Posts by Rob Stowell
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Speaker: Data Love or: How I learnt to…, in reply to Grant McDougall,
she may still be arrested over the Libyan embassy fiasco
On some other planet.
In the end, leading (since dumped!) GOP congressional republicans described the committee they set up to ‘investigate’ the State Depts role in ‘Benghazi’ as just a smear campaign.
The ‘email scandal’ is just as trumped up. Republicans have been smearing Hilary since forever, in anticipation of running against her one day (and in a continuation of their relentless attacks on Bill.)
(Edited: McCarthy was running for the speaker's job - the top job in congress- when he made the comments - just checked and he was not on the committee) -
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to Alfie,
Just to say: I really appreciate keeping this thread open. We must not forget. And it's not over.
-
Hard News: Helen Kelly's letter, in reply to Sacha,
I think the comments indicate the mass of public opinion has shifted on cannabis. Love to know what Curia are coming up with. It would be almightily amusing if JK, losing the flag referendum, decided his 'legacy' would be cannabis law reform!
-
Speaker: Data Love or: How I learnt to…, in reply to Fen Tex,
the Republicans are going to confirm Obama’s Supreme Court nominee
That's a bold prediction! You should put a bet on it :) https://www.predictit.org/Contract/2091/Will-the-Senate-confirm-any-SCOTUS-nominee-before-Obama-leaves-office#data
-
The energy that’s behind Sanders right now needs to be channelled into more regional and local battles.
Sanders is unlikely to win the nomination (it's a long-shot, but watch Michigan today, and on the 15th, Ohio - if he does well in both, and wins one - he's back in the game.)
But I think you're dead wrong in saying he's failed to address the current road-block from the GOP controlled house and senate.
He says it all the time: electing him is not going to change anything. It takes a massive and long-term movement of people getting behind progressive ideas at every level.
He's also been far more upfront condemning GOP efforts to halt the demographic tide: the gerrymandering of congressional districts, and the many fraudulent attempts to 'reduce voter fraud' (there is no significant voter fraud) by requiring voters to carry specific ID.
(I also think you're optimistic about Trump having no chance at all. Hilary could hit hurdles - she's not immediately 'likeable'. Trump has a certain (horrible) charisma. While he's throwing his own obnoxious ideas around, he's relatively unburdened by the standard GOP obnoxious ideas.
So far he's advocated very little policy - making it fairly easy for him to 'pivot the centre' on a lot of issues in a general election. He's likely to push major infrastructure work in the US (like Sanders); an aversion to foreign wars (like Sanders) and a strong push for tariffs and against free trade - all potentially popular. He would probably perform disastrously - and win or lose, it's unlikely the GOP will ever be quite the same again, post Trump - but sadly, it does seem possible he might beat Hilary.) -
Polity: Key Derangement Syndrome…, in reply to Sacha,
But they also do a better job of digesting, framing and feeding the media than the left.
Yes- and while some of that is definitely down to JK (the best ‘communicator’ in politics at least since Lange) the polling and comms should also get some credit. But it’s also worth noting: it’s not so hard to look good when your chief opponent keeps shooting themselves in the jiǎoyāzi .
(rant edited for brevity: Labour supporter on downward spiral of disappointment sighs lengthily) -
Polity: Key Derangement Syndrome…, in reply to Rob Salmond,
Labour has also taken a strong stand in favour of melanoma patients currently dying while the government dithers.
Which sounds great (and I’m supportive) but it could be re-phrased as taking a strong stance on paying outrageous sums to drug companies for the life of their (soon to be extended) monopolies on IP.
While we have the current model where corporates fund research in return for monopolies, we’re going to see a lot more (potentially great new, but also quite possibly over-hyped, re-packaged with a minor variation to extend the patent) drugs come on the market – at rates most people will never afford.
It’s a flawed model, and the TPP will entrench it and make it significantly worse. Some ideas around how medical research could be publicly funded in NZ and worldwide might be worth exploring. Or in the short-term, giving PHARMAC a stronger hand in negotiating?
Ragging on Pharmac is a short-term dead-end.
ETA: snap Mr Observationz :) -
Hard News: The flagging referendum, in reply to Chris Waugh,
fiddling with superficialities but doing nothing substantial.
You have NO future in marketing :)
-
Sorry. An impulsive post that apparently I shouldn’t have :( Not completely pointless but a fool stop.
-
Oops. (Not announced yet)