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Sat Jun 11, 2022 5:46 pm

Of course - it's an "argument" fueled solely by feelings and no reasons. Arming teachers is sheer idiocy. On the other hand, if adult students can carry on college campuses, it's a bit odd to prevent staff from doing the same.

poorpete · Post by **poorpete** » Sat Jun 11, 2022 8:02 pm

And to sadly remember the Buffalo terrorist was shot by a good guy with a gun. Bad guy had armor so it did nothing.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Thu Jun 16, 2022 9:45 am

Edited

bralbovsky · Post by **bralbovsky** » Thu Jun 16, 2022 5:35 pm

This is the fundamental difference among the, "They're all the same." nonsense.

Republicans fundamentally want the rules to apply strictly and firmly, weaponized if necessary, as long as they don't have to comply with them. Their other technique is to make laws that do not cover their methodologies. Welfare fraud is theft. Tax fraud is meh. This is a core belief. "I am rich, and, "the law in its infinite wisdom.." One sees this especially in their reactions to sexual misconduct. Bill Clinton pilloried for an affair by serial cheater Newt Gingritch. Whitewater vs Trump.

The Democrats, meanwhile, dither, aware that rules are important perhaps, and desiring some fantasy high road (fantasy because it's politics for crissakes, and because they don't really believe in ethics, just in not getting caught). They want to seem fair, but refuse to invoke due process. Al Franken comes to mind. Gillibrand comes to mind. She insists her colleagues resign and misses the chance to actually establish a protocol and framework for behavior. Instead of demonstrating fairness or ethics, they demonstrate impotence and a vague sense of preserving some weird elitist privilege.

So, will there be any fallout from these hearings? Sadly, I fear they will all wanly agree that the republic was just a bad idea, and it will just be over.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Fri Jun 17, 2022 1:49 am

The starkness of trump stirring it up apparently in at least casual hopes of offing Pence still shocks and chills me. I mean you know he's been like that always, but the idea this was president and VP ... It's just amazing. So North Korea - no wonder he likes that guy. Same ethos.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Tue Jun 28, 2022 1:44 pm

Interesting developments imo

poorpete · Post by **poorpete** » Wed Aug 03, 2022 12:51 pm

Gotta say Pelosi pretty brave. Blaming her for increased tensions is like blaming an xray for finding a tumor. She's shining a light. That said, I hope there will be peace, there are here.

Kyle · Post by **Kyle** » Wed Aug 03, 2022 1:04 pm

I support Pelosi. I'm tired of the world pretending that China is not guilty of some of the worst human rights abuses- not the least of which is detaining and forcing over a million muslim chinese citizens into reeducation camps. Disgusting.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Wed Aug 03, 2022 6:49 pm

Some fun info on that topic: we have had military jets and helicopters overhead this afternoon in unusual appearances, along with AF1s (you never know if that's one of the many copies or what). Always a good feeling, like, hug the kids again once!

Mando · Post by **Mando** » Tue Aug 16, 2022 11:33 pm

Pelosi had to make that trip. She could not back down and I am glad she did not. On the world political stage we cannot allow China to bully our Congresspersons. I am glad things did not escalate further. China is simply a bully that plays by their own set of rules. Consider the Climate Change Accords ...while I cannot say I was in favor of them (No MAGA heathens are) they allowed India and China to claim "Emerging Nation" status which means they could pollute almost unchecked while the West had to regulate their cow-farts (exaggeration or hyperbole? which one?) .

And dont get me started on the Uyghurs. It is a true genocide that only a few even mentioned.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Wed Aug 17, 2022 9:55 am

Totally agree with you about the genocide and the other bad behavior we are seeing, but I can't understand the climate thing. What different standards? China shouldn't be considered a developing nation in the WTO or for other economic reasons but how did the climate accord treat them differently? The whole thing is voluntary and peer pressure, and a great way to make sure we're all doomed together is to have no agreement. The Southwest has no water and the coastal southeast has too much, the west is burning... eventually it won't really matter what people believe or don't, or decide to do or not do. All this is being decided for us, like it or not.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Thu Aug 18, 2022 11:11 pm

Frustrated by Democrats running to the left when in most cases the main goal is to prevent a complete anti-democracy loon on the far-right from getting into or staying in power. The people who are motivated to vote are thoroughly motivated at this point. There is no enormous crew of pro-choice, far-left activists clamoring to get to the polls if only we would appeal to their preferences. People need to feel a twinge of fear when considering a vote for these extremists. They need to feel they're normalizing and balancing things by not letting them go that far.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Tue Sep 20, 2022 5:12 pm

After being frustrated with Democrats for not running to the center (or for not voting for Democrats who run to the center), just read an article about how some MPs in Britain want to provide workplace leave for women going through symptoms of menopause.

poorpete · Post by **poorpete** » Wed Sep 21, 2022 1:18 pm

When I see Lena Dunham or Shaun King trending I know it's not for a good reason. There's the temptation to click and see what the fuss is about but then again, no thank you.

poorpete · Post by **poorpete** » Tue Oct 18, 2022 7:38 am

As we watch "woke" become a negative word in America, I wonder if a century ago a person who against the mistreatment of blue-collar workers woke up to discover everyone was scared of the word "socialist."

Oh no, a few people are trying to be empathetic to all, they are the true threat

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Tue Oct 18, 2022 11:37 pm

The "woke ideology" - every once in a blue moon, an enterprising journalist gets the wild notion to ask what that actually means.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 7:03 pm

Ugh, the useless progressive "squad" is up to their usual foolery.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Fri Nov 11, 2022 11:46 am

I have been listening to excessive right wing talk radio so I don't want to uncritically adopt their notion that Democrats are all responsible for this - probably many different people are responsible! But I share a bit of their outrage that we don't have ballots back in larger numbers from States like Arizona and Nevada or other places. Honestly, this isn't the first time things haven't gone smoothly, and they have a responsibility to provide answers more quickly. The longer something like this drags out for the initial count, the less people are going to trust the ultimate accuracy and fairness, even if they don't have clear reasons for that mistrust. I don't mean recounts which might happen anytime things are close, because you want to get it exactly right. I mean just having a basic initial result: why can't we get this?

Tahlvin · Post by **Tahlvin** » Fri Nov 11, 2022 3:00 pm

I don't know about Arizona and Nevada, but I know here in Wisconsin, some of the delay in finalizing results is the result of rules forced on election officials by the Republican legislature. For example, absentee ballots have to undergo signature verification before the envelope can even be opened so the ballot can be counted. The rules put in place by the Republican-led legislature do not allow election officials to begin doing any of that verification until election day. Prior to the pandemic, when the volume of absentee votes wasn't as significant, that wasn't too much of a problem. Since the pandemic, it's become an issue. In fact, it was an issue so much with the 2020 election that Republicans in the state (purposefully, in my opinion) pushed the fact that they were listed as winning the presidential election when the polls closed and the in-person voting results (which leaned Republican) started coming in, but then lost the lead later when the absentee ballots (which leaned Democrat) started getting added, as evidence of fraud with the election. During the pandemic, election officials had asked the Republican legislature to allow them to begin the verification process early, while still waiting to open the envelopes and count the votes until actual election day, but the Republicans refused. I heard from a friend of mine, whose nephew worked for a Republican candidate in the state, that the candidate was pushing the idea already months before the election that the Republicans would lead when the polls closed but the Democrats would "mysteriously" close the lead in the dead of night, and told their followers that it was because of fraud on the part of the commie Democrats. Even though they knew it was because they refused to let the absentee ballots be verified prior to election day, meaning there would be a significant lag before a big portion of absentee votes would be able to be counted.

All of that to say: part of the Republican approach in recent elections seems to be to make the process as difficult and slow as possible, all so they can point at the delay and claim it's suspicious and a sign of fraud on the part of Dem election officials.

Kyle · Post by **Kyle** » Fri Nov 11, 2022 3:18 pm

Tahlvin wrote: ↑Fri Nov 11, 2022 3:00 pmAll of that to say: part of the Republican approach in recent elections seems to be to make the process as difficult and slow as possible, all so they can point at the delay and claim it's suspicious and a sign of fraud on the part of Dem election officials.

This. Exactly. And as transparent as that is (as we're seeing in Arizona, Nevada, Wisconsin and other states), no one is really calling it out. Republicans created these delays with their hysteria so they can point to the delays as fraud. It's shameful and disgusting. These are the things that make me worry about the future of our democracy.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Fri Nov 18, 2022 12:34 pm

Nancy Pelosi has been an incredible leader, and yet another proof of her dedication to good leadership and to this country is the decision to step down and let the next generation come up to national prominence in the Democratic party. Maybe she has someone in mind that she mentors, but with Steny Hoyer also leaving there is room for a couple people. Lots of good candidates but please please let it be my favorite person Katie Porter. Wow is that a good one - they are so lucky to have her as their representative.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Thu Dec 01, 2022 7:43 pm

Wow! I hear the Democrats are going to move their first primary from Iowa to Michigan! Long time due and should help in many different ways, not least of which is putting whoever becomes the candidate on the ground in Michigan for a long time prior to the election.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Fri Dec 02, 2022 8:01 am

Update this morning: NPR saying Biden wants South Carolina instead, followed by New Hampshire and Georgia and Michigan and some others I missed.

The New Hampshire Democrats say they are going to go first no matter what anybody else decides.

And the Iowa Democrats haven't decided yet but might decide to do their caucus before anyone else regardless of what the national party says. And the Iowa Republican party wants the Democrats to do their caucus and would support them going early presumably on the idea that Iowa should generally be the early one.

What a mess!

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Mon Jan 30, 2023 9:19 am

Read a little news item that finally got some attention: Democrats are destroying one of the most important hands that feeds them! For years they had the advantage in the online fundraising space and had made it extremely easy through act blue to support a variety of local candidates or to reach into races across the nation that were close and important.

Now they are permitting your contact information to be used CONSTANTLY and frankly, in offensive ways. Any special interest group seems capable of purchasing their list and sending me junk mail that implies I have somehow supported the group in the past. Absolutely not. I've received things from groups with whom I 100% disagree and definitely did not support financially, but because I donated to different candidates somehow they're able to purchase that list, and they have information about what I've done previously that they can now use (in my opinion against me, but that's because I do not like these organizations I'm hearing from). That's a great way to ensure people don't donate to that person again.

And the emails! The spam emails are just off the charts! At one point I think I was getting about a hundred of them a day. I had to spend a half hour intervening in my email account to prevent this. If they had just done it in a light touch I would have continued to receive those pieces of spam and probably would have responded favorably to them with cash when it's closer to an election. But when It's January of 23 and you're getting a constant onslaught of fundraising messages as if it's 2 months before a presidential? Nah. I'm positive this is hurting them with lots of people and it's so freaking stupid. Easily avoided self own.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Thu Feb 16, 2023 8:35 pm

Dianne Feinstein is one of the many reasons I'm not a Democrat, but I think it's horrible the way people are attacking her as being mentally incompetent, including fellow Democrats. And the attacks on her for having a face we would all be so lucky to have at that age! You might think that old ladies get some degree of respect or consideration in society, but seems only to be given to them when they embrace being feeble and dependent. Nobody likes a powerful old woman. Fortunately they tend to be at peak powers!

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Sun Feb 19, 2023 12:28 am

Reading about Jimmy Carter going into hospice now, very sad. What a human being.

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Sun Feb 26, 2023 11:38 am

Every once in a while Biden seems to have a flash of political brilliance, like this whole Norfolk Southern train derailment response. GOP hopping mad, insisting on congressional hearings, hoping to extend this all year. Biden is like please, please don't throw me in that briar patch!

Phoebe · Post by **Phoebe** » Wed Mar 08, 2023 8:08 am

Speaking of election losers, apparently Democrats who actually have to fight out their election have pointed out the obvious: The general public probably doesn't like it when you reduce penalties for carjacking as opposed to ramping them up. Not a surprise that some of them WANT to vote with Republicans to block the DC crime changes. How do Democrats observe the whole Trump phenomenon and come to the conclusion that the public is comfortable with any kind of "going lightly on assaults"?! People are walking around in a ginned up state of fear about exactly this kind of danger. Please stop with the self owns, Ds.