Where does Mac1958 actually stand on the issues?

[martybegan]

He asked for it, here it is.

Mac1958

 

[Mac1958]

Nice! Now I have a thread, that I didn't start, to which I can direct wingers when they lie about my positions.

Health Care
Dems - For Single Payer
Mac - Against Single Payer. I'm against monopolies of any kind, and I think a public/private partnership would work better

Race
Dems - Committed to PC
Mac - Absolutely against, as it has not only hamstrung the growth of minorities but understandably created increasing resent from the rest

The Border
Dems - Evidently for this mess
Mac - Any increase in problems at the border lay at the feet of the Dems because of their rhetoric over the decades. My completely original and independent idea to reduce border problems and to tell China to go fuck itself on trade: How AMERICAN CAPITALISM can help us address at least two major issues

Identity Politics
Dems - All day
Mac - Absolutely against, as it is spectacularly divisive and aggressively drives resentments

Abortion
Dems - Let 'er rip!
Mac - I agree with Republican Lindsey Graham's 15 week proposal

Energy
Dems - Go green today
Mac - Fully support green energy, but the Dems have done a shitty job of offering a coherent transition plan. This will have to be a process, and we can't just start banning this or that without a plan. The various laws that ban things are worthless and short-sighted.

Taxes
Dems - Higher individual taxes, higher corporate taxes
Mac - Somewhat higher individual taxes, keep corporate taxes down

Government Influence
Dems - Look to the government early in a problem-solving process
Mac - Government has its place, but it should be a backstop and/or last resort

Guns (added)
Dems - Increased gun control, banning certain kinds
Mac - Can't argue with "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns". The cat is long since out of the bag. However, solid background checks are one obvious helpful move. Our gun issue is CULTURAL, and we have to start TREATING it that way.


Okay, martybegan, any issues that I missed that you'd like me to cover?

And what is "my side" again?

 

[BackAgain]

Nice! Now I have a thread, that I didn't start, to which I can direct wingers when they lie about my positions.

Health Care
Dems - For Single Payer
Mac - Against Single Payer. I'm against monopolies of any kind, and I think a public/private partnership would work better

Race
Dems - Committed to PC
Mac - Absolutely against, as it has not only hamstrung the growth of minorities but understandably created increasing resent from the rest

The Border
Dems - Evidently for this mess
Mac - Any increase in problems at the border lay at the feet of the Dems because of their rhetoric over the decades. Completely original and independent idea to reduce border problems and to tell China to go fuck itself on trade: How AMERICAN CAPITALISM can help us address at least two major issues

Identity Politics
Dems - All day
Mac - Absolutely against, as it is spectacularly divisive and aggressively drives resentments

Abortion
Dems - Let 'er rip!
Mac - I agree with Republican Lindsey Graham's 15 week proposal

Energy
Dems - Go green today
Mac - Fully support green energy, but the Dems have done a shitty job of offering a coherent transition plan. This will have to be a process, and we can't just start banning this or that without a plan. The various laws that ban things are worthless and short-sighted.

Taxes
Dems - Higher individual taxes, higher corporate taxes
Mac - Somewhat higher individual taxes, keep corporate taxes down

Government Influence
Dems - Look to the government early in a problem-solving process
Mac - Government has its place, but it should be a backstop and/or last resort


Okay, martybegan, any issues that I missed that you'd like me to cover?

And what is "my side" again?

Hm. What’s your position in lowering government spending?

 

[martybegan]

Nice! Now I have a thread, that I didn't start, to which I can direct wingers when they lie about my positions.

Health Care
Dems - For Single Payer
Mac - Against Single Payer. I'm against monopolies of any kind, and I think a public/private partnership would work better

Race
Dems - Committed to PC
Mac - Absolutely against, as it has not only hamstrung the growth of minorities but understandably created increasing resent from the rest

The Border
Dems - Evidently for this mess
Mac - Any increase in problems at the border lay at the feet of the Dems because of their rhetoric over the decades. Completely original and independent idea to reduce border problems and to tell China to go fuck itself on trade: How AMERICAN CAPITALISM can help us address at least two major issues

Identity Politics
Dems - All day
Mac - Absolutely against, as it is spectacularly divisive and aggressively drives resentments

Abortion
Dems - Let 'er rip!
Mac - I agree with Republican Lindsey Graham's 15 week proposal

Energy
Dems - Go green today
Mac - Fully support green energy, but the Dems have done a shitty job of offering a coherent transition plan. This will have to be a process, and we can't just start banning this or that without a plan. The various laws that ban things are worthless and short-sighted.

Taxes
Dems - Higher individual taxes, higher corporate taxes
Mac - Somewhat higher individual taxes, keep corporate taxes down

Government Influence
Dems - Look to the government early in a problem-solving process
Mac - Government has its place, but it should be a backstop and/or last resort


Okay, martybegan, any issues that I missed that you'd like me to cover?

And what is "my side" again?

You can say all you want, but push comes to shove you back the Dems over Republicans at the ballot box, and that results in the same thing as if you supported the worst of your party, because they are driving the apple cart right now.

Lets see what you forgot. Guns, PA laws as applied to non PA's (the baker/photographer kerfuffle), Kid drag shows, kid hormone/puberty blocker/surgery for trans stuff.

 

[JGalt]

Mac1958 is promoting the Forward Party. They were formed by Andrew Yang and former New Jersey Governor Christine Whitman, who supported Joe Biden over Donald Trump. The Forward Party isn't even running a presidential candidate in 2024, and is pushing ranked-choice voting for all elections, and "Independent redistricting commissions."

Other than those, they have no platform to speak of.

 

[Mac1958]

Hm. What’s your position in lowering government spending?

If we can, sure. I'd imagine we could start with an audit, and that in itself would blow some fucking minds.

Let's get some reasonable people from both parties in a room with no fucking TV cameras and see what comes out of it.

That would be a START.

 

[Mac1958]

You can say all you want, but push comes to shove you back the Dems over Republicans at the ballot box, and that results in the same thing as if you supported the worst of your party, because they are driving the apple cart right now.

Lets see what you forgot. Guns, PA laws as applied to non PA's (the baker/photographer kerfuffle), Kid drag shows, kid hormone/puberty blocker/surgery for trans stuff.

Yes, Guns. I can't get past "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws would have guns". I agree with that point.

And I don't think a few more requirements on background checks are the end of the world. Give and take.

Here's the reality: You guys clearly think that anyone who says Trump is a con man must be a commie. You're wrong. You're not paying attention.

That's on you, not me.

 

[BackAgain]

If we can, sure. I'd imagine we could start with an audit, and that in itself would blow some fucking minds.

Let's get some reasonable people from both parties in a room with no fucking TV cameras and see what comes out of it.

That would be a START.

We could be effective with a balanced budget amendment. But to get one would take time.

So, I’d be happy to see some responsible congresspeople get together and start lacing into our bloated budget. But the problem goes deeper. If we start trimming how much we give to other nations, the dispute will not be about how much. It will be on why we do it. Policy concerns differ and no accord will be reached.

And that same thing applies to almost every other budgetary item.

Since the American people are divided, I say it would be refreshing if we started by honoring the limitations imposed by the Constitution.

 

[Mac1958]

Mac1958 is promoting the Forward Party. They were formed by Andrew Yang and former New Jersey Governor Christine Whitman, who supported Joe Biden over Donald Trump. The Forward Party isn't even running a presidential candidate in 2024, and is pushing ranked-choice voting for all elections, and "Independent redistricting commissions."

Other than those, they have no platform to speak of.

Correct. The Forward Party is about how to address the issues. Fixing the system to stop motivating and rewarding the worst instincts of its participants.

I'm 100% for that.

 

[Mac1958]

We could be effective with a balanced budget amendment. But to get one would take time.

So, I’d be happy to see some responsible congresspeople get together and start lacing into our bloated budget. But the problem goes deeper. If we start trimming how much we give to other nations, the dispute will not be about how much. It will be on why we do it. Policy concerns differ and no accord will be reached.

And that same thing applies to almost every other budgetary item.

Since the American people are divided, I say it would be refreshing if we started by honoring the limitations imposed by the Constitution.

I think we could do some kind of (slightly) flexible balanced budget that allowed for emergencies like wars, large financial disaster, etc. Maybe some kind of special bond purchasing program to let us CHOOSE to finance it.

 

[BackAgain]

I think we could do some kind of (slightly) flexible balanced budget that allowed for emergencies like wars, large financial disaster, etc. Maybe some kind of special bond purchasing program to let us CHOOSE to finance it.

I have most often in the past found you to be compulsively unreasonable. However, unless I just had a stroke, I confess that you are coming across as being pretty reasonable here.

I agree an emergency vent would be needed for national disasters and wars. But the problem is that our politicians would have to honor that proviso. If they instead label everything as fitting within such an exception, the exception would subsume the rule, itself.

 

[Mac1958]

I have most often in the past found you to be compulsively unreasonable. However, unless I just had a stroke, I confess that you are coming across as being pretty reasonable here.

I agree an emergency vent would be needed for national disasters and wars. But the problem is that our politicians would have to honor that proviso. If they instead label everything as fitting within such an exception, the exception would subsume the rule, itself.

My opinions are as strong as those of anyone else. They just don't fall in line with either party. I have no use for either party. They're only getting in the way.

Politicians fucking with/ignoring the rules is always a danger. And that's exactly why I'm a one-issue voter: We have to change the system in which they operate.

 

[BackAgain]

My opinions are as strong as those of anyone else. They just don't fall in line with either party. I have no use for either party. They're only getting in the way.

Politicians fucking with/ignoring the rules is always a danger. And that's exactly why I'm a one-issue voter: We have to change the system in which they operate.

Aside from the no starter of a new political party, I’m not sure how you propose to “change the system.”

Instead, I think that what’s urgently needed is an honest national discussion about which values we need to demand from our representatives, Senators and our President. The value which I maintain needs to get a consensus from the People is fidelity to our Constitution.

 

[Orangecat]

My opinions are as strong as those of anyone else. They just don't fall in line with either party. I have no use for either party. They're only getting in the way.

Your stated political views are rather moderate, but your rhetoric here definitely shows a bias against the right.
You can deny that, but it's rather obvious to perceptive people who've read your posts.

 

[Mac1958]

Your stated political views are rather moderate, but your rhetoric here definitely shows a bias against the right.
You can deny that, but it's rather obvious to perceptive people who've read your posts.

My bias is specifically against the sociological/cultural phenomenon that is Trumpism. And I've said, a thousand times, that it's not about Trump.

Before that, my crusade was against the Left's PC/Identity Politics bullshit. You could utilize the search engine here, enter "Regressive Left" and my name, and you'll see.

I have no use for either fucked up party, and more than anything else I'm anti-ideology.

I've said all of that, many times.

 

[Mac1958]

Aside from the no starter of a new political party, I’m not sure how you propose to “change the system.”

Get the money out of politics and hamstring the politicians:

1. Short, strict term limits
2. Publicly-funded elections
3. Bipartisan redistricting commissions
4. Ranked choice voting
5. Non-partisan primaries

Make those changes, or most of them, and you change motivations, incentives and behaviors damn near overnight.

 

[Orangecat]

My bias is specifically against the sociological/cultural phenomenon that is Trumpism. And I've said, a thousand times, that it's not about Trump.

Okay.

The Q drips out of the GQP frequently.

 

[Mac1958]

Okay.

Exactly.

 

[TNHarley]

Awesome. Keep feeding this guys narcissism.

 

[Orangecat]

Exactly.

You're not fooling anyone.