US Politics: Out in the Cold

[DMC]

I don't like Krugman as a political advocate.  He has no idea what he's talking about in that regard.

[OldGimletEye]

Perhaps he should stay in his lane and just stick to economic analysis.

That said, in my opinion, there is a whole slew of characters, like Dimon, Bloomberg, and Schultz, that try to play the "reasonable centrist" angle,  and I think get believed, but often are just flat wrong on many of their proposals. And somebody with a fairly large public platform needs to point that out.

Its like a couple years back when Carly Fiorina said, "everyone agrees the deficit is the biggest issue" and I'm sure a lot of "reasonable centrist" would have stroked their chin and said, "oh yes I agree". But, you know, that was just garbage on Fiorina's part and a lot of smart people who know this stuff better than she does, wouldn't agree.

[DMC]

4 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

That said, in my opinion, there is a whole slew of characters, like Dimon, Bloomberg, and Schultz, that try to play the "reasonable centrist" angle,  and I think get believed, but often are just flat wrong on many of their proposals. And somebody with a fairly large public platform needs to point that out.

Certainly.  And I think that will be part of the Dem primary.  Schultz has almost already forced the candidates' hands with his amped-up book tour.

7 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Its like a couple years back when Carly Fiorina said, "everyone agrees the deficit is the biggest issue" and I'm sure a lot of "reasonable centrist" would have stroked their chin and said, "oh yes I agree". But, you know, that was just garbage on Fiorina's part and a lot of smart people who know this stuff better than she does, wouldn't agree.

If the Democrats aren't screaming economic inequality from today until November whatever 2020 they're out of their minds.  Love how Schultz said the debt is the most dangerous issue of our time.  Disregarding foreign affairs, which, fine, is nice to disregard - the inequality gap is plainly the economic issue of our time.  STFU about debt and either grow out of the nineties or join Cobain.  Too much?  Yeah, sorry, get carried away sometimes.

[OldGimletEye]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

If the Democrats aren't screaming economic inequality from today until November whatever 2020 they're out of their minds.  Love how Schultz said the debt is the most dangerous issue of our time.  Disregarding foreign affairs, which, fine, is nice to disregard - the inequality gap is plainly the economic issue of our time.  STFU about debt and either grow out of the nineties or join Cobain.  Too much?  Yeah, sorry, get carried away sometimes.

The thing about Shultz is he can't even get basic corporate tax policy right. If he cares about the deficit, but wants to keep the corporate rate lower than what it was, he should say something like, "raise the top rate to about 25% and expand the tax base".

But, I think a lot of people will just assume we knows what he is talking about because you know he was very good at selling coffee at 20 bucks a pop.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

But, I think a lot of people will just assume we knows what he is talking about because you know he was very good at selling coffee at 20 bucks a pop.

I very much look forward to the genius of the Howard Schultz economic plan.  I'm sure it will be replete with policies that are unassailable by any skeptic worth his salt.

[OldGimletEye]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

I very much look forward to the genius of the Howard Schultz economic plan.  I'm sure it will be replete with policies that are unassailable by any skeptic worth his salt.

He'll close the trade deficit by selling China lots and lots of coffee.

[Fez]

12 hours ago, Rippounet said:

snip

Thanks for the additional info on this. My main objection to the withdrawal is the symbolism of it all, the breaking down of yet another longstanding element of the world security system (and also, if it's truly a treaty, then the President doing it without Congressional approval). Maybe Russia was violating the spirit of it (at least), but if this a long-running issue, then I don't see what withdrawal now does, beyond ratcheting up tensions.

[Mexal]

2 minutes ago, Fez said:

Thanks for the additional info on this. My main objection to the withdrawal is the symbolism of it all, the breaking down of yet another longstanding element of the world security system (and also, if it's truly a treaty, then the President doing it without Congressional approval). Maybe Russia was violating the spirit of it (at least), but if this a long-running issue, then I don't see what withdrawal now does, beyond ratcheting up tensions.

NATO released a statement fully supporting the withdrawal. 

[Fez]

38 minutes ago, Mexal said:

NATO released a statement fully supporting the withdrawal. 

Considering the repeated news that Trump keeps considering pulling the US out of NATO, it would make sense for them not to antagonize him over something they have no power over.

I'm not saying that's the case, maybe this really is the right move, but I give Trump no benefit of the doubt and I take everything others say about him with a grain of salt as well.

[Guest]

Booker formally declares candidacy. Primary is heating up. 

[A True Kaniggit]

9 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

Booker formally declares candidacy. Primary is heating up. 

And only 1 year and 2 days away from the Iowa Caucus. Damn he left it to a later date.

[OldGimletEye]

14 hours ago, Lollygag said:

The R's went hard right (genocide-lite!) and now the D's look to hopefully go hard left. People in the middle do exist and now they've no place to go. What could be expected? The extremes are allowed their extremist candidates (they really are), but moderates/centrists/independents are supposed to sit in the corner and shut up? Neither wants moderates/centrists/independents/swing voters, whatever. Base only. Message is crystal clear. 

Why do I often get the feeling that certain sorts of people do:

[Hard Left + Hard Right] / 2 = Reasonable Centrist Position

[Tywin et al.]

10 hours ago, Lollygag said:

There was no big push for a third party which perfectly reflected fiscally conservative

Fiscal conservatism is a buzz word, not an actual thing, or at least it hasn’t been for over four decades. During that time span conservatives have not demonstrated anything remotely resembling fiscal responsibility.

[Martell Spy]

15 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Why do I often get the feeling that certain sorts of people do:

[Hard Left + Hard Right] / 2 = Reasonable Centrist Position

Sounds like Jeb Bush and just because the Republicans don't want him does not make Jeb or a Jeb clone a centrist. 

[Larry of the Lawn]

5 hours ago, DMC said:

.

If the Democrats aren't screaming economic inequality from today until November whatever 2020 they're out of their minds.  .

Seriously.  This should be repeated ad infinitum, and we've seen that voters will turn a blind eye to every other type of injustice.  But mention money and everyone gets on board.

[OldGimletEye]

15 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Fiscal conservatism is a buzz word, not an actual thing, or at least it hasn’t been for over four decades. During that time span conservatives have not demonstrated anything remotely resembling fiscal responsibility.

If people like Sgt Schultz can't tell us in about two sentences how he'd make the corporate tax bill revenue neutral, he needs to be horsed laughed right out the room, when he starts up about about fiscal responsibility.

[The guy from the Vale]

1 hour ago, OldGimletEye said:

[Moderate Right + Hard Right] / 2 = Reasonable Centrist Position

FTFY.

[OldGimletEye]

2 minutes ago, The guy from the Vale said:

FTFY.

LOL. 

Thanks.

[Tywin et al.]

55 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

If people like Sgt Schultz can't tell us in about two sentences how he'd make the corporate tax bill revenue neutral, he needs to be horsed laughed right out the room, when he starts up about about fiscal responsibility.

The thing is nobody that’s actually running for higher office is being honest about the realities of our collective situation. We have to raise taxes on everybody above the poverty line, including large hikes for the middle class, and we have to dramatically reduce spending until we reach the point where we are consistently running surpluses. A little debt is not only okay but necessary, but we cannot sustain our current trends, and I’ll be damned if my generation has to pay off the credit card debts of old folks who were not being responsible and mortgaged our futures so they could live high on the hog.

[horangi]

7 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

Perhaps he should stay in his lane and just stick to economic analysis.

That said, in my opinion, there is a whole slew of characters, like Dimon, Bloomberg, and Schultz, that try to play the "reasonable centrist" angle,  and I think get believed, but often are just flat wrong on many of their proposals. And somebody with a fairly large public platform needs to point that out.

Its like a couple years back when Carly Fiorina said, "everyone agrees the deficit is the biggest issue" and I'm sure a lot of "reasonable centrist" would have stroked their chin and said, "oh yes I agree". But, you know, that was just garbage on Fiorina's part and a lot of smart people who know this stuff better than she does, wouldn't agree.

I do wonder why we seem to be using the term 'centrist' as a disparagement these days and if we aren't allowing the Right to dictate normality much like 'Liberal' became a bad word and term for the 'extreme left'.  I've always considered myself a centrist which to me equates to belief in liberal democracy, a mixed economy, and pragmatic, technocratic policy solutions with otherwise little concern for ideology (whereas a leftist would be more akin to an old school Clause IV UK Labor Party member)  It seems 'centrist' is now being used to mean both-sidisms or trying to avoid annoying anyone, ever.  The reasonable centrist position isn't the halfway point between a bronze age Old Testament dictate and a evidence based, tested policy- its ya know, the one based on 'reason'.

I've seen a number of folks label themselves as 'lefties' whose positions are just to the left of the center demarcation but just because factions of the Republican Party have decided to tack to the right of Attila the Hun doesn't make their 'lefty' positions radical.  Shouldn't we be trying to own and hold the center rather than suggest its the realm of appeasement and status-quo plutocrats? (or maybe I should say throwback gilded age plutocratic wannabees)

That said, I'd add my name to the list of folks who really couldn't see themselves captured well in the '5 corners' of Democratic Voters that Nate Silver posted.  But apparently a platform of simply non-ideological, technocratic governance isnt as sexy to others as it is to me =).