Jump to content
Fragile Bird

US Politics: Ready, Set, Announce! Bookering the Odds

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

Neoliberalism died in 2009. The Global Financial Crisis wrecked it in the same way the oil shocks wrecked Keynesianism in the 1970s. The difference is that, unlike the 1970s, there wasn't an alternative system waiting in the wings - so the world has reverted to the 1930s scenario whereby liberalism gets challenged from the populist Right.

 

I'm surprised to see you say this.  Are there not many neoliberal factions still in controls or vying for control in the EU?  And is not Howard Schultz in the US who is Neoliberal as fuck also additional evidence that it yet lives?  

Maybe it's about to fail though.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Martell Spy said:

Name the alternative then. 

There’s no better alternative I could see. Every country should be democratic to some degree in terms of electing their leaders. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Triskele said:

I'm surprised to see you say this.  Are there not many neoliberal factions still in controls or vying for control in the EU?  And is not Howard Schultz in the US who is Neoliberal as fuck also additional evidence that it yet lives?  

Maybe it's about to fail though.  

"Died" was perhaps the wrong word. I meant that its underpinnings have been pulled out from under it (Keynesianism didn't die in 1973 either, but it was similarly compromised/mortally wounded, before Reagan and Thatcher came along). Certainly, neoliberalism retains its true believers, but the invincibility is gone - the "consensus" is over, and anyone celebrating the all-powerful market is not going to be taken seriously among the general public any more. The post-2009 era has been about figuring out what comes next - hence the comparison to the other intellectual interregnums of the 1970s and 1930s.  

Share this post


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

Because one was a flaming idiot who had no idea what he was doing.

The other was just doing typical politician stuff. But, at least she understood policy and just wasn't randomly pulling stuff out of her ass with no basis in reality.

Typical politicians stuff has gotten us to the point where people were willing to seriously consider any alternative. Be grateful that we wound up with one who is not remaking the overall system -- this might not be the case next time around and it usually ends badly.

Share this post


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

Typical politicians stuff has gotten us to the point where people were willing to seriously consider any alternative. Be grateful that we wound up with one who is not remaking the overall system -- this might not be the case next time around and it usually ends badly.

You were all for Trump. Hard to see you say this now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to systems that are better, the obvious answer is parliamentary systems with built in multiparty support structures and no elected executive. They have significantly more checks and balances, require a majority coalition to function at all, allow more fluid parties and less direct democratic decisions while maintaining democratic accountability. 

Share this post


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

Well except promised to do a lot more than just build wall. He talked about healthcare reform, talked about making America Great Again, whatever, that meant,  and seemingly got some people to vote for him because of his awesome business man experience. You know the whole "run the country like business" shtick that some people always fall for. 

I'm not really buying what your selling here. Trump pretty much proved you can get elected by having a program that has no basis in reality or where you have no idea what you are doing.

Given this, I'm not sure why Democrats would feel the need to write about 50 white papers concerning their plans, to allay the fears of "centrist", who seemingly didn't ask a lot of penetrating questions when Trump ran for president. 

I said nothing about "50 white papers concerning their plans". Not at all. I asked them to come up with an actual plan and flesh them out leaving us with more than blind faith. Don't mischaracterize what I said. 

What he promised was tearing it all down and putting it back the way it was. He was selling this lost golden image of what was. Comparing completely rearranging healthcare, possibly eliminating privatized health care, and then moving to a free college education involves so much detail and entails so many moving parts (hence why it's not been done yet and no one can come up a real plan), that they're not comparable at all. 

https://michaelmoore.com/trumpwillwin/

If you want to actually win, you touch on as many different demographics as you can, not just the single lowest common denominator. It's leaving too much to chance. Which is why Ds need to up their game and not take lazy risks based on poorly thought out assumptions especially when the stakes are so high. 

I can't believe this is the case you're actually making as a strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Yeah, voters looked at Trump and thought he would handle things seriously and with deliberation. 

Yeah, my point is that if Ds actually want to win and also go left, they need to step it up. If beating Trump is so important, it's strategically idiotic to just go for the lowest common denominator. 

And if your main target is the Trump voter, then by all means try the Trump strategy with them.

It makes no sense to give up on the Trump voter and hope the Trump voter strategy will work on those who not only didn't vote for him, but hate him. Good idea. 

 

Share this post


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

Yeah, my point is that if Ds actually want to win and also go left, they need to step it up. If beating Trump is so important, it's strategically idiotic to just go for the lowest common denominator. 

Who says they are?

4 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

And if your main target is the Trump voter, then by all means try the Trump strategy with them.

Dems aren't any more inoculated. Sanders policy were horrible and still are. Obama ran on hope and change. 

4 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

It makes no sense to give up on the Trump voter and hope the Trump voter strategy will work on those who not only didn't vote for him, but hate him. Good idea. 

 

Can you point out the trump voters who will also be swayed with REALLY GOOD policy? Because otherwise your argument is more random bullshit. 

Share this post


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

Across state lines. It will be something wonderful. Yeah, a lot details in those. 

I'll make American Great Again. I'm sure lot of deep though went into that too.

You're intentionally bypassing my point that the Ds need to demonstrate some knowledge of what they're doing if you want to be sure to win against Trump.

Show me how you can be sure to win against Trump by appealing only to the lowest common denominator Trump voter which happens to the be voters Ds aren't even going for.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lollygag said:

You're intentionally bypassing my point that the Ds need to demonstrate some knowledge of what they're doing if you want to be sure to win against Trump.

There is no "be sure" against an incumbent. And the potus who have won against incumbent did not particularly appeal to policy wonkiness. Clinton certainly didn't. 

1 minute ago, Lollygag said:

Show me how you can be sure to win against Trump by appealing only to the lowest common denominator Trump voter which happens to the be voters Ds aren't even going for.

 

Since no one is arguing that, why should we? Show me how having great policy makes you sure to win. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

You're intentionally bypassing my point that the Ds need to demonstrate some knowledge of what they're doing if you want to be sure to win against Trump.

Show me how you can be sure to win against Trump by appealing only to the lowest common denominator Trump voter which happens to the be voters Ds aren't even going for.

 

And your intentionally avoiding my question, which is to wit:

Why do all these centrist demand this display of technocratic competence from Democrats, but could care less where Trump is concerned, or even the Republican Party?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

You were all for Trump. Hard to see you say this now.

I was not "all for Trump", I simply thought that there's a small chance of something good with him which is better than the non-existent one with the alternative. I've grown more pessimistic over the past couple of years -- not only did the small chance fail to pan out, but both the Democrats and the Republicans have become even worse than they were before (albeit in different ways).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

You're intentionally bypassing my point that the Ds need to demonstrate some knowledge of what they're doing if you want to be sure to win against Trump.

The Democratic Party last time it had power got things like Dodd Frank, the ACA, and other things done.

What in the hell has Trump and the Republican Party got done, except for its sorry ass tax cut?

Is there even a question of which party is more competent? Seriously?

How does one listen to Trump ramble on for 5 minutes and thinks this even close? Really?

This comes off more like some sorry ass conservative concern trolling, than it does from a serious person who might be a centrist.

Democrats sure in the hell have more knowledge about what they are doing, than Trump does. They aren't completely clueless about this stuff. The sorry state of American healthcare isn't exactly a secret, except among centrist. Nor is the threat of climate change.

Edited by OldGimletEye

Share this post


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

I was not "all for Trump", I simply thought that there's a small chance of something good with him which is better than the non-existent one with the alternative. I've grown more pessimistic over the past couple of years -- not only did the small chance fail to pan out, but both the Democrats and the Republicans have become even worse than they were before (albeit in different ways).

Dude, you've been pimping for Trump for years, we've all seen that and you own it. You really need to change your screen name if you want us to forget it. And the "good" that came from it was children in cages. And you own that as well. 

If you just voted for Trump, that would be fairly bad. But many of us have watched you spend many hundreds of hours supporting Trump on this board. I personally assume you wanted those children in cages, much like Miller. And hopefully you are an atheist, because if there is a Hell you are totally going there. 

Edited by Martell Spy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is what a lot so called centrist come off as:

Trump:

I'm going to make America Great Again (nobody has any clue what this means)

We have a huge immigration problem (we really don't)

I'm going to fix healthcare (evidently with a combination of across state lines and fairy dust).

My corporate tax cut is going produce all this awesome growth (and here go again with supply side horseshit. And it produced deficits)

So called Centrist: Nada, nothing zilch. Complete silence. Can ya hear the crickets?

Democrats:

We need single payer healthcare. That is simplest and cheapest way to get universal coverage.( which has basis in reality)

We need a green deal, to combat climate change (because really its a problem)

So called Centrist: Whoa, Whoa slow down. That sounds really radical. We have lots questions!

Edited by OldGimletEye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

I said nothing about "50 white papers concerning their plans". Not at all. I asked them to come up with an actual plan and flesh them out leaving us with more than blind faith. Don't mischaracterize what I said. 

And if they don't, what are going to do, vote Republican because of their realistic plans?

Let me ask you, between the two parties, which one you think is really more capable of getting shit done? Seriously?

Edited by OldGimletEye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

 Don't mischaracterize what I said. 

I don't think I mischaracterized what you said.

I think the upshot here is if the Democrats don't have fleshed plans, centrist will just have no choice to vote Republican,  even if the Republicans aren't real good at fleshing out their plans. They only had about 8 years to come up with an alternative to the ACA, which everyone hated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be nice if both parties had well detailed plans during the elections cycle? Yes it would. It certainly would make our politics better, I should think.

But, neither party does that. And suddenly demanding the Democrats do that, while evidently giving the Republican Party a free pass, is absurd.

Take corporate tax cuts. That is something the Republican truly cared about and wanted for decades. But yet before the legislation went through, they didn't have any detailed plans about it. There was quite a bit of haggling and discussion about it before it got passed. That's how things work.

Share this post


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

Here is what a lot so called centrist come off as:

Trump:

I'm going to make America Great Again (nobody has any clue what this means)

We have a huge immigration problem (we really don't)

I'm going to fix healthcare (evidently with a combination of across state lines and fairy dust).

My corporate tax cut is going produce all this awesome growth (and here go again with supply side horseshit. And it produced deficits)

So called Centrist: Nada, nothing zilch. Complete silence. Can ya hear the crickets?

Democrats:

We need single payer healthcare. That is simplest and cheapest way to get universal coverage.( which has basis in reality)

We need a green deal, to combat climate change (because really its a problem)

So called Centrist: Whoa, Whoa slow down. That sounds really radical. We have lots questions!

The Dems need more progressives like Ro Khanna and AOC.

Share this post


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

×