b_m_b_m_b_m

I mean that's the point, to get people out of those industries, but also why the gnd, for example, is framed as a jobs program (that will get us off of fossil fuels) but these voters are not a monolith and will need support in the transition. That said Being in a union is one of the largest factors in predicting support for something like a green New deal

Absolute best case is Dems pick up enough to get to 54 votes. Minus the three already saying no, that gives room for one more to go against the rules change after which it's a dead issue. Do you think a new senator from GA, or IA, or even CO is going to come out and make it so next time they're in the minority they're useless, given that the "moderate" wing has already staked out their position?

It's all optics, actual Nazis have figured this out, it's why every fuckwad in Charlottesville was wearing khakis and a polo shirt.

They didn't dance around their answer, they were unequivocal, and just got elected. If anything they will harden their stance as they get closer to their own reelection

Can't wait for Obama 2012-2014 redux. No climate bill (of any kind), no voting rights bill, and certainly no increase in support for those on Obamacare exchanges let alone M4A. Every democratic candidate for president just got neutered on policy, even Joe or Pete or Amy. There is no significant bill that will get through the Senate, and I'd be shocked if they can so much as fill their cabinet or confirm a judge. Mitch will do what Chuck will not do: grind the Senate to a halt to undermine new administration

Good riddance Also

https://www.oas.org/en/media_center/press_release.asp?sCodigo=S-019/19 OAS report for those who haven't read it And the report from cepr http://cepr.net/publications/reports/bolivia-elections-2019-11

Ok so you've read both reports got it

If they didn't win the election outright you might be on to something

There are zero circumstances where having the military intervene would be acceptable. Once they do that, it's all over. And you keep repeating fraud fraud fraud without any critical thought or reading contrary reports

It's not just a matter of trusting them, but why give them uncritical deference given the history of American intervention in South America, and the closeness of the OAS secretary general with Washington. The report from the OAS was flawed, not the election official results, as outlined by the Report I linked to through tweets of the author from the center for economic and policy research

Before 2012 the national assembly directly appointed members of the supreme Court. This system is not perfect but far superior to their previous system (and I'd argue better than ours)

Why?

And if you look at the text of the document that their decision was based on, the American convention of human rights, seems pretty straightforward https://www.cidh.oas.org/basicos/english/basic3.american convention.htm

And Morales committed to a second referendum, even though it was not necessary as he won by the ten point margin, and opinion polls before the election largely matched the official vote count (including the instant vote count that was halted then restarted, even though it is not a legally binding count) Saying there were election irregularities is perpetuating the right wing/military talking point with little basis in fact

This only holds it you believe that the independently, nonpartisan, elected supreme tribunal of Justice is not truly independent

But the OAS report!!!!

Maybe we should take all the trade unionist jobs from extractive industries and give them new ones fixing these dams

Yeah I bet we get right back to democracy here

This is fun, too.

So anyway, read this before you did knee deep into the OAS story And let's not forget, this would not have happened without the EXPLICIT support of the US government

I only posted greenwald because I don't speak Spanish and he's the only source I could find

I'm ripping this stuff straight from the discord and there's nothing you can do to stop me