Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

So...I'm looking at the speakers and such for this thing, and I'm not noticing a lot of political heavy-hitters. Two of the speakers haven't even held any statewide office (Corey Booker and Julian Castro), and at least two are behind in the polls in their races and are probably on the roster as means of helping strengthen their candidacy (Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren). Former President Clinton is probably the biggest speaker lined up, probably bigger than President Obama, given the circumstances. Do you guys think this is good because it will give an opportunity to new/rising talent in the party the way it did President Obama when he spoke in 2008? Do you think that the convention organizers had to settle for the best they could get because democrats running for office are distancing themselves from DC/President Obama and don't want to appear at the convention?

I keep seeing things about Eva Longoria and some other celebrities, but I don't know if they're going to be speakers or if they're just going to be in attendance. Does anyone think, especially given the...mixed reaction...over Clint Eastwood's speech last week, that pulling the celebrity card is really a good idea? I could see it being hard to do the "eat the rich" thing at the convention when you're trotting out a bunch of rich actors and actresses (especially since a lot of people aren't going to think of acting as "work," since most of them don't realize what kind of time most actors/actresses spend on set).

Probably the worst thing I've seen in relation to the convention so far is the responses to the "are you better off now than four years ago" question. One guy I saw on the news yesterday actually said "no," but went on to say that it wasn't really the important question (which would be the first time this has been true in presidential politics since at least Ford's first attempt at reelection).

I still think the "war on women" thing is going to cost the party more votes than it's going to earn the party. The democrats seem to have single women (the group most likely to be won with this strategy) wrapped up, and any talk about abortion, regardless of your views on it, is generally not well received...not to mention it gives republicans an advantage with men were they to exploit the issue the right way.

There's also the continuing "blame Bush" thing going on, which four years ago worked because we were coming off the end of the Bush administration and it wasn't nearly so difficult to tie McCain to Bush as it should have been. With Bush having been out of the picture for four years, and Romney having few ties to Bush, that's probably not going to play well during this election. A lot of people are going to see it as abdicating responsibility.

Tell me what you guys think. I've been watching both the echo chambers, I'm kind of curious what you think that might be new and different.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

By and large I don't care.

Just your ideological bias prevents you from seeing reality clearly and understanding that Bush's policies are in large part responsible for this mess doesn't mean that others are going to be similarly impaired. The argument is good because it's factually true.

You are correct that the "war on women" nonsense is obsolete and unconvincing and contrary to truth and likely to damage the Democratic Party's standing in the long run (the mirror of similarly extreme and unreal ideas promulgated by the GOP) though I disagree with you that views either way abortion is the aspect of that nonsense that is likely to offend moderates. In an era of rising economic inequality and bureaucratic logjam, most people are much more concerned by the ramifications of social issues likely to affect them personally, and that's not abortion.

Ultimately what is said and done at the DNC doesn't matter. Things will continue as they are, Romney will probably poll about 45-48% of the vote and steal what he needs to win, and whoever ultimately wins, long-term historical forces will continue to make the political system less and less relevant and effective.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

Booker and Warren are very charismatic, which probably factored into the decision to include them more than however "prominent" they are perceived to be. Booker's also most of the reason Newark isn't an utter disaster anymore, so I'm pretty positive on him.

And Clinton's the heaviest-hitter there is for the Democratic party.

If destruction exists, we must destroy everything.
Shuruppak Yuratuhl
Slaad Shrpk Breizh

Didn't Al Gore gain like 30 lbs after the 2000 election?

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

I'm tempted to wander down to charlotte and see what happens.

This thread was worth it just to see Aestu make a fat joke about Al Gore.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

I'd be fine if Clinton outshone Obama, considering Romney got outshone by an empty chair. Also, I didn't watch the convention, but if this "war on women" thing is about how the republicans are threatening to take away contraception and birth control, its a good way to tug at the middle and financial conservatives (considering "moderate republicans" don't exist anymore). IIRC, Ryan believes that women shouldn't even be able to get an abortion if they were raped (unless its "forcible rape", whatever that means) and the repeal of Roe v. Wade was announced as a main point on the party platform.

Also, Bush put two wars and massive tax cuts for the wealthiest on the credit card and gave it to Obama. I think its still perfectly reasonable to fault Bush for the economic troubles we're having. I remember the CBO or some other group coming out with statistics saying that if the bush tax cuts were removed, we'd instantly have a massive amount (I wanna say 80 or 800 billion) of revenue added to the government.

RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]

I think that if abortion was only legal following a rape, a lot of false rape accusations would follow, taking away from the women who were ACTUALLY raped, and sending innocent men to jail.

abortion should be all or nothing.

You're right. Why was abortion due to rape ever frowned upon though? Religion or some other belief that inflicts ideals on others? It kind of makes me chuckle to think of some asshole speaking down to a woman in labor saying, "I know you didn't plan this, but at least this child will be an everlasting reminder of how spontaneous the world is! Isn't life just grand?"

Its consistent with the idea that every sperm is sacred, even if its forced into you.

Conservatives who are anti-choice are either Christian fundamentalists or massive hypocrites, neither of which are good for the country.

RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]

I think that was the rhetoric used mayo, but if you're against abortion because you're against abortion, it best serves your purpose if there's no legal abortion at all.

Personally I think partial birth abortion is an abomination. The rest of it I really don't know how I feel about it, other than a lot of the arguments for/against are stupid.

Which is one of the reasons the average person doesn't like having the discussion.

I don't get the petty moralism and double-standard the Republican party has going on with abortion. I can see why people think abortion is fucking terrible, but for a bunch of people that think "we need to get government out of our lives," I can't think of anything more personal and world-shaking than being faced with that decision. It's not just someone's personal life, it's their very intimate personal life.

I seriously wish there were some middle balance between Democrat's "abortions for everyone, bring out the vacuum!!!" and Republican's "NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!--slink off to your back-alley clothes-hanger operator, you filthy whore" attitudes/policies.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

That's just the thing, Democrats are the middle ground. They're not telling everyone to line up and abort, they're making it very clear it should be a matter of personal choice and no option should be removed from the table. Want to have the kid? Great, it's your body. Don't want it? Abort it.

The abortion debate isn't a battle of extremes. The only extreme is the Republican side.

If destruction exists, we must destroy everything.
Shuruppak Yuratuhl
Slaad Shrpk Breizh

If you looked at the issue from a pro-life perspective, Democrats would look every bit as radical.

There are reasons that the debate is so divided and so heated, and they are not just because 50% of the country are religious nuts.

Abortions should be legal to a point. Full term is 40 weeks. At some point a fetus becomes capable of sustaining life outside the womb, blinking, crying etc.

Somewhere, the lines of baby and fetus blur. Until people can accept the fact that late term abortions are more or less tantamount to murder, and that nobody just says 'hmmm today seems like a good day for abortion' we're going to be dealing with this issue.

Is 39 weeks okay? 35 weeks? 25 weeks? It shouldn't take you that fucking long.

Brawlsack

Taking an extended hiatus from gaming