Comments by "" (@TheHuxleyAgnostic) on "Status Coup News" channel.

  1.  @Aj-zr8dz  The only thing he made fun of, in that video, was mocking people saying she didn't have a chance, dumbass.
    1
  2.  @Aj-zr8dz  Which "way more" wars and refugee crises?
    1
  3.  @Aj-zr8dz  Lol, my only tears are from laughing at your nonsense and how much you can twist yourself into a pretzel.
    1
  4.  @Aj-zr8dz  Yeah, Trump and Bush aren't libs of any kind. US intervention, and the refugee crises started in Yemen, Somalia, Phillipines, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, before Obama. And, although Obama was responsible for the deaths of far too many people, himself, there's no indication there would have been a Syrian civil war, for him to get involved with, or a rise of ISIS, which started under Bush, if the region hadn't been destabalized by Bush. https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/2020/Displacement_Vine%20et%20al_Costs%20of%20War%202020%2009%2008.pdf
    1
  5.  @Aj-zr8dz  And I, literally, listed Syria as starting under Obama. Don't know why you're rambling on about it. Seriously, you know that, even amongst fascists, one can be worse than another, right? Hitler was worse than Mussolini, by miles. They weren't samesies. Sure, the US has been dancing near the edge of lake fascism for decades, but you have to be fucking insane to think being at the water's edge, even dipping a toe in, isn't worse by far, than being a little further away on the beach. You didn't actually provide an example of neolibs getting away with more crimes against humanity, killing more people, or anything of the sort. A bunch of the stuff you listed for Obama started under Bush. You can't even show they're just as bad, or worse, when it comes to foreign policy, let alone national policy. I don't know why you're even trying. Jimmy, himself, called Trump a "maniacal fascist". That's what he argued would be better for progressives than a neolib ... exactly because the "maniacal fascist" is worse. The idiot thought it would be a great idea to put a "maniacal fascist" in charge, to drive people left. He thought even the less fascist Republicans would jump on board and join the left to work against the "maniacal fascist". No. Didn't happen. Jimmy's 2016 "plan", if anyone followed it, turned Republicans even more fascist, caused a rise in hate crimes, caused a rise in right wing terrorism, caused stupid trade wars, caused multiple scotus seats to be filled, caused an incompetent covid response killing tens of thousands of fellow Americans, etc. If Dore convinced absolutely anyone in a 2016 swing state to vote Trump, to vote Stein, or even to not vote, then he is partly responsible for all that ... plus, dropping more bombs abroad. For someone who did their best to help bring all that about, to act like they are the fucking King of progressives, and call anyone not agreeing with him "fakes", "sellouts", and "shills", is bullshit. He doesn't really know how politics works. As I said, he doesn't even grasp that corporate Dems being more willing to lose to Republicans than work with progressives, is actually an argument against his own plan. His plan partly hinges on corporate Dems rather working with progressives than losing to Republicans. It partly hinges on them not propagandizing a paralyzed house against progressives, and the whole thing turning out worse for progressives. It partly hinges on a totally unknown amount of outrage ... what if there is hardly any, except amongst progressives? And sustained outrage, 2 years from now ... what if it does off? He's doing his best to trash the credibility of progressive politicians, who have done far more than him, all over a tactics disagreement, and a plan that isn't a completely risk free slam dunk.
    1
  6. He's lying. The nervous system isn't developed until about 27 weeks, after which most places don't do abortions unless the mother is at risk, or something.
    1
  7.  van wray  What a load of horseshit. A poor attempt to defend racism. You must be a racist PoS, yourself. Trump has not told Bernie or Warren, white folks, to go "back" to "their" countries. And the moron didn't think the US was "their" country, just because they aren't white. He didn't actually check to see what country they're from ... 3 being from the US.
    1
  8.  @dvrmte  Point one out.
    1
  9. Yeah, maybe get them to be as popular as the Libertarian party, that hasn't won a single seat in congress in its near 50 year existence.
    1
  10.  @kennethmcneil3478  Cute, that you think things are similar to about 170 years ago.
    1
  11.  @kennethmcneil3478  Gloriously? So you want Republicans to win, rather than see the progressive caucus become the majority of house Dems. You must be one of Dore's right wing chump fans.
    1
  12. AOC backed progressives who primaried against DCCC backed corporate Dems. She's not trying to be "friends", but does have to find a way to work with others, to get anything done.
    1
  13.  @TahtahmesDiary  Well, she also backed Bernie against their guy in the primaries, and backed other progressives against their DCCC backed corporate Dems in the congressional primaries. She didn't, exactly, play nice. Taking the lesser of two evils route, in the general, isn't necessarily "being nice", either. It could just be being pragmatic. Another Trump term could have ended the ACA and millions getting healthcare coverage, could have killed thousands of more Americans from covid than should be, doesn't get you the small gains of lowering the Medicare age and single payer, getting millions more on government healthcare insurance. We already knew, from the history of Bernie campaigning for Clinton, that they quickly forget the general election support and remain bitter about the primary opposition. After all that, she still has to find a way to work with others, to accomplish anything in the next 2 years. That's harder to do if you go full scorched earth on the party. It could even backfire.
    1
  14. Biden is a moron. He obviously has zero clue how emergency wards work here in Canada, or other single payer countries.
    1
  15.  Porky P Iggy  Telephone lines are akin to the internet, not the websites on the internet, and both of those (internet and phone lines) have been at least partly funded by the government. Every private number you call, though, has the right to hang up on you. Also like how you can use the public roads to get to others' private property, but you still don't have the right to go on their private property. Why do you have the right to be on someone else's privately owned servers? They could start charging membership fees tomorrow if they wanted. They could decide they've made enough money and pull the plugs on their servers.
    1
  16.  Porky P Iggy  The invitation came with rules for membership. Break the rules, lose your membership. Pretty simple concept. If Trump has his gym membership revoked for walking into the women's change room too many times, so what? People have been having memberships revoked since the dawn of memberships. If you want a public square, argue public ownership.
    1
  17.  Porky P Iggy  Sure, and it's the owner's interpretation that decides. These social media sites don't generally have these moments, like with Trump cultists, where a bunch of staff is actively looking for something specific to delete or block. They, generally, just let the program handle some things, and depend on other users reporting on other things. Sometimes it takes just one asshole to report a specific video, that separates it from other similar videos.
    1
  18. Don't go all Jimmy Dore stupid. "But progressives are pushing for the wage increase to remain, and the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) has already ensured that it will be included in the House Democrats' version of the legislation." https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/progressives-hold-biden-to-account-on-15-minimum-wage-as-he-suggests-it-be-dealt-with-later/ar-BB1dxEOV?li=BBnbcA1
    1
  19. It was her punishment for using her platform and PAC to go against DCCC backed corporate Dems and help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress. Adding more yes votes to congress is exactly what needs doing, failed vote or no failed vote. Threatening to paralyze the house might just get you them letting you, and then blaming you for no new covid relief, no new unemployment extensions, no new vaccine funding, etc., during a pandemic.
    1
  20.  @acharris  Just freeze the government, have people pissed they aren't getting money to survive, and that will bring tons of people over to progressivism? Just how delusional are Dore fans?
    1
  21.  @Hunter_Brandon  What was so "behind closed doors" about it? https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/09/progressive-covid-minimum-wage-468061
    1
  22.  @graywalkerjoin3rdparty74  Even if every progressive voted third party, each district general election would then look like a Dem primary, with seperate Dem and progressive candidates, running against a single Republican, with Republicans winning most everything, due to first past the post.
    1
  23. To actually get Pelosi out, or prevent someone worse being picked, you'd need the majority of votes in the Dem caucus. Blocking her at the house vote just paralyzes the house. It then goes back to Dem caucus, where they can keep picking Pelosi as their speaker choice over and over and over, or someone worse. How long do progressives paralyze the house as they get blamed for no new covid relief, no minimum wage hike, no Medicare age reduction, no student debt relief, or whatever else they can use to make progressives look bad in the eyes of the people? If Dore is right, that corporate Dems would rather work with Republicans than progressives, that's actually an argument against his tactic, not for it. Corporate Dems could work a deal with Republicans to dodge paralyzing the house. Pelosi could quietly agree to a Republican request in exchange for having enough Republicans play sick, or abstain, lowering the threshold needed for her to win. None of the movements you mentioned included threatening to paralyze the house. AOC just did exactly what needs doing, used her platform and PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress, going against DCCC backed corporate Dems. Exactly the thing that would still need doing after the vote fails by almost 100 votes (it only has 124 people signed on, and would need 218 to pass a full house vote, so not sure where you're getting 30 from). If you, or Jimmy, have 100 (or even 30) new pro-M4A candidates in your back pockets, why didn't you run them in the election that just happened? I'm sure AOC would have done what she could to help them get elected too. Or are these 100 new candidates going to magically appear after a failed vote? It only took a single question, to get Biden to say he'd veto M4A. It doesn't seem that hard to get a politician to publicly say they're opposed to M4A without having to threaten to paralyze the house.
    1
  24. There's UBI and then there's how to pay for UBI. Alaskans have partial ownership of their resource, and get paid for it. Yang isn't proposing everyone get a share of Amazon, and their profits. He's proposing taxing Amazon's consumers with a VAT. Amazon would still pay zero taxes. They'd simply collect it and pass it along to the government. Toss in the UBI and even more people will spend money on Amazon making them and Bezos even richer.
    1
  25.  @deep-n-yo-mind5061  You keep strawmanning me. I didn't automatically dismiss UBI. I opened by saying there's UBI and then there's how to pay for UBI, and that Yang's plan is just bad. He's the one throwing his hands in the air about tax loopholes for corporations and the rich. He's the one promoting a VAT that doesn't actually tax corporations, and will make them and their owners richer. He's the one not accounting for some poor people who will end up worse off. Other studies will say nothing about his plan, unless they're designed exactly like his plan, and he's the only one with a UBI plan.
    1
  26. I think you're all delusional as to just how much leverage progressives actually have. You all know Pelosi can just let progressives paralyze the house, and then blame them for no new covid relief, no minimum wage increase, no Medicare age decrease, etc., etc., etc., right?
    1
  27.  @Aj-zr8dz  Remaining few? Corporate Dems are still the majority of Democrats. The majority of the Dem caucus picked Pelosi. Progressives can keep sending it back to caucus, but have no actual way of voting her out there, or someone worse, because they don't have a majority. Even the majority of Dem voters just picked Biden over Bernie. Progressive numbers are growing, but they don't yet have the power some people seem to think, and corporate Dems aren't rolling over dead quite yet.
    1
  28.  @Aj-zr8dz  Yeah, you do need to convince the majority to get rid of her, or they can just keep picking her over and over, let you paralyze the house, and blame you when people are desperate for more covid relief.
    1
  29.  @Aj-zr8dz  Other than getting more progressives elected to Congress, exactly like AOC just helped do, until you get the majority, you can't force the majority to do anything in caucus. You can paralyze the house and keep sending it back to caucus, but there you have no power again. They can just let you paralyze the house and blame you when people start asking for more covid relief. Dore and Kyle also argue that Pelosi would rather work with Republicans than progressives, and is the queen of backroom deals, but then don't seem to consider the possibility of Pelosi simply making a backroom deal with Republicans. She could give them something in exchange for 20 Republicans playing sick, reducing the threshold needed to win, and easily dodge the progressive threat.
    1
  30.  @Aj-zr8dz  A Tim Ryan isn't exactly "less established". Parties generally pick amongst senior members to be speaker.
    1
  31. @WeAreIt Yeah, finally M4A is an established part of mainstream political conversation, and progressives are adding multiple seats to their numbers each election, THAT'S the time to bail and start yet another third party that won't even get a single seat in 50 years. Jimmy Dore: I'm so impatient, I'm going to take the longest fucking road possible to reach my destination!!! That'll show em!!!
    1
  32. @WeAreIt Adding multiple new yes votes in a single election is a full slice of bread, compared to starting from scratch.
    1
  33.  @Aj-zr8dz  What do you mean wouldn't last as long? Pelosi says this is her last ride as speaker. Swapping Tim Ryan in now would likely give him more of a chance to stay in longer than her 2 years left.
    1
  34.  @Scepticalasfuk  You work for a third party that just wants to slander progressive politicians, destroy confidence in them, start from scratch, and not even win a seat in the house in 50 years, let alone get M4A?
    1
  35. Bullshit. Progressives got the $15 minimum to remain in the house bill.
    1
  36.  @gabrielarcari72  The progressive caucaus got the $15 minimum to stay in the house bill. Justice Dems and AOC just helped add more M4A yes votes to congress.
    1
  37.  @gabrielarcari72  The broader progressive caucus, which include M4A on their platform, is about 10-15 seats away from becoming the majority of house Dems. They could then pick the party speaker candidate at the party caucus. That could happen next election, if that many viable progressive caucus candidates can replace non progressive caucus candidates. On the other hand, the most popular third party hasn't won a single seat in congress in its near 50 year existence. The second most popular hasn't won a single seat in its 20 year existence. Having a broader group of about a hundred progressives, and even a smaller group of 15, or so, completely corporate free progressives, in congress, are both more than any third party has accomplished. Third parties don't get to put forward even a single bill, don't get to cast even a single vote for, or against, even a single bill. It's a fantasy, thinking a third party would be the faster route. That system needs to change, to make third parties more viable, but you can't really change it from the outside.
    1
  38.  @gabrielarcari72  Because first past the post works against them. Even if you peeled off all progressive voters, from the Dem party, that would just end up letting Republicans win in most places. It would be like Dem primaries vs Republicans in the general.
    1
  39.  @graywalkerjoin3rdparty74  Progressives don't have the numbers to pick a different party speaker candidate in caucus. The corporate Dem majority could have kept picking Pelosi over and over and over, or someone worse. And if you go all out war within the party, how do you think things will go when the progressive caucus gets the 10-15 more seats it needs to become the majority of house Dems, and they pick the party speaker candidate?
    1
  40.  @gabrielarcari72  Uh huh. That's why you need to take over one of those parties, instead.
    1
  41.  @gabrielarcari72  That's a lie. AOC, and others, vote against the seperate military budget, every year.
    1
  42.  @graywalkerjoin3rdparty74  Pelosi introduced M4A just last session. It died in committees, where 90% of bills die. The speaker, alone, can't even force a bill through committees.
    1
  43.  @graywalkerjoin3rdparty74  How do you scare the crap out of people who many say would prefer losing to Republicans than progressives, when Republicans would be who benefits most from a popular progressive third party?
    1
  44.  @graywalkerjoin3rdparty74  The election that just happened would suggest you're exaggerating. Libertarians and Greens did worse than in 2016. Bernie didn't get overwhelming support.
    1
  45.  @gabrielarcari72  So, you don't want them to just vote against the stand alone defense appropriation bill, you want them to vote against the entire budget? Vote against the budget that includes funding for Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, public housing, etc.?
    1
  46.  @dragonbutt1218  Justice Dems and AOC with her PAC, just helped add a few more progressives to congress. Winning even one seat is more than any third party has accomplished. Bernie, running within the Dem party, was also a potential presidential candidate in every state. Third party presidential candidates only have the potential to be on the ballot in about a dozen states, even after 20 years for Greens, and almost 50 years for Libertarians. There's no real contest as to which is the better approach.
    1
  47.  @bluesrockfan36  Sounds like you're referring to his end vision, as was LA's end vision. His "burden shifting", transition, phase he outright describes as a public option, which hasn't worked as a transition phase for LA.
    1
  48. Adding more M4A yes votes to congress is pretty straight forward. It's what you have to do to ever pass a bill. Keeping the $15 minimum wage in the house bill, is also pretty straight forward. And yet you still seem confused.
    1
  49.  @kennethmcneil3478  Oh, do explain how you can ever pass a bill without enough yes votes, dumb dumb.
    1
  50.  @griffmustard  And how many votes are third parties getting on any bill in congress, dimwit? Zero. 10 is immeasurable times better than 0. You seem to be ignoring the 100, or so, cosigners. It's more like half way there. What's your other option to adding enough votes to get it to pass?
    1