Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Martell Spy

U.S. Politics: Hey! Teachers! Leave Them Kids Alone

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Shryke said:

Which southern states?

In 1976?  Literally all of them.

1992:  Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Tennessee

1996:  Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Tennessee

This is really easy to look up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, DMBouazizi said:

In 1976?  Literally all of them.

1992:  Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Tennessee

1996:  Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Tennessee

This is really easy to look up.

Sorry, let me be more clear:

How does any of this contradict anything I said?

Share this post


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

Sorry, let me be more clear:

How does any of this contradict anything I said?

You said:

8 hours ago, Shryke said:

The truth is basically that Nixon used the culture war to stomp the american left's face in and the democratic party was left out in the wilderness for decades, with their only way to succeed being (or seeming to be at least, but I think it's pretty accurate) tacking towards the centre ala Clinton, who actually won. As voting demographics are shifting you are seeing new strategies being employed but that is a distinct change from what they were doing and what seemed to be the only thing working in the 1970s-2000s.

And then:

7 hours ago, Shryke said:

I don't see how it paints anyone as victims. It's just taking a real look at how the public was voting throughout that era. White supremacy carried the GOP to a cultural dominance that is still at work today.

The fact is the Dems continued to win states in which they should be "stomped" by the apparent white supremacy that ruled the day in each of the aforementioned elections as demonstrated by their victories in most of those states.  In fact, the only reason Carter won in 1976 was southern strategy, which flies in the face of a statement like "the truth is basically that Nixon used the culture war to stomp the american left's face in and the democratic party was left out in the wilderness for decades."  Because no, they weren't, they won the most white supremacist/"culture war" states possible immediately after his resignation.  Like I said, your depiction was fine as a generality, but also inarguably inexact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Catching up on some news...

Unless I'm missing anything Maxine Waters took things up a notch in a way that is pretty shocking.  I cannot stand Trump and think it's quite alright if a restaurant gives Sanders the boot.  But it seems like Waters is calling for something much more than that which is for any supporters to shame and try to give the boot to any Trump person full stop for appearing in public anywhere they're seen, not just for an owner to ask someone to leave.  That coming from a member of Congress seems orders of magnitude bigger than one restaurant owner making the decision on their own.  I cannot imagine any way in which it does not benefit Trump.  

I've seen several pieces lately on calls for civility versus letting you incivility flag fly, and think it's hard to say what's up from one instance to the next (like the distinction between the two issues above).  Without any comment on what's "right" or not I think there's also the tactical to consider if you want Trump out, and this feels like a mistake.  Without having dared to look into it yet I'd guess that this is up there for the most adrenaline-inducing thing in rightwing media in some time but also and perhaps more importantly is going to look very extreme to a lot of low information voters.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Triskjavikson said:

Catching up on some news...

Unless I'm missing anything Maxine Waters took things up a notch in a way that is pretty shocking.  I cannot stand Trump and think it's quite alright if a restaurant gives Sanders the boot.  But it seems like Waters is calling for something much more than that which is for any supporters to shame and try to give the boot to any Trump person full stop for appearing in public anywhere they're seen, not just for an owner to ask someone to leave.  That coming from a member of Congress seems orders of magnitude bigger than one restaurant owner making the decision on their own.  I cannot imagine any way in which it does not benefit Trump.  

I've seen several pieces lately on calls for civility versus letting you incivility flag fly, and think it's hard to say what's up from one instance to the next (like the distinction between the two issues above).  Without any comment on what's "right" or not I think there's also the tactical to consider if you want Trump out, and this feels like a mistake.  Without having dared to look into it yet I'd guess that this is up there for the most adrenaline-inducing thing in rightwing media in some time but also and perhaps more importantly is going to look very extreme to a lot of low information voters.

 

 

Maybe. But then you got Pelosi counter arguing with beautiful American dream or some shit, wait-- here:

"In the crucial months ahead, we must strive to make America beautiful again. Trump’s daily lack of civility has provoked responses that are predictable but unacceptable. As we go forward, we must conduct elections in a way that achieves unity from sea to shining sea."

Like, are you fucking kidding me? Thus the fainting goat bares its throat.

---

If as you say getting tactical, of the two stances proposed yeah, Maxine's might not win. Pelosi's, though... would definitely lose.

 

Share this post


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

If as you say getting tactical, of the two stances proposed yeah, Maxine's might not win. Pelosi's, though... would definitely lose.

 

Maxine's has the benefit of being on the right side of things too. I don't disagree that it's an escalation, what I find amazing is that it takes this much for a single Dem to stand up and escalate like this and immediately you have her colleagues...doing what Pelosi does. That's the outrage, not that one of them wants to clench the fists in fighting what is going on.

But hey, both are better than what my left wing party is doing on the issue of asylum seekers where calling them complicit would be implying they only let it happen rather than actively making it worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, JEORDHl said:

 

Maybe. But then you got Pelosi counter arguing with beautiful American dream or some shit, wait-- here:

"In the crucial months ahead, we must strive to make America beautiful again. Trump’s daily lack of civility has provoked responses that are predictable but unacceptable. As we go forward, we must conduct elections in a way that achieves unity from sea to shining sea."

Like, are you fucking kidding me? Thus the fainting goat bares its throat.

---

If as you say getting tactical, of the two stances proposed yeah, Maxine's might not win. Pelosi's, though... would definitely lose.

 

The hour fast approaches when the likes of Pelosi will be left behind. Either by a left that will actually defend itself, or by the right after they're done consolidating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Triskjavikson said:

Unless I'm missing anything Maxine Waters took things up a notch in a way that is pretty shocking.  I cannot stand Trump and think it's quite alright if a restaurant gives Sanders the boot.  But it seems like Waters is calling for something much more than that which is for any supporters to shame and try to give the boot to any Trump person full stop for appearing in public anywhere they're seen, not just for an owner to ask someone to leave.  That coming from a member of Congress seems orders of magnitude bigger than one restaurant owner making the decision on their own.  I cannot imagine any way in which it does not benefit Trump. 

Maxine Waters is perhaps the last machine politician left in Congress (not that I'm judging, machine politics seemed to elicit better results than our current state).  Considering her position I suppose her statements carry more weight, sure, but look up her history and you'll see that "shocking" is kind of her deal.  Thing is, oftentimes she's absolutely right.

1 hour ago, Triskjavikson said:

Without any comment on what's "right" or not I think there's also the tactical to consider if you want Trump out, and this feels like a mistake.  Without having dared to look into it yet I'd guess that this is up there for the most adrenaline-inducing thing in rightwing media in some time but also and perhaps more importantly is going to look very extreme to a lot of low information voters.

This the The Big Question, isn't it?  How to react and such.  I think anti-Trump-ism should be reiterated and reinforced when it comes to the midterms.  That's how responsibility attribution works - the Dems don't "need a message," they're running as a referendum against this douchebag.  As for 2020?  That's a more difficult question.  You certainly need a positive message to win in that regard.  Not sure what that is yet, but there's still plenty of time.

1 hour ago, JEORDHl said:

If as you say getting tactical, of the two stances proposed yeah, Maxine's might not win. Pelosi's, though... would definitely lose.

Pelosi's statement was I'm staying out of this shit.  I don't think it affects much of anything, which was the aim.  There are plenty of Dems trying to poach GOP seats in Congress, and if she said something that'd be run on every fucking ad until November.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Shryke said:

It's pretty indicative of a trend over time I'd say.

The truth is basically that Nixon used the culture war to stomp the american left's face in and the democratic party was left out in the wilderness for decades, with their only way to succeed being (or seeming to be at least, but I think it's pretty accurate) tacking towards the centre ala Clinton, who actually won. As voting demographics are shifting you are seeing new strategies being employed but that is a distinct change from what they were doing and what seemed to be the only thing working in the 1970s-2000s.

During the 1970-2010 period, the Democratic party controlled the Congress for 28 years out of 40 (usually with sizable majorities),  the Senate for 22 years out of 40, and majority of governorships for 28 years out of 40. That's hardly "being in the wilderness for decades". Also, the 1970's congressional Democrats were, on average, much more left-wing than the present-day ones.

A mistake a lot of Democrats keep making is assuming that the US politics is just about the presidential elections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Triskjavikson said:

Unless I'm missing anything Maxine Waters took things up a notch in a way that is pretty shocking.  I cannot stand Trump and think it's quite alright if a restaurant gives Sanders the boot.  But it seems like Waters is calling for something much more than that which is for any supporters to shame and try to give the boot to any Trump person full stop for appearing in public anywhere they're seen, not just for an owner to ask someone to leave.

Is there anyone in the Trump Cabinet who doesn't deserve to be shamed wherever they go?

https://twitter.com/NeinQuarterly/status/1011435459191496704

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gorn said:

Also, the 1970's congressional Democrats were, on average, much more left-wing than the present-day ones.

Nah, that's a bunch of bullshit.  A lot of 70s Dems were still racist as fuck southerners.  Even those that weren't, saying they were "on average" more liberal than today?  Yeah you're full of shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DMBouazizi said:

Nah, that's a bunch of bullshit.  A lot of 70s Dems were still racist as fuck southerners.  Even those that weren't, saying they were "on average" more liberal than today?  Yeah you're full of shit.

1. Throughout the 70's, the Democratic congress proposed multiple single-payer health insurance proposals, all of which were turned down by Republican presidents (and Carter). Until very recently, this was considered to be an extreme, far-left stance in the democratic party.

2. Some of the major legislation they passed: Equal Right Amendment, War Powers Resolution, Federal Election Campaign Act, Ethics in Government Act, Humphrey–Hawkins Full Employment Act... Most of those would never pass today, even with Democratic majority.

3. In the post-Vietnam decade, Democrats were much less hawkish and more protective of civil liberties than today. Today, drone assassinations and Guantanamo are taboo topics in politics which didn't get touched even during recent full Democratic control of government. Also, you could never get something like PATRIOT Act or the Iraq War Resolution be accepted by the majority of US politicians in the 70's.

ETA: Also, Democrats used to be far more supportive of unions than today.

Edited by Gorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@kal if the whole moralities values thing is right and republicans don’t care about hypocrisy as a value how come the right wingers on my Facebook are outraged and vocal by “liberal hypocrites” with the Sarah sanders thing, (almost as much as the human beings on my Facebook were outraged by family separations)?

 

i think it’s actually a manifestation of their perceived loss of privilege, but they’re just using the hypocrite word as cover

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump's travel ban has been upheld by a 5-4 decision of the SCOTUS.

It's well within the authority of the POTUS.

eta: this was version 3 of his travel ban, and one he attacked the Justice Department for, saying it was watered down.

Trump idiots drafted the first two versions, the pros drafted version 3, adding North Korea and Venezuela.

It also means the USA will not accept any refugees from Syria. That must leave a bitter taste in the mouths of many people, good enough to bomb to hell, not good enough to accept as immigrants.

 

Edited by Casablanca Birdie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Checks and balances [rolls eyes]

---

And maybe, DMC. But if that's the case Maxine gave them ample fodder for counter messaging anyway. What she [Pelosi] has done however is talk down to everyone within her base that is offended by the actions of the Trump administration. I follow a lot of people I don't like on Twitter, just to keep tabs on the BS, but of those I follow because I agree and/or admire them, their response to Pelosi's comments is pretty much uniform condemnation. 

Edited by JEORDHl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Casablanca Birdie said:

Trump's travel ban has been upheld by a 5-4 decision of the SCOTUS.

It's well within the authority of the POTUS.

Not really a surprise. A conservative court would rule that it’s within the president’s rights while a liberal one would cite that the motivation violates the law. I think the funny part about the ban is that it was supposed to be a 90 day ban to do a security check and nothing in that time, nor the following year, showed there was a credible threat of danger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The significance of McConnell's decision to block Obama's authority to appoint a Supreme Court justice in the 4th year of his presidency gets more and more ominous.

Another big decision was also announced. California passed a law saying that pregnancy clinics run by religious groups had to advise women who went there that California runs free or low-cost clinics where women can get assistance as well, assistance like abortions. The SCOTUS ruled this was a violation of religious freedom and struck down the California law.

Those clinics run by religious groups don't allow abortion, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, lokisnow said:

@kal if the whole moralities values thing is right and republicans don’t care about hypocrisy as a value how come the right wingers on my Facebook are outraged and vocal by “liberal hypocrites” with the Sarah sanders thing, (almost as much as the human beings on my Facebook were outraged by family separations)?

 

i think it’s actually a manifestation of their perceived loss of privilege, but they’re just using the hypocrite word as cover

Conservative projection. Just like Trump, and as Goebbels recommended, accuse the other of that which you are guilty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking as someone born in the last years of a dictatorship, you Americans are already several steps in one.

Ferdinand Marcos' greatest trick was convincing people all protesters were communist animals, so when they went missing, few cared. Even after bodies were discovered.

These white people & journalists talking about being civil? These were the rich people, the Fil-Chinese, the mestizos in the Philippines who knew they won't be affected by many of Marcos' policies, and therefore could ignore them even as the killings started.

Marcos was also adept at convincing regular Filipinos that "as long as you don't commit crimes I won't come for you. I'm only getting rid of the 'filth'." He lied, of course. He jailed his most vocal opponents, people whose businesses he wanted to confiscate for his use.

But Filipinos have always been susceptible to strongman personality cults, just like your Republicans.

(Yeah don't @ me on this one, Repubs still singing Reagan's praises despite the fact he was FRIENDS with Marcos and helped him retain power, making it 1000x worse for us.)

White people, journalists who insist on civility- you seem to think civility is a common ground you share with opponents like Trump et al. Here's a clue - whenever you offer these assholes middle ground, they will invade that space & then claim you never gave them ground at all.

Marcos kept pushing. First it was all protesters were communists. All student protesters. Then it was the free press. Then it was the people with businesses he coveted. And then it was anyone who looked at Imelda Marcos or his daughter, Imee, wrong. Arrested, raped, murdered.

And every step of the way there were the same kind of fuckwits here twittering on about how people should be civil, SURELY Marcos wouldn't go that far, the economy is flourishing surely it can't be THAT bad.

"It didn't happen to ME, so it must not be bad." up till Martial Law.

White people asking for performative civility do the same thing they did, for the same reason - they're afraid. You've never been raised to fear discrimination or prejudice against a system that has always been built in your favor for centuries.

Your argument for civility is a terrified lashing out against an uncertain future that your ancestors / fellow white people have subjected people of color to for centuries. It's built in POC culture to learn how to cope with this. You've had none, because you've never needed to.

Because regardless of whether you want it or not, status quo benefits white people best. In any upheaval, white people have the least casualties. That makes them the last demographic wanting to rock the boat, even if the boat is full of Nazis steering it straight into Auschwitz.

Because you know Auschwitz isn't going to be for you. It's gonna be Auschwitz for a lot of people in that same boat you're on, but you know that's not for you. And that's why you can afford to be compliant.

And here's the kicker: YOU KNOW THEY'RE NOT CIVIL. That's why it's the liberals you keep appealing to for decorum and politeness. You know you're not going to get most Trumpsters on board anything amounting to basic decency.

So you shift the goalposts, and you enable the gaslighting, even if inadvertently. "Maybe if YOU hadn't been so rude they wouldn't have done that."

Bullshit. You KNOW they'll do it anyway because again, your goddamn status quo.

People invested in putting kids in cages don't want your civility. They don't want you to extend them the same courtesy they never had - and never wanted - from you. What they want is for you to retreat.

And every ground you grudgingly give, hoping that they'll construe that as some good faith on your part, is only an incentive for them to push harder until you have no ground left.

Then they're going to tell you they've owned the land all along.

"So much for the tolerant left." This is why they say this all the fucking time. This is the bait they expect you to fall for. Your required "tolerance" for the things they do, even as they do the exact opposite to you.

The first requirement when approaching any discussion with civility is that both sides must come to the table with it. The side that advocates putting kids in cages and are now thinking of stripping citizenship from legal green card holders, never had that to begin with.

Now: if you are REALLY invested in still keeping civil after this, there are countless unaffiliated Red Hen places in the US (+one in Canada) being egged, getting death threats, etc.

Try discussing "civility" with those people this time, & see how well that works out for you. - Rin Chupeco

Edited by Bonnot OG

Share this post


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

×