US Politics: Follow the Money!

[Martell Spy]

And Now, For His Grand Finale, Paul Ryan Is Trying to Kick at Least a Million People Off of Food Stamps

https://slate.com/business/2018/05/paul-ryan-is-trying-to-kick-a-million-people-off-food-stamps.html

Quote

Chances are that the legislation will also prevent many perfectly eligible families from receiving food stamps simply by trapping them in red tape. Under the proposed bill, adults subject to work requirements will have to prove every single month that they either clocked their 20 hours on the job, were in training, or qualified for an exemption, such as for health. Today, states typically require a check-in just every six months, and for good reason: Low-income families tend to have erratic lives that make it hard to make those kinds of regular appointments. If a car breaks down, they don’t necessarily have the money to fix it. If a child gets sick, they can’t pay for a babysitter. They might work a number of different jobs, and have trouble getting their pay stubs together to prove they worked enough.

 

[Martell Spy]

Trump Has Now Broken Every One of His Economic Populist Promises

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/05/trump-broken-every-populist-campaign-promise-prescription-drugs-infrastructure.html

Quote

Donald Trump ran for president as an economic populist. This fact has been largely forgotten, buried by the flurry of bizarre and outrageous actions, and activists on both sides have had little reason to bring it up. Conservatives have pushed the administration to forget its unorthodox gestures and follow Paul Ryan’s lead. Progressives have emphasized the racist and sexist nature of Trump’s appeal. But Trump’s ability to distance himself from his party’s economic brand formed a decisive element of his appeal. Voters actually saw Trump as more moderatethan any Republican presidential candidate since 1972. And he has violated every one of his promises.

 

[Sour Billy Tipton]

12 hours ago, King Ned Stark said:

That statement is obscene, no matter your political leanings.  

 

12 hours ago, Sword of Doom said:

You know what is even more obscene? Telling a person with brain cancer who, along with their loved one, is pleading with you to help them keep their health insurance / coverage, to move out of state since you do not consider health insurance and the access to healthcare a human right. 


My political leanings are shaped by actual ethics, not money and greed, unlike McCain.


It's amazing how so many Americans are worried about playing nice and just chalk politics up to some thing that has no impact on peoples lives and can't actually kill people. 

 

Yeah, honestly this thread is too upsetting for me.  I don't see the point in congregating with a choir of angry pundits who preach about equality but practice hateful speech that segregates half of the country.

It's a beautiful day where I live, hopefully the sun is shining where you are as well.  I'm off to catch some of it, and then grab a filet mignon and shrimp cocktail!

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/05/trump-broken-every-populist-campaign-promise-prescription-drugs-infrastructure.html

Honestly, THIS should constitute almost the entirety of Democratic messaging among vulnerable red-state Senators and among House candidates looking to pick up seats in Trumpy areas.

Quit trying to appease Trump voters by voting to approve his nominees, and just play ads over and over of Trump making populist promises during the campaign, say that Joe Manchin or Claire McCaskill or whomever was excited about working with him to fulfill those promises, and try to use that as a wedge to depress support and turnout among Trump voters.

Most of them either don't pay attention to the ins-and-outs of the Mueller investigation, or ignore the facts because of tribalism - "you're attacking our guy, so fuck you I'm not going to listen". The others have their right-wing rag of choice running interference for Trump and aren't going to believe Mueller or the FBI or what the NYT tells them.

But they sure as fuck heard Trump make those promises. They came out to his rallies, and believed him when he said he was going to make scripts cheaper and invest in infrastructure and all that. All Democratic ideas that Trump co-opted that he dropped as soon as he got elected. It has the added bonus of putting Republican opponents on the defensive:  do they stand with Trump and his populist promises, or do they oppose Trump? 

[Zorral]

What happens when the Big Bad Boyz Club turns on each other:

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/gleason-schneiderman-cohen

The accusations still seem to be true, but it still seems a political hit from opp on the dumbster-lawyers side -- because they knew, just as the Schneiderman side knew for years about Weinstein, dumpster, etc.

Politics has always been and always been known to be nothing but a dirty game, played by some of the most filthy sorts around.  We sure are seeing it in high resolution, wide screen and technicolor these days!

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

I think it's that Clinton was unable to make a clear economic message that resonated with people.  There were many reasons for this: many of her policies were continuations of Obama policies, because she knew Democrats wouldn't control Congress and she didn't want to overpromise.  But probably most of all Republicans were able to hijack the narrative with distraction issues like guns and email security.  The WaPo interview shows that while Clinton had a very complex and well thought out economic platform, she failed to deliver the message of that platform to voters in a way that resonated.  All they heard about Clinton was corruption scandals and "more of the same" kinda policies.  It's no surprise that low information voters were turned off by that. 

Now, how anyone could believe that Trump is going to be championing the average American is a separate issue.  But many Americans approached the 2016 election with the mindset of "the economic status quo is unacceptable".  If that's your starting point, a Clinton vote is almost impossible.  Trump isn't much better, and thus I'm sure a lot of people were just dejected and either voted third party or stayed home.  But since many of those voters went for Obama last time, that alone is a win for Trump. 

To be fair to Clinton, she campaigned relentlessly on jobs and financial challenges.  It's just that her solutions, which were real plans that would really have been implemented, involved re-education into work that fit into the current labor scene -- and might even involve moving.  The people most affected were NOT having that.  They were having one thing and one thing only, WHAT USED TO BE, even when, like coal mining, it killed them and the corporate owners treated them like shyte.  Trump promised everything would go back to some utterly featureless, non-defined, detailess Make America Great Again.  Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.  So they bought it and it's really hard to feel sad for them.

[Maithanet]

2 minutes ago, Zorral said:

To be fair to Clinton, she campaigned relentlessly on jobs and financial challenges.  It's just that her solutions, which were real plans that would really have been implemented, involved re-education into work that fit into the current labor scene -- and might even involve moving.  The people most affected were NOT having that.  They were having one thing and one thing only, WHAT USED TO BE, even when, like coal mining, it killed them and the corporate owners treated them like shyte.  Trump promised everything would go back to some utterly featureless, non-defined, detailess Make America Great Again.  Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.  So they bought it and it's really hard to feel sad for them.

Right, she had a lot of modest, realistic economic proposals that failed to really inspire anybody.  Trump's quick fix solutions blaming immigration and trade agreements for everything wrong in America was what they wanted to hear.  For the most part white working class Americans chose to embrace a lie that the economy will magically improve for working class Americans than face a hard truth that a lot of industries are never coming back, and they need to adapt to (economically) survive. 

[Zorral]

5 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Right, she had a lot of modest, realistic economic proposals that failed to really inspire anybody.  Trump's quick fix solutions blaming immigration and trade agreements for everything wrong in America was what they wanted to hear.  For the most part white working class Americans chose to embrace a lie that the economy will magically improve for working class Americans than face a hard truth that a lot of industries are never coming back, and they need to adapt to (economically) survive. 

In the meantime deportations etc. are wrecking plenty of industries, as in the Chesapeake season for oysters and crab, California and Florida for fruits and vegetables (and it is getting hard to find decent fresh fruit and vegetables, and not just because of droughts, wildfires and floods), the chicken and egg industries and so on.  We are all going to be or already are paying a lot more for food.  Not to mention this summer's gas prices with the destruction of the Iran deal. These happen to be people who drive everywhere and, as the article quotes them saying, "We like our big trucks and big parking spaces."

Their real problem is that they only watch fake noose.  And believekool the kool-aid they're fed 24/7 for decades now.

[Zorral]

The opinion article in the Charlotte Observer (North Carolina) link is particularly interesting in showing the reasoning as why hosting the rethug potus nom con could be a very bad idea.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/05/does-anyone-want-to-host-the-2020-rnc.html

Yah, in keeping with the gerrymandered voting localities, it does look as though cities, unlike big empty spaces who still get representation to rival that of more populated areas, don't care that much for repubs and the dumbster.

[mormont]

2 hours ago, Maithanet said:

I think it's that Clinton was unable to make a clear economic message that resonated with people.

No. There's no evidence at all that this was it: that this statement is anything but wishful thinking. There's no way to craft an 'economic message' clear enough to overcome the issues that Trump exploited.

[DMC]

57 minutes ago, Zorral said:

To be fair to Clinton, she campaigned relentlessly on jobs and financial challenges.

Clinton didn't campaign relentlessly.  About anything.  That was the main problem.  Hard to get your message out there when you're not out there delivering it.

[Zorral]

2 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Clinton didn't campaign relentlessly.  About anything.  That was the main problem.  Hard to get your message out there when you're not out there delivering it.

If you say so.  Yet, somehow, I heard her campaign speeches constantly, talking about jobs, job training etc.  

What she didn't do, though, was go to those hinterland places.  Nobody's saying she and her advisors ran the best campaign that could have been run, are they? 

But she did work, and campaign, constantly.  You cannot say otherwise.

 

[Maithanet]

5 minutes ago, mormont said:

No. There's no evidence at all that this was it: that this statement is anything but wishful thinking. There's no way to craft an 'economic message' clear enough to overcome the issues that Trump exploited. 

I don't see how this could possibly be wishful thinking.  Clinton's economic message did not resonate with voters.  That isn't wishful at all. 

It's possible that Trump's mix of racial grievance and magical answers could not be defeated by good policy alone.  But that's a separate issue, and I think that Clinton's mix of sober reality and modest economic proposals was a terrible fit for 2016.  If that means promising more and failing to deliver, then so be it, politicians promise things they can't deliver all the time. 

[S John]

1 hour ago, Zorral said:

To be fair to Clinton, she campaigned relentlessly on jobs and financial challenges.  It's just that her solutions, which were real plans that would really have been implemented, involved re-education into work that fit into the current labor scene -- and might even involve moving.  The people most affected were NOT having that.  They were having one thing and one thing only, WHAT USED TO BE, even when, like coal mining, it killed them and the corporate owners treated them like shyte.  Trump promised everything would go back to some utterly featureless, non-defined, detailess Make America Great Again.  Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.  So they bought it and it's really hard to feel sad for them.

The coal mining example is hard for most people, including me, to wrap their head around.  The coal industry has raped and pillaged the state of West Virginia for over 100 years and what does the state have to show for it?  Fucking jack shit, that's what.  Dead last or nearly dead-last in just about every single negative category you can think of.  Education is terrible, infrastructure is terrible, there's a major drug problem, environmental degradation, etc, etc.  It's hard to understand how people keep floating the same old solutions and how it keeps working.  Part of it is that the situation is so desperate that any jobs are welcome with open arms.  And when your workforce isn't highly educated, coal and natural gas are the quickest path to meeting immediate needs.  

Most of my family still lives there, and most of them (but not all) voted for Trump.  There are zero coal miners in my family.  My great-great grandfather was killed in a mine explosion in 1912 and his son decided to open a saloon instead of making a living underground and nobody in my family has gone down there ever since.  But part of it is that my relatives remember what it was like in the 1940's-early 70's when a lot of the state was thriving economically and they were (and are) eager to believe anyone who promised a return those times.  That's what Trump was selling while Clinton was promising a more realistic (but less desirable locally) outcome, where the workforce retrains and basically ships out of some of these rural areas where there is literally no other work.  That's a sacrifice many people have made, but it also essentially destroys some of these communities and generations of heritage in the area.  It represents the end of a way of life.  I think most of us who are modern in our thinking and posses a university education generally don't balk at splitting from your family and moving all over the country in pursuit of the best possible career opportunity, but historically speaking, that is kind of weird and unusual.  

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, Zorral said:

But she did work, and campaign, constantly.  You cannot say otherwise.

Yes I can.  Here's a GIF of the two campaigns' stops from Sept 1.  Here's an article noting Trump out-campaigned her by 50% in the key battleground states during the stretch run.  And here's another one noting she basically took the week off before the first debate to prepare, which is probably the least economical way for a candidate to spend their time when they're debating Donald Trump.

Hillary famously didn't visit Wisconsin during the stretch run, but she got thoroughly out-campaigned overall.

[Maithanet]

8 minutes ago, S John said:

That's a sacrifice many people have made, but it also essentially destroys some of these communities and generations of heritage in the area.  It represents the end of a way of life.  I think most of us who are modern in our thinking and posses a university education generally don't balk at splitting from your family and moving all over the country in pursuit of the best possible career opportunity, but historically speaking, that is kind of weird and unusual.  

Particularly for people who are over 50, that is a really hard sell, because they know that learning a new trade and moving is really hard, and they don't have a lot of earning years left.  Really hard to expect people to embrace those kinds of answers. 

[Bonnot OG]

2 hours ago, Sour Billy Tipton said:

 

Yeah, honestly this thread is too upsetting for me.  I don't see the point in congregating with a choir of angry pundits who preach about equality but practice hateful speech that segregates half of the country.

It's a beautiful day where I live, hopefully the sun is shining where you are as well.  I'm off to catch some of it, and then grab a filet mignon and shrimp cocktail!

It's adorable you think preaching equality and tolerance means the people who preach it have to even be tolerant of a terrible person like McCain. 

It's amazing that you completely ignored the part of what I said, where that sack of shit McCain told someone who was dying (dead now) of brain cancer to move to another state when they pleaded with him to help support something that would help them keep their health insurance. He said move to another state because he doesn't think health care is a human right. 

But yea, it's so intolerant and hateful of me not to be crying tears of sadness because McCain is dying of something he didn't care if others died of and refused to help when they begged him to do something that would benift them. 

 

[Bonnot OG]

I see some people here are still pushing the bullshit narrative about Trump supporters voting the way they did out of ecnomic anxiety and that Clinton lost because of the working class, which they really mean the white working class since people of color are apart of the working class as well. 

The majority of Trump supporters had made a median household income from $50,000 - $100,000 and some $100,000+. 1/3rd of Trump supporters made $50,000 or less. 

Every Trump supporter is a bigot. Every. Single. One. 

They are either fully into the bigotry he spewed, or didn't care and helped perpetuate it anyway to benifit from Trump only to try and benefit from it financially.

Also, Clinton had a pretty clear economic plan, we just didn't hear about it as much as we heard about emails or Trumps big fucking mouth. 






 

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, Sword of Doom said:

I see some people here are still pushing the bullshit narrative about Trump supporters voting the way they did out of ecnomic anxiety and that Clinton lost because of the working class, which they really mean the white working class since people of color are apart of the working class as well. 

The majority of Trump supporters had made a median household income from $50,000 - $100,000 and some $100,000+. 1/3rd of Trump supporters made $50,000 or less. 

Every Trump supporter is a bigot. Every. Single. One. 

They are either fully into the bigotry he spewed, or didn't care and helped perpetuate it anyway to benifit from Trump only to try and benefit from it financially.

Also, Clinton had a pretty clear economic plan, we just didn't hear about it as much as we heard about emails or Trumps big fucking mouth. 






 

I think it's definitely possible to say that economic of the working class (including working class POC) played a role in Clinton's loss, but just not in the way it's typically framed.

Turnout among black voters declined 7 percentage points between 2012 and 2016.

Black turnout fell 2 points and Hispanic turnout tumbled by a whopping 34 points in Michigan, a state President Trump won by just over 10,000 votes after Clinton fell short of matching President Obama's vote totals in Detroit.

In Wisconsin, another state Trump barely won, fewer than half of black voters cast a ballot; four years ago, when Obama carried the state, 78 percent of blacks voted.

Turnout among black voters fell seven points in Florida, and turnout among Hispanic voters there, who make up critical voting blocs stretching from Miami-Dade County to Orlando, fell eight points. That ended a streak of four consecutive elections in which black and Hispanic voters showed up in increasing numbers. At the same time, white voters, who disproportionally backed Trump, turned out at a slightly higher rate in Florida than they had in 2012.

It's possible that an uninspiring, moderate and complicated economic message depressed turnout among the Democratic coalition.

[Gorn]

When discussing McCain, his ultra-hawkishness often gets ignored. Personally, I will always associate him with "Bomb, bomb, bomb / Bomb, bomb Iran". People don't realize what a major bullet-dodge for the world happened in 2008.