Source: buzzfeednews.com
Posted: 7 hours ago reddit
Trump is reportedly constantly gushing about Kim Jong Un to weirded-out world leaders
Source: theweek.com
Posted: 17 hours ago reddit
- Posted by: BlinkingYellow Score:11705
This guy's dictator fetish is even more disturbing than his public descent into dementia.
- Posted by: Dahhhkness Score:9470
Trump has a very long and extensive history of slobbering over dictators:
Trump on China:
"When the students poured into Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government almost blew it, then they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength."
Trump on Xi:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/4/17077642/trump-xi-china-fundraiser
“He’s now president for life. President for life. No, he’s great,” Trump said. “And look, he was able to do that. I think it’s great. Maybe we’ll have to give that a shot someday.”
“President Xi, who is a strong man, I call him ‘king’,” Trump said in a wide-ranging speech at Tuesday’s dinner. “He said, ‘But I am not king, I am president.’ I said, ‘No, you are president for life, and therefore you are king.’ He said, ‘Huh … huh.’ He liked that. I call him ‘king’. I get along with him great.”
Trump on Hussein:
"We shouldn't have been there. We shouldn't have destabilized Saddam Hussein, right. He was a bad guy, really bad guy. But you know what he did well? He killed terrorists," Trump said.
"He did that so good. They didn't read them the rights. They didn't talk. They were terrorists. Over. Today, Iraq is Harvard for terrorism. You want to be a terrorist, you go to Iraq. It's like Harvard, OK? So sad, so sad."
Trump on el-Sisi:
"You have a great friend and ally in the United States and in me," Trump told Sisi, sweeping aside his predecessor Barack Obama's concerns about the Sisi government's purge of political opponents and rights activists.
"I just want to let everybody know that we are very much behind President al-Sisi — he has done a fantastic job in a very difficult situation," Trump said.
“Mr. Trump looked over a gathering of American and Egyptian officials and called out in a loud voice: ‘Where’s my favorite dictator?’ Several people who were in the room at the time said they heard the question,” the newspaper reported.
Trump on Assad:
"I think in terms of leadership, he's getting an A and our president is not doing so well,"
Trump on MBS:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/06/donald-trump-saudi-arabia-corruption-crackdown-tweet
“I have great confidence in King Salman and the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, they know exactly what they are doing,” the US president, who is travelling in Asia, posted on Twitter. “Some of those they are harshly treating have been ‘milking’ their country for years!” The tweets came days after Trump urged Saudi Arabia to list the first offering of shares in Aramco, one of the world’s most important oil companies, on the New York stock exchange or Nasdaq. The White House had been silent about the unprecedented arrests, which began on Saturday with little warning or legal process, and were widely seen as a consolidation of power by 32-year-old Crown Prince Mohammed.
“You have done a spectacular job,” Trump told the powerful crown prince on Saturday, calling him “a friend of mine”. […]. Trump praised the crown prince, who has moved to loosen some social restrictions in the kingdom but also cracked down on activists, including women pressing for the right to drive. “It’s an honour to be with the crown prince of Saudi Arabia ... a man who has really done things in the last five years in terms of opening up Saudi Arabia,” Trump said. “It’s like a revolution in a very positive way.”
Trump on Kim:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/15/politics/trump-north-korea-kim-jong-un/index.html
"He's the head of the country," Trump said of Kim Friday during a live interview on Fox News' "Fox and Friends." "And I mean he's the strong head. Don't let anyone think anything different." "He speaks and his people sit up at attention," the President added. "I want my people to do the same."
“I learned that he’s a very talented man. I also learned that he loves his country very much.”
“His country does love him,” he said. “His people, you see the fervor. They have a great fervor. They’re gonna put it together, and I think they’re going to end up with a very strong country, and a country which has people—that they’re so hard working, so industrious.”
He added: “I may be wrong, but I believe that chairman Kim has a great and beautiful vision for his country, and only the United States, with me as president, can make that vision come true
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-praises-kim-jong-un-vietnam-summit-2019-3
"Again, the relationship is very good. He likes me. I like him. Some people say, 'Oh, you shouldn't like him.' I said, 'Why shouldn't I like him?'" […] At a rally in West Virginia last year following their first summit in Singapore in June, Trump was effusive about his relationship with Kim, telling supporters "we fell in love." ”No, really. He wrote me beautiful letters," he continued.
Trump on Erdogan:
‘Well, we have to ask our parliaments. We have a process; we can’t just tell you we’re going to spend more, we have a legal process.’ Trump turns around to the Turkish president, Recep Erdoğan, and says, ‘Except for Erdoğan over here. He does things the right way,’ and then actually fist-bumps the Turkish president,” Bremmer said.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/21/trump-erdogan-turkey-praise-242986
“It’s a great honor and privilege — because he’s become a friend of mine — to introduce President Erdogan of Turkey,” Trump told reporters. “He’s running a very difficult part of the world. He’s involved very, very strongly and, frankly, he’s getting very high marks.”
Trump on Bolsonaro:
“He is working very hard on the Amazon fires, and in all respects doing a great job for the people of Brazil,” Trump tweeted on Tuesday. “He and his country have the full and complete support of the USA!”
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/trump-praises-brazil-s-far-right-president-white-house-n985116
President Donald Trump praised Brazil’s new far-right leader Tuesday as he welcomed him to the White House, saying the man who’s been described as the “Trump of the Tropics” has done “a very outstanding job.”
Trump said President Jair Bolsonaro had run “one of the incredible campaigns,” saying he was “honored” it had drawn comparisons with his own 2016 victory. And he predicted the two would have a “fantastic working relationship,” telling reporters as he opened a joint press conference that they have “many views” in common.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jul/30/donald-trump-praises-jair-bolsonaro-brazil-leader-/
President Trump on Tuesday praised Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro’s decision to appoint his son, Eduardo, as the ambassador to the U.S., saying he doesn’t view it as nepotism. Mr. Trump lauded Eduardo Bolsonaro, a 35-year-old lawmaker, during his father’s visit to the White House earlier this year. “I find his son to be outstanding,” Mr. Trump said. “I know his son, and that’s probably why they did it.” “I don’t think it’s nepotism,” Mr. Trump added.
Trump on Duterte:
“I just wanted to congratulate you because I am hearing of the unbelievable job on the drug problem,” he said. “Many countries have the problem, we have a problem, but what a great job you are doing and I just wanted to call and tell you that.” Mr. Duterte responded that drugs were “the scourge of my nation now, and I have to do something to preserve the Filipino nation.” Mr. Trump responded that “we had a previous president who did not understand that,” an apparent reference to President Barack Obama, “but I understand that.”
Trump on Mussolini:
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/trump-tweets-interesting-mussolini-quote-219932)
“Chuck, it's OK to know it's Mussolini. Look, Mussolini was Mussolini. It's OK to — it's a very good quote, it's a very interesting quote, and I know it,” he said Sunday morning. “I saw it. I saw what — and I know who said it. But what difference does it make whether it's Mussolini or somebody else? It's certainly a very interesting quote.”
Trump on Putin:
So goddamn many it’s hard to pick just one:
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/03/politics/trump-putin-russia-timeline/
https://www.newsweek.com/heres-all-times-trump-has-praised-putin-708859
- Posted by: Llordric26 Score:2781
When you think Trump is the epitome of stupid presidents but he still manages to surprise you and exceed himself.
- Posted by: brickmack Score:2031
Trump says a lot of stupid stuff. These quotes are not that. This is evil, not stupid
- Posted by: Codydw12 Score:1410
Trump is both evil and stupid.
- Posted by: zoodisc Score:2228
"Chaotic Stupid"
- Posted by: noscreamattheend Score:6768
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the new guy in the group, reportedly tried to engage with Trump's commentary briefly, but the other leaders reportedly just sat back in their chairs at a loss for words, a source said.
2 oranges in a pod
- Posted by: timesuck897 Score:2658
Imagine a Dumb and Dumber remake with them, involving needing to get an important UN meeting and ruining it instead of returning the ransom money. They could wear oversized blue and orange suits too!
- Posted by: Persea_americana Score:4300
Trump is so easy to manipulate it's insane, just stroke his ego and he's in your pocket forever.
- Posted by: fitzroy95 Score:1545
You can either stroke his ego or stuff his wallet, he's good with either
- Posted by: waffledogofficial Score:2186
This headline reads like something directly from the Onion. Reminds me of when you have a crush on someone and everyone around you is forced to listen to you gush about them, whether you want to or not.
The US sent bomb-sniffing dogs to Jordan. Now they're dying from poor treatment
Source: edition.cnn.com
Posted: 23 hours ago reddit
- Posted by: monkeycrazyfeet569 Score:9907
All dogs should've been recalled immediately.
- Posted by: tres_chill Score:3051
Dogs are heroes, so we have to stop this immediately.
- Posted by: a_spooky_ghost Score:1556
How fucking hard is it to feed a dog? They'll happily eat scrap food not that that's super healthy but letting them starve and waste away? Wtf?
- Posted by: rukqoa Score:9044
Despite the 2016 findings and recommendations, more dogs were subsequently sent to Jordan, and the program continued to be funded. Even when new measures were put in place, like the deployment of full-time mentors from the US to monitor the dogs in Jordan, the problems continued -- two such mentors had been there at the time of Athena's declining health, and they failed to either notice or intervene.
What. The. Fuck.
- Posted by: signalwave Score:3943
This is the kind of government spending that I wish went through a very strict requirement for "should we fucking do this?" (with some realistic fucking oversight)
- Posted by: rukqoa Score:3752
Feed the dog twice a day. No chocolates. No grapes. Change their water once a day. Wash them once a month. Wipe or spray down their living area while you're at it. This is stuff that a 15 year old can handle. I didn't think dog care needed a government committee for oversight but apparently I would be wrong.
- Posted by: ActuallyUnder Score:1364
You forgot lots of scritches, it’s equally as important as food
- Posted by: duckducklab Score:3289
Dogs are considered unclean and forbidden in their culture. Not surprised they don't understand how to care for them, nor do they care about them.
- Posted by: Boon-Lord Score:1626
Not culture. It’s in the religion. Dogs are not allowed to be inside ones home because angels are scared to enter a home that dogs are in. Therefore many Muslim societies are unfamiliar with how to care for dogs correctly.
- Posted by: nwdogr Score:1400
Mistreating dogs is not in the religion. One of the most famous stories that almost every Muslim hears growing up is about a man who was forgiven because he saw a thirsty dog in the desert trying to get to water it couldn't reach in a well, so the man used his sock to bring water up to the dog.
The people who abuse the dogs are just desensitized and would abuse any other animals as well.
- Posted by: nospying Score:3025
Read the article. The US State Department KNEW about this a few years ago, and refused a recommendation to end the program.
Even if you don’t care about the dogs, the type of training they get is really expensive. Jordan is taking our money and throwing it in the garbage. Why do we keep giving it to them?
This is all a show. The US State Department would rather send dogs to die, than risk upsetting the “Royalty” of Jordan.
- Posted by: Asgard033 Score:2618
Take the dogs back and don't give them any more. The dogs are wasted on them.
Source: astronomy.com
Posted: 23 hours ago reddit
- Posted by: stos313 Score:3520
In my college Astro class, I remember my prof saying, “the solar system is 99.9% the sun and .1% Jupiter”. Heh
- Posted by: diamond Score:1769
"The Solar System consists of the Sun, Jupiter, and some debris."
-Isaac Asimov
- Posted by: Lm0y Score:1616
Fun fact: Jupiter is about as big as planets can possibly be. More mass just gets compressed by gravity. That's why Saturn, despite being a fraction as massive as Jupiter, is almost as big. Brown dwarf stars are all about the same size as Jupiter too.
Fun fact 2: Brown dwarf stars would probably appear magenta to the naked eye, if it were possible to get near enough to see one.
- Posted by: TheScaryScarecrow Score:674
Yeah and our sun completely dwarfs Jupiter and our sun is still 1000+ times smaller than some of the massive stars we have detected in the universe.
- Posted by: racingwinner Score:1224
imagine being an absolute chonker of a celestial body, just to be called a failure, or "small and brown"
Elizabeth Warren proposes a lifetime lobbying ban for major government officials
Source: theweek.com
Posted: 22 hours ago reddit
- Posted by: dismayedcitizen Score:5340
Of course there's a tweet, there's always a tweet.
- Posted by: CarmineFields Score:2750
- Posted by: Scarbane Score:998
Rules for thee, not for me. A lot of people are saying that, very smart, the best people.
- Posted by: redditready1986 Score:152
Do as I say not as I do do
- Posted by: Quadrupleawesomeness Score:58
Hakuna matata
- Posted by: TutumTeRebore Score:87
Hasa Diga Eebowai
- Posted by: RetardAndPoors Score:338
What the fuck is an "ethics waiver" supposed to be? Is the president single handedly issuing his buddies permissions to do unethical shit?
- Posted by: Rennarjen Score:137
Make selling indulgences great again?
- Posted by: CarmineFields Score:84
Bingo!
- Posted by: gitbse Score:210
And then continued (along with the rest of the gop) to dissolve almost every ethics and watchdog committee around.
- Posted by: acog Score:136
The first act of Congress after Trump was elected was to write a bill that would gut an independent Congressional ethics committee.
I remember having some hope for Trump at the time because he actually objected to them doing it and they withdrew the bill.
- Posted by: Good_old_Marshmallow Score:87
It's a fairly standard autocratic move we see in a lot of countries with high corruption. You don't need to go through the messiness of bribes if you can let your favored cronies profit off corruption while using the threat of anti-corruption measures to keep them in line and remove your enemies from power.
- Posted by: dagoon79 Score:223
We kinda need that for local Corporate Lobbyists as well.
- Posted by: wwarnout Score:239
Or, how about we ban money in politics? This would make lobbying, as a way to enrich oneself, obsolete.
- Posted by: CrushHazard Score:189
Lobbying is separate from money in politics, although most companies will use every device available to tilt policy in their direction.
The solution to lobbying is getting rid of the revolving door. You can either work in a political capacity on the public side or the private side, but not both.
The solution to money in politics is publicly funded elections.
Both these things need to happen for it to work.
Also recognize that lobbyists do have an important job, because politicians can make some boneheaded decisions that have dire consequences for industry with little to no actual benefit for the public. If lobbyists aren’t there to inform legislators about consequences, we lose that important aspect of the legislative process.
- Posted by: Nearbyatom Score:85
Wasn't there a science panel who tried to inform Congress on climate change in the 90s? It sent out memos and reports that were against the GOP held Congress and their policies so newt Gingrich disbanded it....now we just have a bunch of uninformed idiots making decisions for us.
- Posted by: TheTinyTim Score:37
Thank you. I occasionally have to lobby for the non profit I work for and need to explain often to others that what we’re doing isn’t dirty work. Politicians can’t be experts in everything so lobbyists should be there to fill in the knowledge gaps.
- Posted by: code_archeologist Score:47
Lobbyists don't only influence policy through
bribespolitical donations, though that is the most obvious method. They also use their personal connections to put "experts" in front of a politician, or their staff, to convince that politician to see a policy in their way.Another thing that they will do is that they will entice a staffer with a cushy job (that pays way better) in order to act as eyes and ears in that politician's inner circle, and to take the client's side in private discussions.
There is a lot more than just money changing hands in lobbying. And as long as there are billions of dollars hanging on a single representative's vote... there are going to be mercenaries willing to push or pull that representative to the direction of their client.
- Posted by: LudditeHorse Score:42
The only reason this isn't considered bribery is because it's legal.
- Posted by: mtarascio Score:132
Wow, especially with the Giuliani and Manafort stuff.
Can't believe it's an official campaign piece too.
- Posted by: nflitgirl Score:151
How about Flynn?!
Trump literally hired an unregistered foreign agent - someone being paid by the Turkish government - to be our National Security Advisor!
If ever there was a better example of Trump’s absolute corruption and incompetence, I’d fucking love to see it.
- Posted by: PrinceOfRandomness Score:99
And pence lied about it to help cover it up. This was literally the first few days of the administration and both of them committed impeachable offenses. It only went downhill from there.
- Posted by: froyork Score:59
Trump committed impeachable offenses on the campaign trail that only got Michael Cohen in trouble because the president is apparently invincible when half the opposition are themselves Republican-lites.
- Posted by: HavoKTheory Score:1845
Warren is going to take this all the way. There are only two major candidates that are listening to what the people want, especially working class people.
- Posted by: 2020politics2020 Score:538
Hopefully the bill will stem the tide from this type of stuff.
AOC: Corruption Is Legal In The United States (5:08)
- Posted by: RidleyScotch Score:166
Working Families Party endorsed her over Sanders today, i believe based on a 60%-30% vote split. In 2016 they endorsed Sanders over clinton.
Here in NY the WFP is a big deal, they have a lot of people holding office on the state/local level in NYC
- Posted by: calvinguy Score:69
50% of the vote tally was generated from leadership. If 100% of leadership voted warren it would only be 20% of members. They won’t release actual tally’s. Smells like shit to me.
- Posted by: CrassostreaVirginica Score:59
Sigh... rank and file members weren’t excluded from the vote, it’s just that leadership participated at a higher rate. Stop with the conspiracy theories.
- Posted by: Caledonius Score:47
That's not conspiracy theory-esque,it does seem fucky that leadership can essentially choose to ignore what rank & file voters wants. Kinda like the electoral college.
- Posted by: 70ms Score:138
We HAVE to get one of them in there.
- Posted by: dougdemaro Score:61
If the Democrats can get one of them in they may be able to swing the country entirely.
- Posted by: FLHCv2 Score:74
Quick question, what happens if the primaries go something like:
- 32% Biden
- 31% Bernie
- 27% Warren
- 10% Everyone else
- Posted by: ArtysFartys Score:128
I would hope that Bernie or Warren would step down and endorse the other.
- Posted by: Volosat1y Score:57
How’s about instead of stepping down, one taking a lead while other going as his/her VP ?
- Posted by: JojenCopyPaste Score:51
If they get those % of delegates, then the nominee is chosen at the convention on the 2nd (or more) ballot. This is called a brokered convention.
Super delegates still exist and get to vote on the 2nd and subsequent ballots. So that would favor Biden. But if Sanders and Warren have over 50% of delegates even after adding the super ones, they could make some sort of a deal at the convention to throw the support behind one of them. This is a bit harder than just Warren saying "all my delegates go to Sanders". The delegates themselves choose how they vote so if any of them aren't a firm supporter of who they're pledged to, that could sway things too.
One thing about your 10% for all others, a candidate needs 15% in a state to get any delegates so Harris pulling 8% won't get anything unless she's doing significantly better in some states.
- Posted by: akaWhisp Score:49
We collectively say "fuck" and push for ranked choice voting in the future.
- Posted by: nomorerainpls Score:50
Bernie and Liz agree to combine on the ticket and send Biden home. Dream ticket IMO.
- Posted by: KdubF2000 Score:51
This is part of Yang's plan already, I'm glad some other candidates are picking up the ideas he's talking about. There's a reason why he's the only candidate with an A+ on Equal Citizens
- Posted by: sharknado Score:64
Yeah but now it's coming from someone with an actual chance of winning.
- Posted by: Thethirdtoken Score:1317
What's crazy to me, about all these items that Sanders and Warren are proposing, they all just make common sense, like anyone can think about it and say, ya, why isn't that a thing already?
- Posted by: AKnightAlone Score:537
According to the two groups of Trump supporters I talked to recently, one being my parents, Venezuela and socialism!!! Somehow that's a response.
- Posted by: gojirra Score:378
It's funny because all the baby boomers I know that support Trump agree with anything you bring up that people like Warren and Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez stand for, as long as you don't tell them who said it. Instead they believe moronic fake news. Recently heard one of them claiming AOC wanted to abolish airplanes. I looked up what this dumb fuck was talking about and it turns out she wants to expand transportation so that you don't HAVE to deal with shitty airlines every time you travel. That same dumb fuck baby boomer who believed that shit complains about airlines all the time and always asks why we can't have high speed rails systems like in Asia...
- Posted by: Suecotero Score:72
What you are experiencing, my parents have told me stories that are almost identical from 1970. Right-wing radicalization was standard fare for the CIA when fighting leftist movements all over the third world in the 20th century.
Now, the way Russia flipped that playbook on you... I can't say I'm happy for you, but it's pretty impressive for a crumbling petrostate.
- Posted by: jumpinjahosafa Score:45
Yeah I saw one of the dumbasses claiming AOC wants to ban cars. Like where do they even come up with this shit.
- Posted by: Vescape-Eelocity Score:38
This is the only way I can talk politics with one of my Trump fanatic friends. I can't mention democrats or Republicans or socialism or even use specific politicians names. If I talk purely about the issues and policies, he almost 100% agrees with all the progressive democrats. As soon as I tell him that, it's like the whole conversation never happened and he's back to "socialism bad, orange good"
- Posted by: LOSS35 Score:57
Fox News has really been hitting the Venezuela beats strongly recently. In reality not much has changed since the failed (US-backed) coup in April.
- Posted by: TSand11 Score:50
I’m no massive fan of lobbying but let me explain why it exists and bet it will make a lot more sense. You are a Senator, while hundreds of bills before you. But your interest is say, so I don’t lose to many people, assisting helping green energy. But how? Maybe you want to write a bill that does something. Say create tax breaks, or assist small businesses in converting to green technology. But how EXACTLY do you go about helping them? You don’t run a small business, you don’t know what tax breaks to give, how to give them, or how to make them effective. You don’t know if maybe there is a environmental law that is out dated that gets in the way, etc, etc, etc. So how do you craft a bill on something you know very little about? And how can you make sure it is effective?
There in lies “lobbying.” It’s to broad a term and it carries a negative implication because while it takes a bad form sometimes and needs much more regulation, the alternative is legislators trying to do the right thing with no fucking clue how. Laws are incredibly complicated and so are the solutions. Health law is a prime example. The point of lobbying is to allow experts, people in the field, to have input on problems they experience. So “banning” lobbying is a terrible idea. It basically means the people who could actually provide valuable insight into crafting a solution are excluded from the conversation.
So, “common sense” is often misleading unless you try and understand that most things are in place for at least SOME reason. So, don’t just think of evil things you don’t like being lobbiest, think of Holder wanting to do criminal justice reform, Warren wanting to do environmental lobbying and assistance, or Beto wanting to work on gun reform. That doesn’t mean we cant regulate it. But think before you call to BAN IT because it’s “common sense.”
- Posted by: Bayoris Score:78
She’s not calling for an outright ban on lobbying, but a ban on officials taking lobbying jobs after they leave public service, because this is a common vector of corruption.
- Posted by: jedberg Score:51
Before lobbyists, this is what public universities were for. To, among other things, provide expertise to lawmakers. Also, back then, you represented far fewer people, and so it was very possible to just talk to your constituents who were experts on these things and could fill you in.
This could actually be solved by increasing the size of the House of Reps so that they represent fewer people, so they can actually hear what their constituents have to say.
- Posted by: YoBuckStopsHere Score:1044
Keep in mind during negotiations you have to be willing to give up something. Lifetime ban likely translates to a ten year ban in the end. That is long enough to prevent a lot of the swampiness. (Edit: sorry for the multiple posts, reddit burped)
- Posted by: research_humanity Score:409
Headline took the shiniest part of a very lengthy proposal. There are other 2 and 6 year restrictions. While she might have negotiate down a bit, I don't think it will be by much. Also, this isn't for every government official. The lifetime ban only applies to Presidents, VPs, Congress, federal judges, and cabinet secretaries.
- Posted by: d0mth0ma5 Score:135
It will have to be passed by the Senate and House of Representatives, do we see both those bodies cutting off their future job opportunities?
- Posted by: Neil_Fallons_Ghost Score:81
Not this current congress, I sure don't! Congress won't stay the same.
- Posted by: gummo_for_prez Score:81
So help me god if we elect Democrats and they don’t pass this shit
- Posted by: Granito_Rey Score:109
I mean if we manage to get Warren or Sanders elected and nothing changes, then America will be truly lost. These are some of the best and brightest possible candidates the left has fielded in decades. If they cant at least get started on fixing the shit that's wrong with this country, then the countries fucked forever, pure and simple.
I'm not expecting us to go from here to a utopia in 8 years, but the typical lack of Dem progress after 2020 would be the final bullet in the back of the head of America
- Posted by: Vexiratus Score:73
Andrew Yang wants the same thing but in exchange for increasing salary
- Posted by: SparkyDogPants Score:115
People are against paying politicians well. They don’t think about the fact that underpaying them really only makes it so that only the wealthy can afford to run (see the two year long dnc presidential race), and that it encourages them to want to make side action.
Same with not paying politicians while the government is down. The wealthy can force a shutdown so that the poorer politicians can’t afford to live during one.
- Posted by: -DementedAvenger- Score:340
That's great!...but how about the flip side and also having a ban on lobbyists working in government??
- Posted by: research_humanity Score:223
Read her proposal. It's a fairly easy read, and it absolutely covers expanding the definition of lobbyist to include more people who are lobbying via loopholes, banning certain types of people from being lobbyists, etc.
- Posted by: philko42 Score:209
Great idea from a great candidate.
BUT, I suspect the courts (especially the SCOTUS that Warren will inherit) would kill such an idea on 1A grounds:
Congress shall make no law respecting ... the right of the people ... to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
And lobbying is, by definition, petitioning the Government for a redress of grievances. The fact that the "grievance" is actually "my group ain't getting enough money from the public coffers" is, unfortunately, immaterial here.
- Posted by: mjzim9022 Score:123
Then let's hash it out in the courts
- Posted by: philko42 Score:63
Agreed. I'd much prefer to have Warren trying to accomplish something like this than have Biden fiddling 'round the edges. But we all need to be prepared for a long legal fight and we need to make sure legislation is written so that it's positioned well for that fight.
- Posted by: fuckinpoliticsbro Score:186
I know I’m gonna be downvoted to hell for even mentioning it but once again this is something that Andrew Yang has had as a proposed policy for literally several months. Not a single news article has been written about it.
https://www.yang2020.com/policies/prevent-regulatory-capture-and-corruption/
https://www.yang2020.com/blog/restoring-democracy-rebuilding-trust/
He has frequently talked about it on podcasts and has discussed it at length with his Lawrence Lessig townhall.
edit: link here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kjiHwx6bpkg
- Posted by: BigWungusBill Score:72
I’m not gonna be voting for Yang but it’s fucking criminal how little attention he gets. Absolute bullshit.
- Posted by: bugpoker Score:41
Thank you. I saw this headline and couldn't believe it. Yang has been saying this for months.
- Posted by: NAPosey Score:114
Warren 2020!
- Posted by: runujhkj Score:42
AL votes late, so I’ll be adding my vote to whichever progressive candidate has the lead by then. I hope it’s Bernie, but I won’t hesitate to bubble in Liz’s name if that’s the way the tide is going.
- Posted by: JonesyJonesyJones Score:66
If you think this is a bad idea, you are either already a multi-millionaire or you are irredeemably stupid.
- Posted by: LittleShrub Score:54
But the Swamp! Won't someone think of the Swamp??
- Posted by: Ishouldbewriting83 Score:41
I totally agree.
Let's not kid ourselves. They didn't say no because of their high ethics standards as a global PR firm. They said no because it would be terrible PR for themselves if their work would inevitably become public knowledge.
And most of all, protests are not over. Nobody knows how it will end. It will not be the same job if there's a blood bath.
As far as people of HK are concerned, there was a shitton of blood shed and there possibly were few protesters killed on August 31st, when police started beating people in Prince Edward station.
For fuck's sake, fire department publically contradicted police story and someone in police has been leaking stories. According to leaks police arrenged attacks by triads on July 21sr in hopes that people would "be reminded" why the need police. And it backfired spectacularly.
So any PR campaing would most likely backfire.
Dont forget the 100+ corpses thrown off buildings, with the police stating there was no foul play involved, some of which were decapitated.
Id say those look pretty dead.
Okay I was a bit confused.
I first thought "Hong Kong" in the title meant "The protesters" but clearly it means "The
electedappointed government of Hong Kong."