Dems are going to win.

[Vernon]

I'm agnostic too. But only because I can't prove either way and that's the only honest way to be. Regarding abortion; I think there's a line, a legal line that we have to define scientifically. I think a reasonable cutoff with deference given to the health of the mother and rape is fine.

We agree

I've worked with many hard working white men, I happen to be one. Immigrants simply work harder as a generalization. They're people too, they are just as capable of being scummy and lazy, but the ones that come here generally want to work.

I know where you're coming from. On my way back and forth to Lake Erie, I see what I believe to be Migrant workers all the time, probably mostly Mexican. They must be doing piece work, but I always marvel at entire crews all with their heads down, going about their business. No-one leaning on a shovel, No-one watching. My longest stint was somewhere around 20 years as a Residential Construction worker - 15 running a small business. Back then I would be thinking, man if I could pack up half a dozen of these guys.....

I'm not sure how old you are but I found cor work in the gym, like squats, dead-lifts and the like, did wonders for my sore back. Many times it's the small muscles that cause us trouble. As usual, regular exercise is the best cure, even if you have a physically demanding job. Hope you feel better.

I'm 60, trying to work out the best time to retire, while at the same time making sure I provide for my wife, who I expect will live a decade past me. This is why I'm kind of sensitive to policy that is inflationary or having negative economic impact.

Working with dumb bells is probably the only thing that's kept me going. I like construction work, but by age 35 or 40, I was already aware that I could not continue for another 25 years (lower back, wrists, knees, shoulders), so back to school again.

Docs tell me my lower back will never improve, just keep moving - so that's what I do. Hopefully, the new problem with my upper back is only do to about 3 weeks of unusually heavy activity. I have the luxury now of working my own schedule 50-50 between the grunt work and office work. Truckin hurts, I sit - Sittin hurts, I truck... 'weekend' for me is now, so I'm just taking it easy as the next job at home involves crawling around under the house.

McMike, I'm kind of surprised on how much we actually agree, only our conclusions or reactions to political events are so different. I think you want a more revolutionary change now, while I don't see many events as seriously. I want change too, many times in the same direction as you, but less reactionary, more plodding (probably the wrong word)

I get the impression your half my age plus some? If, so I think you'll get where you want to go, I believe. If it all works out the way it's supposed to, you will outlive me by a bunch. younger votes seemingly are closer to you, than I.

Vern

[Vernon]

To be honest, there's nobody in either America or Canada who in the terms we used to use would qualify as "Far Left." Uncomfortably, we're absolutely seeing some who're accurately self-described as "Far Right."

After all, what qualifies as "Far" is whether one ever intends to leave power, having once achieved it. The term is about authoritarianism and the suppression of dissent, not education or student loan policy.

While we focus on the "Far Left" authoritarian Communism of Lenin or Mao (violent revolution), the "Far Right" authoritarian Fascism/Nazism of Mussolini or Hitler got underway when they were voted into office. Experts like Anne Applebaum and Ruth Ben-Ghiat comment that most 20thC-21stC authoritarians were elected, then subverted their countries' Constitutions.

And whatever OAN or FOX claims, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortes and Bernie Sanders support representative democracy. They're not "Far" anything. "Extreme Leftists" like Beto have never led anyone to think they'd deny their own electoral losses ... in his case, twice. These are people advocating health policy like New Zealand's, education policies like most European NATO allies.

On the other hand, Trump demanded election-denial for any Republican who wanted his public support last week. Hundreds of Republicans vying for high Federal and low civic office went on record.

If some mealy-mouthed plurality of Republicans are now (perhaps) attempting to walk that back, it isn't because they've discovered their inner Liz Cheneys, but because pragmatism. I mean, what in the Hell does Lindsey Graham believe about election integrity?

Lots of interesting thoughts, by many.

I wouldn't call trump 'far-right', but I can't really argue the point. He's got a class of his own. A-hole is a good as any. But, by policy - just 'right' most of the time. I think this is why so many were willing to defend him. All about politics, less about right and wrong - honesty and integrity.

In my neck of the woods, there's another whole group of 'throw all the bums out' thinkers. They like the idea of shaking things up - getting politics back to 'for the people'. One co-worker I think would still vote for Trump even after sh-tty, became extremely sh-tty. Really good guy who also voted for (D)Marcie Kaptor because he thinks she's 'doing for Ohio'.

[Vernon]

It is becoming increasingly obvious that everyone in the Bilge is from Ohio.

Funny, I sometimes get the impression everyone's from Mars.
Their life experiences are seemingly so different than mine. I'd probably be more comfortable in say the Australian outback than coastal California or NYC.

Vern

[Vernon]

Back to the OP, something about who's going to win. I guess I'm probably as responsible as anyone for the drift.

The first search result from AP. They have it 205(D) - 217 (R). A Squeaker, I haven't checked individual races, but I thought I remember the Dems past 205 by some sources. I've been taking a wait and see stance.

Vern

[Durnik]

YES
Honest and competent, of course accounting for political realities. Sometimes one does have to follow the Parties lead.

But, I do prefer Pragmatic politicians on either side who work toward the common good.

Vern

keeping in mind 'the common good' means everybody..

EVERYBODY.

the right/religion are diametrically opposed to Everybody, ie: The Common Good.

[Garret]

Back to the OP, something about who's going to win. I guess I'm probably as responsible as anyone for the drift.

The first search result from AP. They have it 205(D) - 217 (R). A Squeaker, I haven't checked individual races, but I thought I remember the Dems past 205 by some sources. I've been taking a wait and see stance.

Vern

If this election has proven anything (other than there being a few more sane people in the US than previously believed), it's that the polls & prognosticators have really missed the boat. Different thread for sure, but I can't help but wonder why they are so far off nowadays.

A long winded way of saying "Yes, let's wait & see"

[Keith Wilson]

The actual polls this time were surprisingly accurate, rarely wildly off. Many elections were very close, and polls can't predict any more than that they'll be close. Interpretations before the election, not so much.

[Vernon]

If this election has proven anything (other than there being a few more sane people in the US than previously believed), it's that the polls & prognosticators have really missed the boat. Different thread for sure, but I can't help but wonder why they are so far off nowadays.

A long winded way of saying "Yes, let's wait & see"

What Keith said right after. I think it was the reporting off more than the polls. Well 'some of the polls'.

[Vernon]

keeping in mind 'the common good' means everybody..

EVERYBODY.

the right/religion are diametrically opposed to Everybody, ie: The Common Good.

Sure, I don't disagree RE The common good. I wouldn't agree that most religious organizations are bad though, if that's what you mean. Though I don't participate, I think many/most are a good thing in fact.

Vern

[Vernon]

I was just looking at the numbers again. So, there's 13 seats left to call according to the AP. If they break roughly 50-50 - probably unlikely. But if they do, and it's (R)223. Hear me out, just if ... Can I then declare Boatbum the fountain of all wisdom? Or - is that going to far?

Never mind, I know - I do - know I mean.
I'll get my laptop out and get some remote work done.

Vern

[Boatbum]

I was just looking at the numbers again. So, there's 13 seats left to call according to the AP. If they break roughly 50-50 - probably unlikely. But if they do, and it's (R)223. Hear me out, just if ... Can I then declare Boatbum the fountain of all wisdom? Or - is that going to far?

Never mind, I know - I do - know I mean.
I'll get my laptop out and get some remote work done.

Vern

Vern:

No matter what I got pretty close and was several weeks before the actual vote. I could still be off by 1 senate seat and said the GOP would pick up 2 governorships but it looks like they lost one. But still very happy with my prediction

[sandtown]

I often cannot figure out why some actions that seem very important to me, do not seem to move the electoral meter -

like DeSatan's blatant use of the power of the state government of FL to punish a company that had decided not to give him campaign money,

i.e., Disney

It is amazing to me that the move was apparently OK with the FL public and business communities

https://fortune.com/2022/04/22/flori...t-say-gay-law/

[Garret]

I often cannot figure out why some actions that seem very important to me, do not seem to move the electoral meter -

like DeSatan's blatant use of the power of the state government of FL to punish a company that had decided not to give him campaign money,

i.e., Disney

It is amazing to me that the move was apparently OK with the FL public and business communities

https://fortune.com/2022/04/22/flori...t-say-gay-law/

Talking to Fla. friends who are major Desantis fans, they loved his response to the hurricane (wasn't that mostly the Feds though?) and "Would never go to Disney, so who cares?" On book banning they shrugged - even though both are well educated. Same for the immigrant busing.

I thought (for them) it was "He's not a Dem" - but it seems to go way beyond that. I just don't get it.

[sonofswen]

Vernon said>>>" But, by policy - just 'right' most of the time." referring to Trump.

Really? Here are just a few..where he, his policies hurt this country:The Trump Administration Rolled Back More Than 100 Environmental Rules. Here’s the Full List.

By NADJA POPOVICH, LIVIA ALBECK-RIPKA and KENDRA PIERRE-LOUIS UPDATED Jan. 20, 2021

Over four years, the Trump administration dismantled major climate policies and rolled back many more rules governing clean air, water, wildlife and toxic chemicals.

In all, a New York Times analysis, based on research from Harvard Law School, Columbia Law School and other sources, counts nearly 100 environmental rules officially reversed, revoked or otherwise rolled back under Mr. Trump. More than a dozen other potential rollbacks remained in progress by the end but were not finalized by the end of the administration’s term.

“This is a very aggressive attempt to rewrite our laws and reinterpret the meaning of environmental protections,” said Hana V. Vizcarra, a staff attorney at Harvard’s Environmental and Energy Law Program who has tracked the policy changes since 2018. “This administration is leaving a truly unprecedented legacy.”

The bulk of the rollbacks identified by the Times were carried out by the Environmental Protection Agency, which weakened Obama-era limits on planet-warming carbon dioxide emissions from power plants and from cars and trucks; removed protections from more than half the nation’s wetlands; and withdrew the legal justification for restricting mercury emissions from power plants.

[Boatbum]

Talking to Fla. friends who are major Desantis fans, they loved his response to the hurricane (wasn't that mostly the Feds though?) and "Would never go to Disney, so who cares?" On book banning they shrugged - even though both are well educated. Same for the immigrant busing.

I thought (for them) it was "He's not a Dem" - but it seems to go way beyond that. I just don't get it.

You may want to revisit that - its been pretty much debunked.

[Vernon]

Vernon said>>>" But, by policy - just 'right' most of the time." referring to Trump.

Really? Here are just a few..where he, his policies hurt this country:The Trump Administration Rolled Back More Than 100 Environmental Rules. Here’s the Full List.

By NADJA POPOVICH, LIVIA ALBECK-RIPKA and KENDRA PIERRE-LOUIS UPDATED Jan. 20, 2021

Over four years, the Trump administration dismantled major climate policies and rolled back many more rules governing clean air, water, wildlife and toxic chemicals.

In all, a New York Times analysis, based on research from Harvard Law School, Columbia Law School and other sources, counts nearly 100 environmental rules officially reversed, revoked or otherwise rolled back under Mr. Trump. More than a dozen other potential rollbacks remained in progress by the end but were not finalized by the end of the administration’s term.

“This is a very aggressive attempt to rewrite our laws and reinterpret the meaning of environmental protections,” said Hana V. Vizcarra, a staff attorney at Harvard’s Environmental and Energy Law Program who has tracked the policy changes since 2018. “This administration is leaving a truly unprecedented legacy.”

The bulk of the rollbacks identified by the Times were carried out by the Environmental Protection Agency, which weakened Obama-era limits on planet-warming carbon dioxide emissions from power plants and from cars and trucks; removed protections from more than half the nation’s wetlands; and withdrew the legal justification for restricting mercury emissions from power plants.

Just to be clear, I didn't mean to say 'correct' most of the time. Right vs Far Right was the discussion. There were many policies that I'd have agreed with, suffice to say without creating another laundry list.

But, I think your meaning to say Trump was Far Right, and I'll not defend him.
If relaxing some regulations is 'Right', Going as far as he did in your quote is 'Far Right', then OK.

Vern

[skuthorp]

Talking to Fla. friends who are major Desantis fans, they loved his response to the hurricane (wasn't that mostly the Feds though?) and "Would never go to Disney, so who cares?" On book banning they shrugged - even though both are well educated. Same for the immigrant busing.

I thought (for them) it was "He's not a Dem" - but it seems to go way beyond that. I just don't get it.

Niemoller comes to mind.

[McMike]

McMike, I'm kind of surprised on how much we actually agree, only our conclusions or reactions to political events are so different. I think you want a more revolutionary change now, while I don't see many events as seriously. I want change too, many times in the same direction as you, but less reactionary, more plodding (probably the wrong word)

I get the impression your half my age plus some? If, so I think you'll get where you want to go, I believe. If it all works out the way it's supposed to, you will outlive me by a bunch. younger votes seemingly are closer to you, than I.

Vern

I'm not surprised, most self-identified moderates are, in fact, liberal but are to afraid to admit it. And so they build this persona that fits their environment, justifying it all the way. I sense you've bought into it a little bit but you've not given in. Rigid right wing runs hard in our industry and it's hard to disagree with guys you see everyday. I don't mean this as a dig, I get it. I respect your willingness for dialog.

. . . you and I have lived relatively parallel lives. I'm 48, not too much younger than you. My wife is 7 years younger than me and she will outlast me too, and my main goal is to make sure she can retire easily. Secondary goal is for us both to be able to enjoy 5-10 years of retirement with us both relativity healthy.

Reactionary? if meant in it's truest definition, I agree . . . , I've been waiting for Universal Healthcare since 92. 30 years should have been enough time if the will was there. It's not. Trump almost destroyed us, might yet still. The environment is going to effect the lives of The millennials and younger profoundly. I can't understate that. We are in the beginnings of a cascading shift in global temps that the preponderance of science has confirmed is our doing. I think the population has grown 4 times in your lifetime and burning of fossil fuels have increased something like 60 time in that time. There is no way to deny it when you look at the facts, than to conclude that we are going to make most of the world uninhabitable for mankind. I also read that up to this point, 68% of the worlds living creatures have disappeared. The crabs off the coast of Alaska is a prime example of this, there was a mass die-off this year . . . This is undeniable.

I would say, at this point, it's irresponsible to bring children into this world, selfish. I have not and will not. Reactionary is not a bad thing when it's in response to real threats and problems. We can't afford to plod.

[Vernon]

I'm not surprised, most self-identified moderates are, in fact, liberal but are to afraid to admit it. And so they build this persona that fits their environment, justifying it all the way. I sense you've bought into it a little bit but you've not given in. Rigid right wing runs hard in our industry and it's hard to disagree with guys you see everyday. I don't mean this as a dig, I get it. I respect your willingness for dialog.

. . . you and I have lived relatively parallel lives. I'm 48, not too much younger than you. My wife is 7 years younger than me and she will outlast me too, and my main goal is to make sure she can retire easily. Secondary goal is for us both to be able to enjoy 5-10 years of retirement with us both relativity healthy.

Reactionary? if meant in it's truest definition, I agree . . . , I've been waiting for Universal Healthcare since 92. 30 years should have been enough time if the will was there. It's not. Trump almost destroyed us, might yet still. The environment is going to effect the lives of The millennials and younger profoundly. I can't understate that. We are in the beginnings of a cascading shift in global temps that the preponderance of science has confirmed is our doing. I think the population has grown 4 times in your lifetime and burning of fossil fuels have increased something like 60 time in that time. There is no way to deny it when you look at the facts, than to conclude that we are going to make most of the world uninhabitable for mankind. I also read that up to this point, 68% of the worlds living creatures have disappeared. The crabs off the coast of Alaska is a prime example of this, there was a mass die-off this year . . . This is undeniable.

I would say, at this point, it's irresponsible to bring children into this world, selfish. I have not and will not. Reactionary is not a bad thing when it's in response to real threats and problems. We can't afford to plod.

My son's 35 now, he's made the choice of no children too. I don't know why I was thinking you might be mid-thirties. I read off and on in the Bilge, there's some interesting stuff here, but I suppose I don't follow enough to know what's really going on. Maybe the Jeep thing, off-roading and all - seems a younger mans game.

Anyway, I appreciate the effort you put in to the conversation. At work I am a bullet point guy - do this, do that, need this, that. It's challenging and enjoyable to attempt understanding in writing across a range of issues. Taxes the old brain in the right way.

Thanks,
Vern

[McMike]

Maybe the Jeep thing, off-roading and all - seems a younger mans game.

It is, but I took longer to be able to afford it and had to try it.

[sonofswen]

For those on the Right that venture here...I found a new hat that you should really get!

images.jpeg

[Garret]

You may want to revisit that - its been pretty much debunked.

Signed the bill:

https://apnews.com/article/entertain...484425d290385b

[sandtown]

. . . you and I have lived relatively parallel lives. I'm 48, not too much younger than you. My wife is 7 years younger than me and she will outlast me too, and my main goal is to make sure she can retire easily. Secondary goal is for us both to be able to enjoy 5-10 years of retirement with us both relativity healthy.
. . , I've been waiting for Universal Healthcare since 92. 30 years should have been enough time if the will was there. It's not..

With a few blowed up quads, A-fib, and a few other minor blips, the Admiral and I have had almost twenty years of healthy retirement - hugely fortunate.

The best advice we received ?? Don't wait to travel.

The will is there for M4A - we have been blocked by money in politics and a centuries out of date electoral system.

Obama could have and should have done it.

Look at how the national Dem establishment operated in the election - pretty clearly, a lot of them would rather lose to a GOPPER than see a progressive win.

We who are FDR Dems are in a struggle for the soul of the Dem party.

[Landrith]

I'm not sure I agree with that characterization of what "far" means. I'll have to think about it. My initial reaction is that it's possible to be "far" along the political spectrum in regard to policy without denying the rule of law, democratic governance, and the peaceful transfer of power. And without trying to squash dissent.

Maybe I'm thinking about it from a strictly U.S. context, though, where there is no real "far" left as you say, and the far right is certainly aiming at authoritarianism if not outright fascism.

Tom

Wow, to hear it told on the Bilge yet again that Hitler and Mussolini, the embodiment of the maximum state with control of the citizen's private wealth to a degree only rivaled by later Nordic Socialist governments were some how the far right makes me realize why AOC really understands me. In America, Laissez-faire Capitalism is the right and conservatives seek to preserve or restore the days when government had very little power over the individual.

[Tom Montgomery]

^
Hitler, Mussolini, and Franco were fascists, genius. Trump is a wannabe. Where does fascism fall on your left/right political spectrum?

[L.W. Baxter]

Wow, to hear it told on the Bilge yet again that Hitler and Mussolini, the embodiment of the maximum state with control of the citizen's private wealth to a degree only rivaled by later Nordic Socialist governments were some how the far right makes me realize why AOC really understands me. In America, Laissez-faire Capitalism is the right and conservatives seek to preserve or restore the days when government had very little power over the individual.

lol.

pull the other one man.

as if power over the individual only emanates from government. in your laissez-faire capitalism, who has the power over the individual?

liberalism is the rationalizing and democratizing of power. it is investing power in the government not to control the individual, but rather to reduce the power of one individual over another, thereby freeing the less powerful from coercion of violence, economy, religion. and that includes circumscribing the power of individuals...in government. holding office, wearing uniforms, etc.

conservatives today want their chosen leader, and their uniforms, their holy men, to be free of the legal--and moral--restraints of democracy. fascism exactly.

[Keith Wilson]

. . . the embodiment of the maximum state with control of the citizen's private wealth . . . . In America, Laissez-faire Capitalism is the right and conservatives seek to preserve or restore the days when government had very little power over the individual.

You're a funny man.

Still, there's some truth there; it is indeed true that 'freedom' for the very, very wealthy is a central principle of the current US right wing; that private wealth is sacred, no matter how concentrated, and that taking it away or restricting its use in any way is unconscionable. Gini Index? Hah! Weath is the mark of character, virtue, and God's favor, don'cha know? And as Mr Baxter so astutely points out, 'power over the individual' due to great wealth is far, far more dangerous to individual liberty than laws passed by a limited and democratically-elected government; that's the central Libertarian fallacy.

But seriously, man? 'Very little power over the individual'? You may possibly have heard of the religious right, the Evangelical Christian core of the Republican Party, the folks who want to ban everything they think God doesn't like? Sorry, libertarians they ain't, and pretending otherwise is utter bullsh!t.

[Boatbum]

lol.

pull the other one man.

as if power over the individual only emanates from government. in your laissez-faire capitalism, who has the power over the individual?

liberalism is the rationalizing and democratizing of power. it is investing power in the government not to control the individual, but rather to reduce the power of one individual over another, thereby freeing the less powerful from coercion of violence, economy, religion. and that includes circumscribing the power of individuals...in government. holding office, wearing uniforms, etc.

conservatives today want their chosen leader, and their uniforms, their holy men, to be free of the legal--and moral--restraints of democracy. fascism exactly.

So then where does a government disinformation bureau fit in? Isn't that the government deciding what information is able to be available to its citizens? How does that fly with freedom of speech?

[L.W. Baxter]

So then where does a government disinformation bureau fit in? Isn't that the government deciding what information is able to be available to its citizens? How does that fly with freedom of speech?

things are not simple, are they.

if a wealthy individual, owner of a media company for example, propagates lies to manipulate the populace, is that not an exercise of power?

circumscribing the "freedom" of an individual to exert psychological control over others is a proper use of democratic government power.

that government power will have to be discerning, of course. good government, like good citizenship, is a never ending process of discernment.

[Boatbum]

Signed the bill:

https://apnews.com/article/entertain...484425d290385b

You are referring to a law which gives parents the right to challenge the presence of some books present in elementary school libraries with their school board. Challenging it does not guarantee removal and having raised children, I can say that there are some books I would not have wanted my children to read if they were available at the time. Young minds need some element of protection by their parents and school systems.


I was referring to this USA Today story.....

In July, a new Florida law went into effect that allows parents to register concerns about books taught in schools and petition local districts to ban them.Nevertheless, many prominent people on social media have been claimingthat a slew of books were immediately banned in schools and libraries statewide by the law. They have circulated an image of 25 book titles listed on a piece of paper.
The book list includes novels that have been taught in schools for generations, including "To Kill a Mockingbird," "Catcher in the Rye" and "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings." It also includes the Harry Potter series and the biblical Song of Solomon.


The image of the banned book list has been shared by American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten and Star Wars actor Mark Hamill on Aug. 21 and 22. Hamill's tweet has racked up more than 30,000 retweets and 150,000 likes.
An Aug. 21 Facebook post featuring the image of the book list has been shared 80 times. The post reads, “Florida's Current Banned Book List. Tragic How Many Totalitarian Third World States Exist in the USA in 2022.”
But the list is a fiction.


These content guidelines require specialists to review reading materials and prohibit reading materials that are "inappropriate for the grade level and age group for which the material is used" or contain "pornographic content."


Based on our research, we rate FALSE the claim that an image shows a list of books that are banned from schools and libraries in Florida. Florida has not issued any statewide book bans, a DeSantis spokesperson told USA TODAY. Further, several works on the list have been recommended by the Florida Department of Education in a guide for educators.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ne/7876468001/

[Vernon]

With a few blowed up quads, A-fib, and a few other minor blips, the Admiral and I have had almost twenty years of healthy retirement - hugely fortunate.

The best advice we received ?? Don't wait to travel.

The will is there for M4A - we have been blocked by money in politics and a centuries out of date electoral system.

Obama could have and should have done it.

Look at how the national Dem establishment operated in the election - pretty clearly, a lot of them would rather lose to a GOPPER than see a progressive win.

We who are FDR Dems are in a struggle for the soul of the Dem party.

We're not too interested in travel, some maybe - but we like it
here.

Obama had a majority across the board in congress, but I don't think he would have had a chance on M4A. The Democrats too have members who wouldn't go for it. I'm afraid that'll continue without some sort of reform RE funding elections.

It's another argument, for a different time/thread, but the electoral system we have is another foundational system that I wouldn't want to see changed much.

Vern

[Vernon]

AP's got the race for the house 209-217. I think that's plus 4 for the Democrats since I last looked. Even if you check in every other day, this one's like watching paint dry.

[Keith Wilson]

You are referring to a law which gives parents the right to challenge the presence of some books present in elementary school libraries with their school board.

Yes. It's at best a stupid law, a sop to the fundamentalist right, utterly ineffective at keeping books out of anyone's hands who really wants them. Any book not in the school library is probably in the local public library, and if not, available by interlibrary loan, at the local bookstore, or online. It mainly gives wacko Evangelical Christian parents a legal framework to harass teachers and school librarians. A fair number of them have been convinced by propaganda, the latest episode of Terror Of The Month, that there's a 'woke' conspiracy to turn their kids trans, or something equally ridiculous, and they'll act on that belief. The religious right is losing the culture wars year by year, and they're desperate to do something to turn back the tide. This won't help, but it'll get them to vote for DeSantis. The law is performance art, designed to get votes, and it will will do zero good and a fair bit of harm.

[TomF]

Wow, to hear it told on the Bilge yet again that Hitler and Mussolini, the embodiment of the maximum state with control of the citizen's private wealth to a degree only rivaled by later Nordic Socialist governments were some how the far right makes me realize why AOC really understands me. In America, Laissez-faire Capitalism is the right and conservatives seek to preserve or restore the days when government had very little power over the individual.

Where does this fit into Laissez-faire Capitalism?

On Steve Bannon's October 26, 2022 podcast, he asked Marjorie Taylor Green how Congress' priorities would be be different when the GOP took control of the House following the then-expected Red Wave.

In specific response to that question, Greene threatened the corporations which stopped donating to the GOP because of the January 6 2021 insurrection.

"That's not going to be forgotten by a whole lot of my Republican colleagues, because that's ridiculous and wrong."

"There is [sic] going to be investigations coming. And there should be. There definitely should be, because the way corporations have conducted themselves, I've always called it corporate communism."

Again, this is MTG, about 3 weeks ago.

Saying that a key, immediate Republican priority was to use the powers of the Federal state to publicly punish corporations which stopped making voluntary donations to the Republican party because of January 6.

MTG is saying that firms don't have that right. That "voluntary donations" to the GOP aren't any more "voluntary" than payments to a mobster who runs a protection racket. Or if you'd prefer, the donations amount to a private tax by the GOP.

This is Government exerting "very little power over the individual?" This is "laissez-faire?"

[Boatbum]

AP's got the race for the house 209-217. I think that's plus 4 for the Democrats since I last looked. Even if you check in every other day, this one's like watching paint dry.

Yes, but with about 3500 more ballots to count in Boebert's district she is ahead by 2000 votes. Frish would need to outpace her by a 2:1 margin. I don't know if there is some reason to think that the remaining ballots are heavily favored to one side or the other.