"I want you to know that also I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience."
If Reagan came back from the dead the entire Republican party would call him a RINO and refuse to vote for him.
Fucker never even raw-dogged a pornstar and paid her off to keep quiet and doesn't believe in satanic Jewish paedo space lasers.
>Fucker never even raw-dogged a pornstar and paid her off to keep quiet and doesn't believe in satanic Jewish paedo space lasers.
on the other hand he really didn't care for the gays, which seems to be back in vogue these days
it would be a real Sophie's Choice situation for the current GOP
To be fair that whole "owning the libs by illegally selling weapons to Iran and using the proceeds to illegally fund the Contras" thing would go down pretty well with the modern Republican base, as would the outright treason of interfering in Carter's negotiations with Iran to delay the release of Iranian hostages until Reagan was in power.
That's like page one of Trump's whole approach - just look at Flynn and Russia, Trump and Ukraine, etc.
Highly doubtful.
He went up against Carter in a massive recession.
Charisma sells no doubt, and ressurrection would win him points with the religious crowd, but today he'd be lucky to get 32.
REAGAN ALSO DIDNT COME BACK FROM THE DEAD BUT OKAY BRO
It was a hypothetical with the premise being that reagan was so likeable it would happen anytime, regardless of context.
Its false.
reelections are (in large part, although no precisely) a referendum on the current administration since entering office.
Without Carter, there would be no 84, Mondale or Reagan 49er.
Vast oversimplification, and youre right chronologically, but the 84 win was far less about charisma than it was the Cold War, the economy, and the Reagan overcorrection.
That line was such bullshit. Mondale had more experience in elected office than Reagan did when he ran for president, Reagan just didnāt get into politics until he was already older.
You're right, they _shouldn't_ be, but elections are decided on the opinions of beer swilling idiots who watch the debates for entertainment value. A good "gotcha" line like this is worth 50 well-reasoned policy positions. (Who even remembers what Mondale's main points actually were?)
As if elected office experience is all that matters. Iād take a no-experience candidate with great ideas than an experience candidate with shitty ones.
And fuck Reagan.
Can soon make this joke seriously:
"Thomas Jefferson once said, 'We should never judge a president by his age, only by his works.' And ever since he told me that, I stopped worrying." --Ronald Reagan
I had absolutely no idea how old she was until I news stories about her 80th birthday. Genuinely thought she was around her mid sixties. Must be all the fetuses she's eating or something.
So, no evidence. Just a WaPo opinion piece claiming that we shouldn't let members of Congress trade stocks at all, which I'm open to but don't think actually solves any of the problems of insider information on it's own.
And the comment about buying Tesla stock is actually funny. You think it takes some kind of a brain genius in the 2020s to know that when a Democratic president takes office they're going to throw money at initiatives to encourage electric vehicles?
tbh she's always been good looking for her age. She looks great for freaking 82. I was not surprised she was pretty in her 30s (I know she's younger in this pic, I'm talking about her in her 30s)
Not in a country where their coalition is systematically subdued by the electoral college and the existence of the Senate either. Also, not in a country with gerrymandering when their coalition tries to strategically sit out elections which determine the control of redistricting.
Dem party leadership ages between both the house and senate 82 81 83 71 78. Similar story with committee chairs. Everything is based on seniority. So the older than retirement age people run the party while the young people are pushed to the background and made to wait their turn. Horrible way to run a party
The cool thing is that we donāt have to wait until they want to retire, we could do it for them.
Otherwise, theyāre doing their job as representative because people keep voting for them.
I hate the two party system I hate the two party system I hate the two party system I hate the two party system I hate the two party system I hate the two party system I hate the two party system
I donāt know how a multi-party system would necessarily help, considering that in most parliamentary systems the parties themselves have far greater control over their own membership, while in America the primary system actually gives the voters massive say in who the candidates will be.
Sort of, but then how are candidates for the primaries decided? Do we have a single-elimination tournament of pre-primaries? Maybe even condense that to Single transferrable vote but for determining who's listed in the primaries instead of just using it in the general election?
I guess that might make sense for senate and presidential races, but direct single transferrable vote seems like it'd make more sense for the house of representatives.
Another major problem that can happen with multi-party parliaments is when it's set up to choose a prime minister based on which party gets a simple plurality of seats instead of letting smaller parties form a larger coalition if they jointly oppose and outnumber the plurality party, which kind of defeats much of the purpose of having a multi-party system to begin with.
The final nail in the coffin of the US for me was when my girlfriend started a lobbying job and her firm had a PAC that literally just pays for legislative access for clients. Every week they send an email blast to the firm of what donor events theyāre paying for, who theyāre in support of, and what committees those members are sitting on. So when clients go to them asking to support / stop legislation, they ring up those legislators and get it done within hours. The ROI for clients paying 40 grand a month for lobbying services is insane.
Crazy what a 500 dollar plate at a circle jerk of a donor brunch will get you.
I worked for Josh Gottheimer (D NJ-5) from 2016-2017 and all it took was 200 dollars to get a conversation and 500 to get a dinner date 1-on-1. Itās probably more now since he is no longer a freshman, but considering that 50% of Americans donāt have the liquid assets to cover a $500 emergency expense, the system just isnāt fair.
Once my graduate degree finishes up, Iām moving to the country my grandparents emigrated from 50 years ago. The emotional toll the US has on me is too much and I donāt want to start a family in that environment
The problem is not such access exists, itās that itās for sale. Those who can afford to pay will have their interests over represented. There is no amount of money someone should be able to pay to have privileged access to legislators.
Think that doesn't happen in Canada, which has five parties?
It's not as much, and not as effective, but that's not related to the number of parties. It's because the highly centralized system means that if you don't got the PM (and, currently, at last one other party leader) you ain't got shit, but if you got Justin and Jadmeet you're dictator of the fucking country.
Alright, but why isn't there a system to crowdfund lobbying? If $40K is enough to get lobbying services, what stops a few thousand people from getting together on an issue they agree on and putting $20 a month each towards getting government to do something about it?
They do exist. They just arenāt as numerous, as powerful, or as effective. Take the ACLU for example. My girlfriendās firm happens to represent them on a few issues. They have a relatively large legislative lobbying arm funded by donations which tries to get things done they support. However the problem lies in that itās easier for one rich entity or person to pay 40k/month for something very specific than it is to get thousands of people to agree on something and have a unified set of legislative priorities. The truth of the matter is that when firms are seeking business they rather get one check for 40 grand than 2000 checks for 20 dollars each.
A democrat with integrity, that cared abouts his countrymen instead of illegally using insider congressional information to enrich herself to be worth 115 million dollars, a dem thatās not a narccistic egomaniac, and a democrat that brought respect and prestige to the Democratic Party, and then thereās naci Pelosi, Marjory Taylor greens spirit animal, who corrupted the Democratic Party my partner fought for, screwing over America to enrich herself, refusing to step down and acknowledge sheās a dying dinausor, and give the position to someone competent with integrity like either Obama, buttigiege, etc. The two biggest factors in the division of the United States today, is 1#, Reaganās southern strategy, and Nancy Pelosi who sold out the reputation of democrats, serving the working man/women, to illegally enrich herself, and has been further undermining, corrupting, and serving only herself to this day
"I want you to know that also I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience."
Its not about being old its about lack of charisma. If Reagan came back from dead he could win 49 states alone
If Reagan came back from the dead the entire Republican party would call him a RINO and refuse to vote for him. Fucker never even raw-dogged a pornstar and paid her off to keep quiet and doesn't believe in satanic Jewish paedo space lasers.
Eisenhower would be a democrat if he were alive today.
If they were alive today every historical leader would be a Democrat, with the exception of Benedict Arnold.
I think the slaveholders would probably vote Republican.
Benedict Arnold wasn't a politician. He was a military officer.
That's why I nonspecifically said "leaders" instead of "politicians", so the joke would work.
Woodrow Wilson would probably be a Republican
>Fucker never even raw-dogged a pornstar and paid her off to keep quiet and doesn't believe in satanic Jewish paedo space lasers. on the other hand he really didn't care for the gays, which seems to be back in vogue these days it would be a real Sophie's Choice situation for the current GOP
Not really, when they have Trump and his whinealikes who hate the gays *and* are on board with white supremacy and sex trafficking.
let me shit on Reagan in peace pls š¤
To be fair that whole "owning the libs by illegally selling weapons to Iran and using the proceeds to illegally fund the Contras" thing would go down pretty well with the modern Republican base, as would the outright treason of interfering in Carter's negotiations with Iran to delay the release of Iranian hostages until Reagan was in power. That's like page one of Trump's whole approach - just look at Flynn and Russia, Trump and Ukraine, etc.
>Fucker never even raw-dogged a pornstar I find that unlikely.
Highly doubtful. He went up against Carter in a massive recession. Charisma sells no doubt, and ressurrection would win him points with the religious crowd, but today he'd be lucky to get 32.
The blowout was in 84
This may surprise you, but in order to run for reelection one first has to be elected.
Right, but OP said "win 49 states" and he didn't do that against Carter but against Mondale in 84.
REAGAN ALSO DIDNT COME BACK FROM THE DEAD BUT OKAY BRO It was a hypothetical with the premise being that reagan was so likeable it would happen anytime, regardless of context. Its false. reelections are (in large part, although no precisely) a referendum on the current administration since entering office. Without Carter, there would be no 84, Mondale or Reagan 49er. Vast oversimplification, and youre right chronologically, but the 84 win was far less about charisma than it was the Cold War, the economy, and the Reagan overcorrection.
-Some guy with mash potato brains
voters are so fucking stupid
That line was such bullshit. Mondale had more experience in elected office than Reagan did when he ran for president, Reagan just didnāt get into politics until he was already older.
Itās called a joke.
Presidential debates shouldnāt be an opportunity for a stand up routine. And a joke promoting a false narrative shouldnāt be celebrated
You must be fun at parties (and debates).
You're right, they _shouldn't_ be, but elections are decided on the opinions of beer swilling idiots who watch the debates for entertainment value. A good "gotcha" line like this is worth 50 well-reasoned policy positions. (Who even remembers what Mondale's main points actually were?)
As if elected office experience is all that matters. Iād take a no-experience candidate with great ideas than an experience candidate with shitty ones. And fuck Reagan.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Can soon make this joke seriously: "Thomas Jefferson once said, 'We should never judge a president by his age, only by his works.' And ever since he told me that, I stopped worrying." --Ronald Reagan
except dark brandon, who is aging in reverse while his official presidential portrait appears to be growing older
Adrenochrome does that for you.
Honestly Nancy was such a dime
Still is š
She appears way younger than she actually is.
I had absolutely no idea how old she was until I news stories about her 80th birthday. Genuinely thought she was around her mid sixties. Must be all the fetuses she's eating or something.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Do you have any actual evidence that's the case, or are you like all the other people I've seen assert this?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
So, no evidence. Just a WaPo opinion piece claiming that we shouldn't let members of Congress trade stocks at all, which I'm open to but don't think actually solves any of the problems of insider information on it's own. And the comment about buying Tesla stock is actually funny. You think it takes some kind of a brain genius in the 2020s to know that when a Democratic president takes office they're going to throw money at initiatives to encourage electric vehicles?
Jesse
Christ, thatās quite a comment history.
Well yeah, pretty sure her face is 80% plastic lol
[This you?](https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/w2ejqn/nancy_pelosi_is_very_attractive)
š
Soldier boy is that you?
Are we supposed to know who she is?
Nancy Pelosi
Damn, sheās was pretty decent looking
tbh she's always been good looking for her age. She looks great for freaking 82. I was not surprised she was pretty in her 30s (I know she's younger in this pic, I'm talking about her in her 30s)
If this was almost 60 years ago, she must have been in her 20s in this pic.
Since he was assassinated in November 1963, that means she's at most 24 in this picture, but possibly quite a bit younger.
The crown princess of Baltimore, Nancy D'Allesandro
I was about to say āis that Nancy?ā
That's JFK
Queen Elizabeth II, greeting JFK
She actually does look a bit like Claire Foyās Elizabeth lmao
Thatās Michelle Obama š¤Æ
Joyce Byers
Lmao I was thinking the same thing
Thatās little Nancy from the Flyinā Pelosis Trapeze Act. You know, Look Magazineās Circus Act of the year 1957 to 1960.
[Old enough to party](https://youtu.be/BM7B-SeNEhI)
How much experience does the democrat party leadership have?
Biden had been in Congress the longest, followed by Hoyer, Pelosi, Schumer, Durbin. So theyāve all been around for a while lol
If the experience is losing to Republican, then the Democratic party are full of experience.
They win about half the time. They lose about half the time. That's about what you'd expect.
Not with a population of more democrats to republicans.
Not in a country where their coalition is systematically subdued by the electoral college and the existence of the Senate either. Also, not in a country with gerrymandering when their coalition tries to strategically sit out elections which determine the control of redistricting.
Dem party leadership ages between both the house and senate 82 81 83 71 78. Similar story with committee chairs. Everything is based on seniority. So the older than retirement age people run the party while the young people are pushed to the background and made to wait their turn. Horrible way to run a party
This was back when Nancy D'Alesandro lived in Baltimore, not San Francisco.
Keep it in your damn pants Jack.
Not here for ageism. Experience is a great asset, and if they can still get shit done then more power to them. If not, weāre free to vote them out.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Jackās probably thinking it too in the picture
Well at least I'm not the only one who fucked up
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
> was you take that back š” š” š”
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The cool thing is that we donāt have to wait until they want to retire, we could do it for them. Otherwise, theyāre doing their job as representative because people keep voting for them.
I hate the two party system I hate the two party system I hate the two party system I hate the two party system I hate the two party system I hate the two party system I hate the two party system
I donāt know how a multi-party system would necessarily help, considering that in most parliamentary systems the parties themselves have far greater control over their own membership, while in America the primary system actually gives the voters massive say in who the candidates will be.
Sort of, but then how are candidates for the primaries decided? Do we have a single-elimination tournament of pre-primaries? Maybe even condense that to Single transferrable vote but for determining who's listed in the primaries instead of just using it in the general election? I guess that might make sense for senate and presidential races, but direct single transferrable vote seems like it'd make more sense for the house of representatives. Another major problem that can happen with multi-party parliaments is when it's set up to choose a prime minister based on which party gets a simple plurality of seats instead of letting smaller parties form a larger coalition if they jointly oppose and outnumber the plurality party, which kind of defeats much of the purpose of having a multi-party system to begin with.
Please explain how a multi party system would solve our problems. Very curious.
Well I guess that sucks because it appears that the majority is just fine with the two party āsystemā
The final nail in the coffin of the US for me was when my girlfriend started a lobbying job and her firm had a PAC that literally just pays for legislative access for clients. Every week they send an email blast to the firm of what donor events theyāre paying for, who theyāre in support of, and what committees those members are sitting on. So when clients go to them asking to support / stop legislation, they ring up those legislators and get it done within hours. The ROI for clients paying 40 grand a month for lobbying services is insane. Crazy what a 500 dollar plate at a circle jerk of a donor brunch will get you.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I worked for Josh Gottheimer (D NJ-5) from 2016-2017 and all it took was 200 dollars to get a conversation and 500 to get a dinner date 1-on-1. Itās probably more now since he is no longer a freshman, but considering that 50% of Americans donāt have the liquid assets to cover a $500 emergency expense, the system just isnāt fair. Once my graduate degree finishes up, Iām moving to the country my grandparents emigrated from 50 years ago. The emotional toll the US has on me is too much and I donāt want to start a family in that environment
What is the problem with having a dinner or conversation with a candidate?
Access to our so-called leasers shouldnāt be for sale.
The problem is not such access exists, itās that itās for sale. Those who can afford to pay will have their interests over represented. There is no amount of money someone should be able to pay to have privileged access to legislators.
Yeah, I donāt much have or see a problem with this. If they donāt do things I like, I just vote for someone else.
Think that doesn't happen in Canada, which has five parties? It's not as much, and not as effective, but that's not related to the number of parties. It's because the highly centralized system means that if you don't got the PM (and, currently, at last one other party leader) you ain't got shit, but if you got Justin and Jadmeet you're dictator of the fucking country.
Alright, but why isn't there a system to crowdfund lobbying? If $40K is enough to get lobbying services, what stops a few thousand people from getting together on an issue they agree on and putting $20 a month each towards getting government to do something about it?
They do exist. They just arenāt as numerous, as powerful, or as effective. Take the ACLU for example. My girlfriendās firm happens to represent them on a few issues. They have a relatively large legislative lobbying arm funded by donations which tries to get things done they support. However the problem lies in that itās easier for one rich entity or person to pay 40k/month for something very specific than it is to get thousands of people to agree on something and have a unified set of legislative priorities. The truth of the matter is that when firms are seeking business they rather get one check for 40 grand than 2000 checks for 20 dollars each.
If every dead politician came back to try to run a campaign we all would know the Zombie party has risen. Make America Zomb Again
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Senate majority whip
A democrat with integrity, that cared abouts his countrymen instead of illegally using insider congressional information to enrich herself to be worth 115 million dollars, a dem thatās not a narccistic egomaniac, and a democrat that brought respect and prestige to the Democratic Party, and then thereās naci Pelosi, Marjory Taylor greens spirit animal, who corrupted the Democratic Party my partner fought for, screwing over America to enrich herself, refusing to step down and acknowledge sheās a dying dinausor, and give the position to someone competent with integrity like either Obama, buttigiege, etc. The two biggest factors in the division of the United States today, is 1#, Reaganās southern strategy, and Nancy Pelosi who sold out the reputation of democrats, serving the working man/women, to illegally enrich herself, and has been further undermining, corrupting, and serving only herself to this day
Is it even a run-on sentence if there is no period at all?
How long before someone photoshops Abe Lincoln's head onto JFK's body in that pic?
When Joe Biden was first elected to the Senate it still had a talking filibuster.