Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
LongRider

U.S Politics; The Price of Steele

Recommended Posts

The Clownpire Strikes Back.

And it seems some Democrats are getting in on the clownery.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/03/05/senate-banking-bill-would-boost-the-chances-of-more-bank-bailouts-cbo-report-says/

Quote

A bipartisan bill that's on the Senate floor this week would increase the odds of government funding going to bail out failed banks, according to a new report from the Congressional Budget Office.

The bill, which is scheduled for an initial Senate vote Tuesday and is expected to pass the chamber as soon as this week, would roll back some of the regulations Congress put in place after the 2008 financial crisis. A major feature of the bill is exempting about two dozen financial companies with assets between $50 billion and $250 billion from the highest levels of regulatory scrutiny from the Federal Reserve. If passed, it would be the most substantial weakening of the regulations put in place by the 2010 Dodd-Frank law that strengthened financial regulations.

The CBO report says those exemptions make it more likely a bank would collapse and lead federal officials to stabilize it with public funds. The CBO notes that this scenario is unlikely in any given year, but it says the bill makes it more probable.

 

Interesting piece from Jonah Shitbird.

Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. Somebody said that once.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/nationalism-americans-right-trump-russia-meddle-election-2016-2018/

Quote

These days, “nationalism” is all the rage on the right. I put it in quotes because there are a lot of different ideas of what nationalism means. Some of it is just rah-rah “U.S.A. No. 1” sloganeering. For others, nationalism is basically code for white-identity politics.

And for the so-called alt-right, it’s not even code.

“The ideal of a white ethno-state — and it is an ideal — is something that I think we should think about in the sense of what could come after America,” Richard Spencer, a leading alt-righter, has said.

I don’t have a problem with a bit of nationalism per se.
I do have a problem when it’s used to do something utterly stupid. Shitbird ought to know a thing or two about that. Cough, cough Iraq.
And of course when it is used to crap on other people.

Interesting:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/5/17070920/democrats-president-congress-priorities-health-care-immigration-guns-climate-change-poll-survey

Quote

Significant pluralities of American voters, and Democrats specifically, want the Democratic Party to prioritize health care if they retake the White House and Congress in 2021:

 

Quote

While some Republicans chose health care, as a whole, self-described Republicans were likelier to pick immigration (26 percent) and deficit reduction (19 percent) as important issues to address than they were health care (18 percent). 

Healthcare reform and deficit reduction are not two mutually exclusive propositions. And of course if conservative sorts of people are interested in deficit reduction, then they should have no problem with Democrats fixing the Republicans fucked up tax bill.

Though, I'd note it's interesting that conservative sorts of people seem to pick immigration issues over deficit reduction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Though, I'd note it's interesting that conservative sorts of people seem to pick immigration issues over deficit reduction.

I'm surprised to see them pick deficit reduction at all.  No wait, I forget, everyday the Fake News Clown Brigade tells them how awful the deficit is and it's all because of them immigrants sucking up the 'entitlements'.  Well, that and them brown folk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Nasty LongRider

Quote

Gen Who'er?   lol.  Saying we can't wait till the Boomers die so all of the votes cast will be the correct ones is plain silly.   Lot's of Boomers I know are liberal and lots of Gen X'ers aren't and the rest are like that too.  No one generation is politically consistent through and through.  If one wants the Demo's to get the most votes in the upcoming elections this round then get up off your ass and get active politically.   There is more work to do than just bitching on a forum.  

I obviously can’t speak for everyone, but almost all of the Millennials that I know are quite resentful of Boomers, and it has nothing to do with their political leanings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

@Nasty LongRider

I obviously can’t speak for everyone, but almost all of the Millennials that I know are quite resentful of Boomers, and it has nothing to do with their political leanings.

I agree with the first part but not the second. It's definitely about their politics from anything I've ever seen.

They are older and more likely to be conservative for one. And they are getting more so over time afaik. And they keep hanging around. Fuck, it's goddamn 2016 and both candidates are still fucking Boomers.

But mostly they are blamed for taking the post-war economic boom and pissing it all away on obsessions with tax cuts and deregulation. When you graduate into the Great Recession and your economic future is permanently fucked over to a real measurable degree all because older generations just really wanted to cut taxes and remove banking regulations put in place by their parents' generation and vote Republican because scary black people, you are a lot less inclined to think well of them.

They are all that wrong on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I have a growing number of millennial friends who are not only socialists, they are really closer to being communists.

Mind you, in Canada the saying is NDP (very left wing) when you are young, Liberal when middle-aged, Conservative as a senior. I seriously look side-eyed at any person who says they never supported the NDP in their youth. They lack a soul.

Edited by Fragile Bird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just saw this on NPR:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/03/05/590860018/fearful-of-fellow-legislator-colo-lawmakers-began-wearing-kevlar-at-state-capito?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20180305

From the article:

"I bought a bulletproof vest," Assistant Majority Leader Alec Garnett told the chamber on Friday, tearing up. "And I'm wearing it. It's right here."

He patted his chest.

"I'm wearing Kevlar," he said. "Because I fear for retaliation. I am in the chamber of the House of Representatives, and I'm wearing a bulletproof vest because I fear retaliation for telling the truth and standing up for victims of sexual harassment. I've been wearing it for three weeks."

Garnett, a Democrat, told The Denver Post that he was specifically worried about the potential for violence from Lebsock, who he said had threatened to "take [him] down.' "

He said he had stopped buttoning up his shirt or tying his tie before getting to work.

"Because once I get in here I have to put on my bulletproof vest, because my wife doesn't want to see me put it on," Garnett explained. "So I walk into my office. There's a sign that says 'Harassment Free.' And I put on my bulletproof vest. And I button up my shirt and I go into the members' bathroom and I tie my tie."

Rep. Matt Gray, also a Democrat, told the chamber he had started wearing one of the vests, too.

 

"I put mine on in the parking garage so my kids don't have to see and I don't have to explain to them what it is," he said.

The Post reports that Lebsock cried as he replied to hearing about the vests.

"Members," he said. "I am an honorably discharged Marine Corps veteran. And if someone walked in here — members, you would have had me here to protect you. Even the ones that don't like me. I'm just hoping you know that."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Using "everyone' never means every single person who posts, you know that! But without a doubt, the strongest sentiment in this thread for years now has been the Democrats won't retake Congress.

To Fragile Bird:

Sorry, I definitely have strong doubts about that. There are a few people on this thread that are always pessimistic about such things --and perhaps they tend to use stronger language to express their opinions -- but in my memory there have been just as many people who disagree with them. 

And since I am sure neither you nor I have the time to go back and count up all the posts that have been made about this issue "for years", we will just have to agree to disagree on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

I have a growing number of millennial friends who are not only socialists, they are really closer to being communists.

Mind you, in Canada the saying is NDP (very left wing) when you are young, Liberal when middle-aged, Conservative as a senior. I seriously look side-eyed at any person who says they never supported the NDP in their youth. They lack a soul.

Many of my friends either fall into this category, or they fall into the 'I don't need government for anything, stay out of my life' trap.  I feel like that second category of millennials are the ones most likely to go with the GOP at some point as they try to push their limited govt snake-oil while regulating important things like wombs and non-toxic plants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Shryke said:

I agree with the first part but not the second. It's definitely about their politics from anything I've ever seen.

They are older and more likely to be conservative for one. And they are getting more so over time afaik. And they keep hanging around. Fuck, it's goddamn 2016 and both candidates are still fucking Boomers.

But mostly they are blamed for taking the post-war economic boom and pissing it all away on obsessions with tax cuts and deregulation. When you graduate into the Great Recession and your economic future is permanently fucked over to a real measurable degree all because older generations just really wanted to cut taxes and remove banking regulations put in place by their parents' generation and vote Republican because scary black people, you are a lot less inclined to think well of them.

They are all that wrong on this.

You’re right to say that older people tend to be more conservative, and you’re also right to say they pushed for economic policies that led to deregulation and tax cuts, but liberals, Independents and apolitical people also own some of the blame. Boomers collectively were fiscally irresponsible. They ran up the debt and left the bill for younger generations to pay for while recognizing that we’d probably not get any of the benefits. I don’t see many of my peers giving liberal Boomers a break regardless if they are less to blame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

The Clownpire Strikes Back.

And it seems some Democrats are getting in on the clownery.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/03/05/senate-banking-bill-would-boost-the-chances-of-more-bank-bailouts-cbo-report-says/

[snip]

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/18/tim-kaine-were-planning-to-strengthen-wall-street-regulations.html

Quote

"Sen. (Bernie) Sanders and Sen. (Elizabeth) Warren have really important ideas that they've put on the table," Kaine said. "We've got to keep regulation on abusive practices and on Wall Street, so that Wall Street doesn't tank Main Street again. These are their ideas, but they're our ideas too: We put Dodd-Frank in place for a reason, and we want to strengthen it, not get rid of or weaken it."

18 months later....

Quote

Many progressive activists, led by the anti-corruption organization Rootstrikers, have taken to calling the Democratic co-sponsors the #bailoutcaucus. Nine of the twelve Democrats supporting the deregulatory measure count the financial industry as either their biggest or second-biggest donor, according to an analysis of Federal Election Commission data listed by The Center for Responsive Politics.

When questioned about this correlation, and whether it would aggravate concerns that the Democrats in support of this bill are being affected by industry money, a spokesperson for Senator Tim Kaine responded, “Campaign contributions do not influence Senator Kaine’s policy positions. He supports this bill because it provides relief for small community banks and credit unions in Virginia, helps prevent further harmful consolidation in the banking industry, and strengthens consumer protections for all Americans.”

hmmmm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

West Virginia teachers get their sought after 5% raise.  Good for them, ridiculous that it had to come to this. 

but there is always a fucking catch 

Quote

There will be no tax increase to offset the raise, and Blair said the government will see a $20 million reduction in spending to come out of cuts to general services and Medicaid.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

"Older people being more conservative" is a complex issue. It depends of course partly on how one defines "conservative."

At the moment the elderly in the USA are still predominantly members of the Silent Generation, those born before 1946. From the data I've been able to find, they still voted at a slightly higher percentage in 2016 than Baby Boomers did. And they are the most Republican generation, because they came of "political age" under Eisenhower.

Boomers are less Republican than the Silents, especially the first two thirds of the Boomers. Boomers are those born between 1946 and 1964. Boomers born before 1960 tend to have about the same % of Republicans and Democrats as the electorate as a whole, if anything slightly swinging toward the Democrats. Those born in the 1960s are more Republican, having come of political age under the late Carter and early Reagan years. 

Data on whether people become more "conservative" as they age is mixed and differs from country to country. In the United Kingdom, there does seem to be a trend for people to be more likely to vote for the Conservative Party as they age. 

In the USA, though, there is a lot of evidence that people are more likely to become more liberal on social issues as they age. The shift in support of same sex marriage, for example, was way too large and too swift to just be the result of older people dying off -- a great many older people changed their minds on that issue. Since statistics still show older people average out more "conservative" than the young on such issues, it masks the fact that as a group they have actually become more "liberal" over their lifetimes.

In Canada and the US, data which shows older generations being more "conservative" as they age deals with issues of security and authority. And as I understand it the shift toward conservatism on those issues is not primarily a matter of aging but rather a matter of becoming a parent. Many measures of "conservatism" include questions about whether one should always defer to those who are leaders or authorities -- and becoming a parent tends to make one think "people should defer to authority" sounds like a much better idea. Childless people don't seem to become more "conservative" on those issues as they age. 

"Millennials" are more "liberal" as a group on social issues, but in terms of party identification and identification with the word "Conservative", there is evidence that a higher percentage of them are on the right than earlier generations. As politics in the USA has become more polarized, that polarization has affected Millennials the most -- what has gone way down in that group compared to previous generations is the percentage who say they are "moderates." More of them actually say they are "conservative" than was the case for earlier groups. The paradox with that is the percentage who say they are "Independents" rather than Democrats or Republicans is way up -- but a lot of those young Independents seem to be identifying as "Conservatives" with a llibertarian bent.

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-millennials-politics-conservative-20160907-snap-story.html

Edited by Ormond

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I just watched a CNBC interview with Larry Kudlow, not a person I'm crazy about, but he is appalled at the idea of broad tariffs that hit allies. Canada buys 50% of our steel!!!!

But I was appalled at one of the traders in the interview, who said, "Look at the Art of the Deal, it hasn't changed in 30 years, you start negotiations with a punch in the face". :stillsick:

And a second trader who said, "You can't begin real NAFTA negotiations without cancelling NAFTA first!"  :stillsick:

Kudlow, to my surprise, gave a firm "no" to both ideas.

He also believes that if Trump later this week announces he's signed the cancellation notice, you'll see market chaos.

Edited by Fragile Bird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

North Korea.

Are we all going to have to eat crow and say "rocket man" talk worked?

I was commenting on this to my wife this morning (who is S. Korean) -- it takes a fuckup blowhard representing actual disaster to open talks between the Koreans. The S. Korean president ran on a more open approach, btw, and he's quite popular, sort of an Obama-like figure, in contrast to the corrupt Trump-like president before (Park).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

North Korea.

Are we all going to have to eat crow and say "rocket man" talk worked?

I would happily eat crow if North Korea actually becomes denuclearized.  But I very much doubt that is where this goes.  I think it's a lot more likely that NK is seeking to either:

A) buy time to continue to develop its missile and nuclear capabilities.  Note that NK has used negotiations and even agreements for this purpose in the past.  Or

B ) seeking to improve relations with SK in the hope that they can appear as a more "normal" actor and get some sanctions relief.  That would be more of a long term play, where they likely would adopt a less bellicose attitude towards both SK and the USA, but would never actually agree to disarmament.  In such a situation, NK would need to show that they are just another country with nuclear weapons, and there's no reason to single them out for eternal sanctions.  China and Russia aren't going to go along with sanctions forever if NK shows better behavior. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rocket Man is probably pretty close to putting a nuclear warhead on an ICBM and just needs to buy some time. I'm not willing to give Trump any credit, particularly since it isnt even clear the US will take him up on his offer. Even if they do, who knows what they want as the outcome (complete denuclearization is probably not gonna happen).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×