U.S. Politics-Hope Floats 2: We All Float Down Here

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

32 minutes ago, Ser Reptitious said:

THIS is the part that comes across as tone-deaf, and I don't think your doubling down on it (or trying to downplay it) is helpful. Women constitute what, a shade over half of the U.S. population? Racial and gender minorities perhaps around 20-ish percent? The poor (depending on your definition) at least another 15 percent or so? That adds up to a significant majority of the U.S. population (by your own admission) being adversely affected by this event, on top of all the other horrible stuff they already had to put up with. So can you perhaps understand that a white man saying "it's not the end of the Republic" may come across as just a tad insensitive? 

I can understand how it would and should come off as tone-deaf and/or callus if the comment was made in a vacuum. As a Jew, I think your Germany analogy is completely apt. But the thing is it wasn't made in a vacuum. I was specifically responding to multiple people that were saying this is the end. I'm sick and tired of all the hyperbolic comments I see here and elsewhere that lament the latest action of the president as the end of the country. That's going to make people numb, and I fear people won't respond to calls when something occurs that actually could lead us down the path of ending democracy (i.e. national voter suppression). 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

27 minutes ago, DMC said:

I've met Schumer multiple times and I very much disagree.  Talk about lack of civility..

I think the comment I've heard that best describes him is that he's "an acquired taste." 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

5 minutes ago, JEORDHl said:

Kennedy had picked his clerks for next year? Imma do some digging, but anyone know if that's true?

Yes, it's been reported that he had hired his clerks for next years calendar, which is what made people surprised that he retired now. I believe he was slow in doing so though, which made people speculate that he would retire this year, but most assumed it would be next year due to the hires. 

https://abovethelaw.com/2017/12/supreme-court-clerk-hiring-watch-are-reports-of-justice-kennedys-retirement-greatly-exaggerated/

[Rippounet]

24 minutes ago, DMC said:

I agree it's obvious, but I don't think it should make you worry too much.  Pretty sure it's at least a decent chunk of McPoolThal's (2008) Polarized America.

21 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

American conservatives are often fed propaganda about unions being terrible for workers and believe it.There are often studies with conclusions that are obvious to liberals.

Thanks guys. I can't believe I genuinely forgot about the conservative propaganda machine there.

But then, that's what so efficient and terrible about it: you end up having to prove some fairly obvious points. And to the outsider it appears as if you have two equally valid socio-economic narratives, that "there is a debate," even when there isn't really.

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

31 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

 

And wonder how far along we are in this playbook. I do think you're a little complacent about "end of the Republic" because the Republicans are definitely consolidating power, and unlikely to surrender it again.

They are consolidating power, there is no doubt about that. And they're playing hardball while Democrats whine about how unfair all of this. Still, I don't think it's fair to call me complacent. Kal and I had like a month long conversation about how Trump could systematically undo the democracy. I just think you have to pick and choose your fights when it comes to declaring that we're on the road to ending democracy. Kennedy's retirement will ultimately lead to worse outcomes for many, many Americas, but it's not going to undo the Republic. The only way I can see that happening is if they gut basically all the laws on the books when regards to voting, followed by sweeping new legislation being rushed through the Congress and onto Trump's desk. It's not completely implausible, but I don't think that will happen. 

[Jace, Extat]

25 minutes ago, chiKanery et al. said:

I can understand how it would and should come off as tone-deaf and/or callus if the comment was made in a vacuum. As a Jew, I think your Germany analogy is completely apt. But the thing is it wasn't made in a vacuum. I was specifically responding to multiple people that were saying this is the end. I'm sick and tired of all the hyperbolic comments I see here and elsewhere that lament the latest action of the president as the end of the country. That's going to make people numb, and I fear people won't respond to calls when something occurs that actually could lead us down the path of ending democracy (i.e. national voter suppression). 

Here's the disconnect, broseph. And remember that I've not been attacking you.

We're already on the path. Folks who see that and have been screaming about it are not being hyperbolic, they're being tuned out by peeps who want to feel comfortable. The reason they're screaming is because when they were just civilly attempting discourse, circa 2012-2016, they were called hysterical and told to be less dramatic.

But the problem with being asked to treat Fascism with less 'drama' is that it legitimizes the Fascists. Which, GASP, is what happened. The Republican party is a full on authoritarian advocating entity. Full stop.

So once again, if you want to point out that the loss of a -rarely not a piece of shit- as I called him isn't THE END of democracy, that's cool. It's your insistence that THE END isn't in sight and getting closer every day that is causing such strong reaction.

[lokisnow]

39 minutes ago, chiKanery et al. said:

Yes, it's been reported that he had hired his clerks for next years calendar, which is what made people surprised that he retired now. I believe he was slow in doing so though, which made people speculate that he would retire this year, but most assumed it would be next year due to the hires. 

https://abovethelaw.com/2017/12/supreme-court-clerk-hiring-watch-are-reports-of-justice-kennedys-retirement-greatly-exaggerated/

It probably means McConnell persuaded him to retire now so that they can use the vacancy in the midterms. McConnell will probably schedule the actual confirmation vote the Friday after the midterms and will confirm in the lame duck no matter what. He knows he’s going to 100% confirm any nominee, but hes going to pretend otherwise and is going to dangle the vacancy in front of ignorant voters to get them out there voting in November.

 

[OldGimletEye]

Just now, DMC said:

 But it becomes a problem when you start telling people to let it go and the fight's over - especially while acting like you've figured something out these others don't realize.  You haven't.

I just wanted to add that I really dislike this idea of throwing in the towel.

One reason is I just dislike losing to sorry asses. And the Republican Party and conservatives are some of the biggest sorry asses around.

But another reason is given the stakes, things are too important to just give up. I don’t think it’s time for the left to go all Bill Paxton.

I don’t want to minimize the real fear many people have or the sorry state we find ourselves in. But, because shit has really hit the fan, so to speak, is the very reason the left can’t give up.

Certainly, the looming shift of the US Supreme Court is really bad. I’m old enough that I don’t think I will ever live to see a balanced court and certainly not one what leans to the left. And that is a bit depressing.

I don’t want to polly anna the situation but perhaps one positive thing that might result with a Supreme Court that will soon turn to the right is more people will come out and vote. I’ve always suspected that some people have, at times, been a bit complacent in voting because they saw the Supreme Court as reliable firewall. That will soon no longer exist.

The left will have to figure out some way to neutralize the Supreme Court. Perhaps, we should study how conservatives did it, as I’d argue they were able often to achieve many political victories with a court that arguably leaned liberal (if only somewhat) for decades.

And while I’m on this. Conservatives have waited for this moment for decades. Now I dislike conservative ideology and the Republican Party. But, it’s hard not to admire, to some extent, their persistence. Maybe the left should learn how to rip a few pages out of their playbook.

[lokisnow]

1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

Brand new study has me worried:

https://www.princeton.edu/news/2018/06/21/princeton-economists-find-unions-had-historical-role-helping-address-income

What has me worried is that this was always fairly obvious to me. I'm a bit surprised that there was a need for an official study to demonstrate that. Or that such a study was only done in 2018. It has me worried because since I write stuff too, perhaps there are other things I see as obvious... that aren't?

All elected democrats, particularly democrat leaders, since the late seventies always assume republicans are always already right about all things involving money and labor and the economy and that we must accept in totality all republican ideological fantasies about economic theory as hard irrefutable gospel fact. (Because once upon a time there were a couple years with double digit inflation the horror!)

That’s what neo liberal* economic theory is all about: accepting all the ideological fantasies of republicans as facts and then trying to coerce and gaslight democrat voters into believing the economic raping the voters experienced (and that the leaders committed) was consensual all along, and also good for us. Neo liberalism for the win!!!!

 

* auto correct changed neo liberalism to bro liberalism, which is amazingly apt.

[TheKitttenGuard]

1 hour ago, Martell Spy said:

Chuck Schumer Is Secretly Sabotaging the Next Democratic President

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/06/schumer-is-secretly-sabotaging-the-next-democratic-president.html

 

The current status quo is no 60 vote to allow closure for Judicial appointments. The writer is awful and putting out a lot of conjectures. 

Nothing in your quote was about putting back the 60 vote for closure for Judicial appointments.

Nothing in the article is about Schumer wanting to restore the 60 votes for closure for Judicial appointments.

Really, the writer does not know what the status quo is and putting out a lot of conjectures. This is a really bad article and the writer need lesson in governance and what the 60 vote was related to.

[Ser Reptitious]

1 hour ago, chiKanery et al. said:

I can understand how it would and should come off as tone-deaf and/or callus if the comment was made in a vacuum. As a Jew, I think your Germany analogy is completely apt. But the thing is it wasn't made in a vacuum. I was specifically responding to multiple people that were saying this is the end. I'm sick and tired of all the hyperbolic comments I see here and elsewhere that lament the latest action of the president as the end of the country. That's going to make people numb, and I fear people won't respond to calls when something occurs that actually could lead us down the path of ending democracy (i.e. national voter suppression). 

The problem with that approach is that you seem to think that there has to be one single significant act that everyone realizes symbolizes the end of democracy, unless it is stopped. More than likely that's not how things will go. Think of the saying "that's how democracy ends: not with a bang, but with a whimper." Not to belabour the Nazi analogy, but can you really point to one single moment throughout 1930s Germany that signalled 'THIS IS IT'? Any smart regime (just look at Putin and Erdogan as more recent examples) knows to chip away at the democratic institutions gradually, rather than in one fell swoop. The U.S. is/will be no different. 

We can all see where things are headed. But you seem to say "let's wait a bit longer before getting too alarmed", whereas others, who are either already directly affected (women, minorities, etc.), or who see the writing on the wall are ringing the alarm bell now, in (fading) hopes of stopping the trajectory before its too late. I don't think doing so is being hyperbolic. 

[mcbigski]

26 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

And while I’m on this. Conservatives have waited for this moment for decades. Now I dislike conservative ideology and the Republican Party. But, it’s hard not to admire, to some extent, their persistence. Maybe the left should learn how to rip a few pages out of their playbook.

Well when you look at how well the left had done dominating universities, charitable foundations, and government bureaucracy, remember your guys have had long term successes too.

[karaddin]

2 hours ago, DanteGabriel said:

Jesus, please stop with the attempted heretic-burning among liberals. I disagree with Tywin (or chiKanery, fucking World Cup) and think he's too complacent and Schumery myself, but there's no need to get this fucking nasty with him. 

I responded to a post that was essentially asking what he'd have to take back or feel bad about and attempted to explain it, albeit with anger and not a lot of detail because I thought it was obvious. SR did a much more civil attempt at this below and it didn't really get much further

1 hour ago, Ser Reptitious said:

Snip

You said what I was thinking but didn't articulate.

58 minutes ago, chiKanery et al. said:

 I'm sick and tired of all the hyperbolic comments I see here and elsewhere that lament the latest action of the president as the end of the country. That's going to make people numb, and I fear people won't respond to calls when something occurs that actually could lead us down the path of ending democracy (i.e. national voter suppression). 

The thing is that the people making these statements aren't being hyperbolic. We have arrived at this conclusion through looking at what is happening, and noting the stark similarities to the last big rise of fascism and authoritarian dictatorships, and concluding the problem is very dire.

It's not just people on a message board, academics who have spent their entire careers studying the rise of Hitler and Nazi Germany are saying it, journalists that have spent their careers reporting on dictatorships are saying it, people who have lived in past dictatorships (or emigrated out of them) are saying it. The Anne Frank foundation is saying it.

You are most certainly able to draw different conclusions about what is going on, I hope with all of my being that you are right and we are wrong. However dismissing these justified concerns as hyperbolic does nothing to reconcile the two sides on the left, acknowledging the fears and accepting them as reasonable but that you don't think they are correct would get a lot further with me at least.

The biggest problem with dismissing the concerns as hyperbolic is not the way it angers those being dismissed though, its that it contributes to normalising what is happening - if what is being done doesn't warrant significant alarm then, other people conclude subconsciously, that this is still all fine and normal and the overton window gets dragged further and further right. 

[karaddin]

3 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

Well when you look at how well the left had done dominating universities, charitable foundations, and government bureaucracy, remember your guys have had long term successes too.

That one a short term victory, the Republicans did a really effective job at undermining trust in academics/expertise in general, and then more recently convincing a significant chunk of the left that students being students constituted a significant threat to free speech. That 'asset' is only worth a fraction of what it was.

[Ser Reptitious]

10 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

Well when you look at how well the left had done dominating universities, charitable foundations, and government bureaucracy, remember your guys have had long term successes too.

Universities: I suppose if you deem the very notion of examining and questioning conventional wisdom (and then having to back up your views with evidence) as liberal, then sure. But then what would a proper conservative university look like? Everyone simply regurgitating perceived conventional conservative wisdom?

Charitable foundations: ??? Aren't a lot of charities based on religion? What exactly makes them liberal? Caring?

Government bureaucracy: again ??? What exactly makes them liberal overall, aside from the conservative assertion (courtesy of Reagan) that government is always the problem, never the solution, and the smaller it is, the better? Would you really consider the FBI, the CIA, the DoD, the DHS, ICE, etc. liberal? Even departments like the EPA can only be considered liberal if you feel that environmental protection in any form is incompatible with conservatism (oh, the irony when you consider the literal meaning of that word!). 

[Chaircat Meow]

36 minutes ago, Ser Reptitious said:

The problem with that approach is that you seem to think that there has to be one single significant act that everyone realizes symbolizes the end of democracy, unless it is stopped. More than likely that's not how things will go. Think of the saying "that's how democracy ends: not with a bang, but with a whimper." Not to belabour the Nazi analogy, but can you really point to one single moment throughout 1930s Germany that signalled 'THIS IS IT'? Any smart regime (just look at Putin and Erdogan as more recent examples) knows to chip away at the democratic institutions gradually, rather than in one fell swoop. The U.S. is/will be no different. 

We can all see where things are headed. But you seem to say "let's wait a bit longer before getting too alarmed", whereas others, who are either already directly affected (women, minorities, etc.), or who see the writing on the wall are ringing the alarm bell now, in (fading) hopes of stopping the trajectory before its too late. I don't think doing so is being hyperbolic. 

Yes, I can, despite the fact that my history is blurry; a consequence of my corroding brain. I seem to recall that there was this big fire at the Reichstag very soon after Hitler became chancellor, and that Hitler used it as a pretext to press the senile Hindenburg to suspend all civil liberties.

Following this all the communist delegates in the Reichstag were arrested, giving the Nazis the majority they had not been able to win in the elections. The Nazis used this majority to pass the enabling act, which accorded to Hitler the right to make law without the consent of the Reichstag for four years. Very soon after (July 1933) the Nazis were declared the only legal party in Germany and all other parties were encouraged to disband. Opposition leaders were at this time already being sent to concentration camps. 

So it took approximately six months for German democracy to be totally annihilated. It was swift and it was obvious.

 

 

[mcbigski]

32 minutes ago, Ser Reptitious said:

The problem with that approach is that you seem to think that there has to be one single significant act that everyone realizes symbolizes the end of democracy, unless it is stopped. More than likely that's not how things will go. Think of the saying "that's how democracy ends: not with a bang, but with a whimper." 

If the Original Trilogy has taught us anything it's that democracy dies to thunderous applause.  So that would be the sign. 

[TheKitttenGuard]

2 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

If the Original Trilogy has taught us anything it's that democracy dies to thunderous applause.  So that would be the sign. 

That is the Prequels not the Original Triology, you Philistine filth.

[DMC]

1 hour ago, Martell Spy said:

Chuck Schumer Is Secretly Sabotaging the Next Democratic President

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/06/schumer-is-secretly-sabotaging-the-next-democratic-president.html

Yeah as @TheKitttenGuard said, this is article is absolute bullshit.  I didn't read much of it but didn't need to - it betrays itself with the first sentence:

Quote

President Trump periodically registers his totally correct opinion that the legislative filibuster is a stupid relic that the Senate should abolish. 

Um, no, the opinion that the filibuster is a "stupid relic" is not "totally correct," but rather the maintenance of the legislature filibuster is the only reason Trump and the GOP didn't run roughshod through the country tenfold to what they already did.  I suspect there's a kernel of truth here in Schumer giving assurances he would maintain the filibuster - to ensure the GOP doesn't abolish it in the meantime.

1 hour ago, chiKanery et al. said:

I think the comment I've heard that best describes him is that he's "an acquired taste." 

Maybe for a non-New Yorker.

[Martell Spy]

Quote

 

At his rally last night, Trump took the next step, and declared not only that he is richer than his enemies, but that so, too, are his supporters:

“We got more money, we got more brains, we got better houses, apartments, we got nicer boats … we’re the elite.”

 

Trump Calls His Supporters ‘Elite,’ Doesn’t Understand How Populism Works

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/06/trump-calls-supporters-elite-doesnt-understand-populism.html

 

Looks like the pigs are walking on their hind legs, now.