Jump to content

US Politics : And the Finer Art of Grumbling


GAROVORKIN

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, Triskele said:

@Shryke - There was a quote that Klein highlighted in that piece:

That's kind of an astounding fact if true.  I was thinking that maybe Brazil was the counter-example, but admittedly I was mostly just thinking that race seemed to matter less there than other multicultural places, and I could be dead-ass wrong about that.

If this quote is true it's quite a challenge to the Obama coalition.  

It's less a challenge for the Obama coalition as it is a challenge for, like, America.

The problem is not building a coalition who's backbone is minority voters and then winning. Obama did that, it's clearly a thing that can be done.

The problem is the reaction to that. It's not coincidental that the nazis in Charlottesville were chanting "We will not be replaced". Or that Tucker Carlson and Mark Steyn are on TV discussing how as a majority of children in a region of Arizona become Hispanic "the border has moved north" (ie - it's no longer America anymore once it's not majority white). Or that the GOP talks constantly about how the US is a christian nation. Or that the first black president is followed into office by a guy most famous politically for being unrelentingly racist against him.

I'm not saying whether that observation about multi-ethnic democracies is accurate or not. But the point being made there is that the issue with a multi-ethnic democracy is the majority race/ethnicity/religion/etc reacting in more and more extreme ways to their perceived loss of preeminence. And how that reaction is ultimately destructive to democratic norms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Triskele said:

So a possible (and if you ask me, hopeful) corollary to that is the 90's California experiment where the right going as hardcore nativist right as possible resulted in getting absolutely overwhelmed by the left in the coming years.  It seems like that is a possibility now, but who knows.

It feels to me like the same thing that happened with Obama there. Like, it's possible but in a democratic system, given how voters react, it's an incredibly unstable solution because you can always lose at some point. And then you get Trump.

Unless you can solve the radicalization, you are just constantly waiting for the other shoe to drop. And that shoe is getting worse the. whole time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Shryke said:

The system allows them to represent the Republican party, which is a big reason they have steadily begun to take over the Republican party. It's why Ryan, the Speaker of the fucking House, can't get shit done on a basic level. And it's not like leadership isn't complicit here. Let's not forget they backed actual pedophile Roy Moore. Or the guy who assaulted a reporter.

I wouldn't immediately assume they represent the party but it's absolutely fully possible, as it already has been in the past, that they will be allowed to do so by being supported and tolerated by the party.

But its not really guys like these who have driven the Republican party crazy right.  It is people like the tea party and primarying seats that are already Republican that has had the big impact.  A guy running in a seat the Republicans will not win, because nobody could be bothered to run for the Republicans, is not shifting the dial right or representative.  Someone running in a primary for a seat where they replace a moderate certainly is.  If you want to criticise those who have got in - go for it.  The idiots that represent the Freedom Caucus and its ilk certainly deserve it, and clearly are representative of the party.  

On the state representative, obviously he did get in, and I have no idea of the circumstances behind that.  But he's one representative out of probably 1000's across the USA.  

Now, if the party comes out and supports them, or at least tolerates them, then sure, sink the boots in.  At that point, its not an outlier but is representative of the party.  But when the official state party machine is declaring the candidate a racist Nazi that they don't want near the ballot or the party, then acting like the guy is representative is pretty disingenuous.  

2 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Surely there is some legitimacy to the notion that a movement / ideology / political group / organisation can be somewhat judged on the extremists it attracts. I guess some people might argue that the Left nutcases the democratic party attracts are as odious and dangerous to social norms and freedoms as an anti-Semetic Nazi, and I'd be very interested to see someone make that argument.

I don't think that first statement is fair at all when you have a two party system.  If there are only two parties, then by nature the extremists have to choose one of them if they want any chance to influence anything.  Given the USA is also a country which was partly created by groups going off and starting their own extremist groupings, the idea that you might have enough extremists in one place to get a state legislator up is hardly surprising.  

On the left, you've had people in these threads quite happy to incarcerate people for what they say, and other extreme notions.  The left has had its share of dictators and failures of government across the world. I don't think either party wants to be measured by what the extreme elements in their party say.  

3 hours ago, dmc515 said:

Yeah I tried to provide context in both cases.

Yep, I should have made clear I didn't mean everyone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shryke said:

It's less a challenge for the Obama coalition as it is a challenge for, like, America.

The problem is not building a coalition who's backbone is minority voters and then winning. Obama did that, it's clearly a thing that can be done.

The problem is the reaction to that. It's not coincidental that the nazis in Charlottesville were chanting "We will not be replaced". Or that Tucker Carlson and Mark Steyn are on TV discussing how as a majority of children in a region of Arizona become Hispanic "the border has moved north" (ie - it's no longer America anymore once it's not majority white). Or that the GOP talks constantly about how the US is a christian nation. Or that the first black president is followed into office by a guy most famous politically for being unrelentingly racist against him.

I'm not saying whether that observation about multi-ethnic democracies is accurate or not. But the point being made there is that the issue with a multi-ethnic democracy is the majority race/ethnicity/religion/etc reacting in more and more extreme ways to their perceived loss of preeminence. And how that reaction is ultimately destructive to democratic norms.

Um, not to nitpick.  But that isn't a perceived loss of preeminence.  It is a real loss.  I'm not saying that 100% it's a zero-sum game, but they are certainly losing power and position due to this.  I think most would say that's a secondary effect to our primary goal of making things fairer, but it is an effect.  One we don't really talk about much on the left.

To be clear, I think taking them down and making it fair is totally right.  Stopping them being able to stomp over minorities and make people second class citizens is all good in my book. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Triskele said:

@Shryke - There was a quote that Klein highlighted in that piece:

That's kind of an astounding fact if true.  I was thinking that maybe Brazil was the counter-example, but admittedly I was mostly just thinking that race seemed to matter less there than other multicultural places, and I could be dead-ass wrong about that.

If this quote is true it's quite a challenge to the Obama coalition.  

I don't think that's actually true. Switzerland and Belgium come to mind. Also, France, Germany and Italy are examples where a single national and cultural identity was successfully forged out of many different local identities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ants said:

When making posts like these, it really should be pointed out that they are about individual loons, not the republican party as a whole.  The top one the Republican party had actually sued to keep the guy off the ballot last time, and has no options this time.  They said publicly that they don't want a nazi representing them.  

The question surely is: why is a Nazi able to represent them? Is he a member of the Republican party? If so, why can they not expel him? Has the Republican party taken any steps to try to prevent his candidacy?

If they're not trying to stop him, they're tolerating him, and that is a legitimate criticism of the Illinois Republican party as a whole.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Shryke said:

Everything to Trump is a TV show with ratings. That's literally all he cares about on a consistent basis.

He runs the country like a TV program too. Notice how the WH likes to release news on Fridays, as if to leave the country on a cliffhanger over the weekend. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ants said:

Um, not to nitpick.  But that isn't a perceived loss of preeminence.  It is a real loss.  I'm not saying that 100% it's a zero-sum game, but they are certainly losing power and position due to this.  I think most would say that's a secondary effect to our primary goal of making things fairer, but it is an effect.  One we don't really talk about much on the left.

To be clear, I think taking them down and making it fair is totally right.  Stopping them being able to stomp over minorities and make people second class citizens is all good in my book. 

What? Man, the left talks constantly about privilege and what this is all about.

And it's not a zero-sum game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ants said:

When making posts like these, it really should be pointed out that they are about individual loons, not the republican party as a whole.  The top one the Republican party had actually sued to keep the guy off the ballot last time, and has no options this time.  They said publicly that they don't want a nazi representing them.  On the bottom one, it is a single state republican making the call.

I know most here dislike (hate) the Republican party, but posting articles without any context about minor officials idiocy is not healthy for debate.  We certainly wouldn't (and don't) like it when obscure one-off democrats get brought up as if they represent the entire democratic party.  

I disagree. The overwhelming majority of self-identified Republicans agree with Trump wholeheartedly, and happily voted for him. An overwhelming majority of them who could vote attempted to elect a child molester in Alabama.

What we see now is what the Republican party stands for. To disagree with them (which I hope that everyone does) is to not identify with them. There's a difference between idealising what they should stand for rather than what in reality they do stand for.

Republicans at the moment are chanting that non-whites suck, they are marching with swastikas and allowing it to happen. They are watching as the leader of their party says that those chanting are "good people, many of them, good people." That's utterly despicable.

If you're not compliant in this then you're not a Republican.

Absolutely, you should hope that the party returns to being something moral, humane and worthwhile. Alternatively, who gives a shit what name you give them? Make a new party, or don't identify with one, or join another that you prefer that's closer to what you stand for.

Edited to add: And this is a blunt message, from someone looking into the country, who doesn't live there. But the rest of the world is seriously scared for America and for ourselves. You should see and hear how people talk about America when you don't live there: we specifically bear a complete revulsion of the Republican party. We were already annoyed when one of them invented an excuse to invade Iraq and secure American oil interests. Looking at America now is like watching a beloved relative go senile and start chanting racism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ants said:

But its not really guys like these who have driven the Republican party crazy right.  It is people like the tea party and primarying seats that are already Republican that has had the big impact.  A guy running in a seat the Republicans will not win, because nobody could be bothered to run for the Republicans, is not shifting the dial right or representative.  Someone running in a primary for a seat where they replace a moderate certainly is.  If you want to criticise those who have got in - go for it.  The idiots that represent the Freedom Caucus and its ilk certainly deserve it, and clearly are representative of the party.  

On the state representative, obviously he did get in, and I have no idea of the circumstances behind that.  But he's one representative out of probably 1000's across the USA.  

Now, if the party comes out and supports them, or at least tolerates them, then sure, sink the boots in.  At that point, its not an outlier but is representative of the party.  But when the official state party machine is declaring the candidate a racist Nazi that they don't want near the ballot or the party, then acting like the guy is representative is pretty disingenuous.  

I don't think that first statement is fair at all when you have a two party system.  If there are only two parties, then by nature the extremists have to choose one of them if they want any chance to influence anything.  Given the USA is also a country which was partly created by groups going off and starting their own extremist groupings, the idea that you might have enough extremists in one place to get a state legislator up is hardly surprising.  

On the left, you've had people in these threads quite happy to incarcerate people for what they say, and other extreme notions.  The left has had its share of dictators and failures of government across the world. I don't think either party wants to be measured by what the extreme elements in their party say.  

Yep, I should have made clear I didn't mean everyone. 

There's actually a socialist party council member on the Seattle city council. Local right-wring talk show hosts love to play clips of some of her crazier statements and use that to demonstrate how awfully left-wing Seattle is and how crazily left the local Democrats have gone.

However, when you look at the entire country, there is a ton more crazy on the right in the U.S. right now. And of course it will be consolidated on state-level elected officials because those seats are easier to get. 

To see how crazy the ring-wing in America you need only look at some of the crazy monsters the right has put up for fucking U.S. Senator positions. Not to mention the current President, and of course Sarah Palin for VP.

There was the "legitimate rape" guy, Moore, among other extremists put up. I just think the Democratic voting base that votes in primaries is a ton more responsible than the Republican voting base at this moment in time.

Have the left put a lot of pedophiles up for federal-left office? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/6/2018 at 9:40 PM, ants said:

 

When making posts like these, it really should be pointed out that they are about individual loons, not the republican party as a whole.  The top one the Republican party had actually sued to keep the guy off the ballot last time, and has no options this time.  They said publicly that they don't want a nazi representing them.  On the bottom one, it is a single state republican making the call.

I know most here dislike (hate) the Republican party, but posting articles without any context about minor officials idiocy is not healthy for debate.  We certainly wouldn't (and don't) like it when obscure one-off democrats get brought up as if they represent the entire democratic party.  

I dissent. The entire Republican Party deserves to catch hell. The whole party and the conservative movement that backs it is rotten to the core. And one ought not to mince words in pointing out. In fact, at least a few self described conservatives seem to admit as much.

Sure maybe most Republicans are not Nazis. But, the fact that clowns like this guy and people like Moore are within the party, pretty much says it all about the Republican Party. They attract clowns like this precisely because for too long they have been willing to do the old wink wink nudge nudge with white resentment crowd. They attract clowns like this just like a pile of shit attracts flies. And the Republican Party is a pile of shit, and there is no good reason to beat around the bush about this matter.

This country will not get righted until the Republican Party get badly mauled, repeatedly. I don't know if it will or when. But, I do know the Republican Party will not change until its politicians fear the wrath of voters more than they do the Limbaughs and Hannities and the GOP donor class.

Getting wishy washy right about now, ain't the way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

There's actually a socialist party council member on the Seattle city council. Local right-wring talk show hosts love to play clips of some of her crazier statements and use that to demonstrate how awfully left-wing Seattle is and how crazily left the local Democrats have gone.

I'm sure the "both sides" crowd will just eat this shit up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 

Democratic candidate Mike Revis on Tuesday flipped what had been a deep-red State House seat in Missouri by a 108-vote margin over his Republican opponent.

Revis defeated GOP candidate David C. Linton in the special election to replace Rep. John McCaherty, who left the office to focus on his run for Jefferson County executive.

 

Democrat Flips Deep-Red House Seat in Missouri
Democratic pick Mike Revis turns a heavily GOP state legislative district blue.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/democrat-flips-deep-red-house-seat-in-missouri?ref=home

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Martell Spy said:

To see how crazy the ring-wing in America you need only look at some of the crazy monsters the right has put up for fucking U.S. Senator positions. Not to mention the current President, and of course Sarah Palin for VP.

Not to mention the folks who have been voted in.  Santorum, Bachman, fortunately they are both out now but they were horrible. Let's not forget Ron Paul, who among other things, his supporters wreaked havoc in the Nevada 2015 caucuses, now his son is the Kentucky Senator.  Plus we have McConnell, the one who refused to bring up a Supreme Court nominee and was rewarded for it and his sidekick Ryan who never met a poor person he couldn't hate.    

As for the Nazi guy in Illinois, he is running unopposed in a safe Dem seat.  He'd been denied running before because his paperwork wasn't right so he was very careful to be correct this time and he's on the ballot.  But why not, in Arizona Sherriff Joe Arapio, whose Presidential Pardon was cheered by the rubes is running for a senate seat.

The Illinois R party made a bit of fuss over their Nazi on the ballot, boo fucking hoo, it should be no surprise to them, it's not to me.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Nasty LongRider said:

Not to mention the folks who have been voted in.  Santorum, Bachman, fortunately they are both out now but they were horrible. Let's not forget Ron Paul, who among other things, his supporters wreaked havoc in the Nevada 2015 caucuses, now his son is the Kentucky Senator.  Plus we have McConnell, the one who refused to bring up a Supreme Court nominee and was rewarded for it and his sidekick Ryan who never met a poor person he couldn't hate.    

As for the Nazi guy in Illinois, he is running unopposed in a safe Dem seat.  He'd been denied running before because his paperwork wasn't right so he was very careful to be correct this time and he's on the ballot.  But why not, in Arizona Sherriff Joe Arapio, whose Presidential Pardon was cheered by the rubes is running for a senate seat.

The Illinois R party made a bit of fuss over their Nazi on the ballot, boo fucking hoo, it should be no surprise to them, it's not to me.  

You also have the Freedom Caucus in the House, of which there is no Democratic party equivalent. To understand how nutty these guys are, you have to understand their immigration beliefs. Their current position is that Donald Trump's plan, which attacks legal immigration, is not far right enough!

Quote

 

One persistent critique of Republicans holds that they are hypervigilant about protecting the powerful, yet blind or unresponsive to injustices suffered by most Americans. At times, the critique is unfair; but it does describe the GOP’s posture toward Donald Trump versus most everyone else who deals with the FBI or U.S. intelligence.

President Trump gets the benefit of hyper-vigilance

 

The Populist Right's Elitist Approach to Surveillance Abuses
If only the Republican Party were as attentive to the violations of the rights of ordinary Americans as it is to the FBI's treatment of Donald Trump

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/the-populist-rights-elitist-approach-to-surveillance-abuses/552611/
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

You also have the Freedom Caucus in the House, of which there is no Democratic party equivalent.

Yup, the ones who are already there and are wreaking havoc and clearing the path for such quality candidates like Moore, Arapio and Nazi guy.  As mentioned above, crazy R's primaring less crazy R's has done a lot to bring us here.  But as the current R MoC's have shown, they will be more than happy to go along to get along with a hateful wanna be authoritarian with out showing any qualms at all.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

The overwhelming majority, I would argue, don't know what he stands for. Or rather, they've become convinced that the Democrats stand for something worse. Most are uneducated, and have been having poison poured into their ears by Fox news for decades. Remember, Republican judges blocked the Muslim ban, Republicans in Congress voted to save O-Care, and one of them donated to the Doug Jones campaign. And Robert Muller, another Republican, is currently the Great Liberal Hope until November.

I disagree with almost everything that the GOP stands for right now, but you are mischaracterizing them by implying that they were collectively in favor of the Unite the Right rally. As I recall the condemnation by almost everyone but the President was pretty universal. And remember too, the goal of the Russain meddling was not just to elect Donald Trump, but to divide our country. And we're finding out now that they've been at it for years, promoting stories that were meant to incite tensions and lending popular credence to inflammatory conspiracy theories.

Painting half of our country with a broad brush is playing right into what Putin wants.

You're missing the dick for the trees, guy. At some point silence becomes complicity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ants said:

 

When making posts like these, it really should be pointed out that they are about individual loons, not the republican party as a whole.  The top one the Republican party had actually sued to keep the guy off the ballot last time, and has no options this time.  They said publicly that they don't want a nazi representing them.  On the bottom one, it is a single state republican making the call.

I know most here dislike (hate) the Republican party, but posting articles without any context about minor officials idiocy is not healthy for debate.  We certainly wouldn't (and don't) like it when obscure one-off democrats get brought up as if they represent the entire democratic party.  

While I agree with you on the Illinois Nazi, I feel compelled to point out that even though it might just be one state representative calling for that solution in Pennsylvania right now, it is entirely logical for Democrats to be extremely concerned about that kind of proposal gaining traction, given that North Carolina just recently went through a very similar scenario, where the outgoing governor signed legislation severely curtailing the powers of his incoming Democratic successor.

The Republican-dominated state legislature passed several measures dramatically overhauling the governor's power in an unexpected special session just weeks before McCrory leaves office. Democrats argued that the moves amounted to a power grab aimed at undermining Cooper even before he takes office.

At least 18 people were arrested during protests against the Republican maneuvers Friday at the state capitol in Raleigh.

The bill McCrory signed will limit the governor's power to make appointments to certain state boards including the Board of Elections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, WinterFox said:

War with NK is not popular.

War with Iraq was not popular. Until it was. And then it was very popular. 

Dubya was trying everything, like throwing spaghetti against the fridge to see what sticks. Human rights violations. Saddam was behind 9-11. They tried to assassinate my dad. Etc. Finally WMD’s stuck. Then all the other stuff that hadn’t suddenly mattered. Because of course, no one wants war just as an idea. Wait, Goering says it better: 

“Of course the people don’t want war. But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, dmc515 said:

Yeah it's been around academic circles - mostly among IR scholars - for quite awhile now.

Good to know, thank you.

This and the discussions about the devolution of the Republican Party make me think of an old friend of my parents, a professor at the JFK School that grew close to my dad. He would, I suppose, have qualified as a member of the "deep state." He'd spent his career in government posts, most active in the 60s and 70s (he was one of Elliot Richardson's deputies who resigned alongside him on the Saturday Night Massacre). His work after that was mostly in international relations, especially refugee assistance programs, and then academics.

I reconnected with him a few years ago, after my mother died, and we'd get together every once in a while to talk politics (and career guidance). I hadn't seen him since the election, and then I got news that he'd died last March. He was one of the last honorable Republicans I knew... And he had switched his party affiliation to Democrat in 2016.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...