Jump to content
Kalbear

US Politics: Culture Club

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, aceluby said:

It's like they were going for Republican street cred more than anything.  Never saw anything quite like this before from them, so it leads me to believe that this is their response to the constant barrage of attacks that have been going their way for the last 3 years or so from the WH.

This morning the public radio talk shows and a lot of the other local media with callers-in and so on seemed to have callers and writers who all criticized this format and the questions and the moderators.  The majority thought Castro did himself a lot of good, in the same way he did the last time.  Harris received a very great deal of disapproval.  Everyone concluded that they'd vote for any of them though -- except Delaney -- but they all pretty much preferred and hoped it would be Warren.  There was one exception who was newly excited by Gabbord.

 

Share this post


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

My 13yr old brother, who is a naturalized citizen, was naturalized at 13 months old, has to carry around a copy of his passport with him.  So fucked up.  Everytime my shitty relatives bring up some pro Trump shit at family gatherings I tell them to ask him for his papers.  

 

Even having a passport may not be good enough, since ICE is essentially a lawless agency and at least half of their door-kickers are full Trumpy racist. All a passport is, is a paper shield. If they say the passport is fake and detain you without access to a lawyer, what's your recourse?

I was naturalized at 16 and me vanishing into an ICE hole for days or weeks or months has become a prominent part of Mrs. Gabriel's nightmares. Like, I'm supposed to visit an old buddy in Montreal and I'm legit not sure if I should risk a border crossing, even with my passport and citizenship certificate on me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

Even having a passport may not be good enough, since ICE is essentially a lawless agency and at least half of their door-kickers are full Trumpy racist. All a passport is, is a paper shield. If they say the passport is fake and detain you without access to a lawyer, what's your recourse?

I was naturalized at 16 and me vanishing into an ICE hole for days or weeks or months has become a prominent part of Mrs. Gabriel's nightmares. Like, I'm supposed to visit an old buddy in Montreal and I'm legit not sure if I should risk a border crossing, even with my passport and citizenship certificate on me.

Yep. It's not like it hasn't already happened to U.S. citizens. I'm gonna bring up Francisco Galicia again.

Apparently he had a Texas ID and his SSC with him, but he was still held for over 3 weeks.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/25/us/us-citizen-detained-texas/index.html

Edited by A True Kaniggit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

If you want to flip Texas, register Latinos and minorities more generally by showing them images of the kids in cages and make the mental link that that’s because of Trump and Republicans in general. That’s more important than just mindlessly dumping money on the state.

My opinion as a New Yorker with limited knowledge of Texas:

Voter registration, hell yes. But the cages and immigration issues cannot be the only issues relied on to reach and fuel the voter mobilization. I’ve seen and heard many, many times over the years (including in these threads) how frustrated Latinx voters get when Democrats and Liberals get when we make the mistake of acting like immigration is the only issue that matters to them.

 If you think otherwise, you’re seriously underestimating the ability of people to “other” different groups of people, even ones who look very much like themselves and come from a similar background. I can also point you in the direction of many Hispanic advocacy groups and Texas Hispanics who are conservative Dems that will echo those points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one has mentioned the fact that Trump has added another 10% in tariffs on more Chinese goods, starting in September, ostensibly because the Chinese didn’t buy enough US agricultural goods. So much for trade talks going well.

I also see that in 2016 there was over $45 B in direct Chinese investment in the US. In 2018 that dropped to $4.5 B and for 2019 is the number is estimated at $2.8 B. That’s a lot of investment money to dry up.

I was also surprised to read that the US government forced a Chinese firm to sell a tower in Manhattan that they had just bought, at a $40 M loss, because it was a few blocks from Trump Tower. I guess they figured the tower would be filled with Chinese spy equipment. And that Grindr, the gay dating site, is owned by a Chinese company and the US government is forcing them to sell it, because they are concerned that the Chinese would gather information about American citizens. This concern for the gay community takes me by surprise. I guess too many Republicans got worried?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

a lot of investment money to dry up.

is the capital flight because of investors' consensual conduct or because of the state's coercive divestiture?  are the assets at issue held by parastatals for purchase by party organs or NGOs associated with the party? are any assets subject to sequestration? by the bye, do we know if there is any odd behavior with the EXIM bank coincident with the divestitures and tariffs? asking for an anti-fascist friend.

Edited by sologdin

Share this post


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

a lot of investment money to dry up.

is the capital flight because of investors' consensual conduct or because of the state's coercive divestiture?  are the assets at issue held by parastatals for purchase by party organs or NGOs associated with the party? are any assets subject to sequestration? by the bye, do we know if there is any odd behavior with the EXIM bank coincident with the divestitures and tariffs? asking for an anti-fascist friend.

The concern being expressed all of a sudden is that companies or individuals have connections to the Chinese government. The US government has broadened it’s powers to refuse investments by foreigners: once it was only if 51% of a business was being acquired, now I believe any amount of investment is involved. But the Chinese government is also apparently putting the squeeze on it’s citizens and restricting investments in the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

My 13yr old brother, who is a naturalized citizen, was naturalized at 13 months old, has to carry around a copy of his passport with him.  So fucked up.  Everytime my shitty relatives bring up some pro Trump shit at family gatherings I tell them to ask him for his papers.  

 

What do they say in response?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DanteGabriel said:

Even having a passport may not be good enough, since ICE is essentially a lawless agency and at least half of their door-kickers are full Trumpy racist. All a passport is, is a paper shield. If they say the passport is fake and detain you without access to a lawyer, what's your recourse?

I was naturalized at 16 and me vanishing into an ICE hole for days or weeks or months has become a prominent part of Mrs. Gabriel's nightmares. Like, I'm supposed to visit an old buddy in Montreal and I'm legit not sure if I should risk a border crossing, even with my passport and citizenship certificate on me.

Thanks, and I hear you.  There's a plan that goes well beyond that, and on the on the day to day stuff, that's what's the first line of defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

What do they say in response?

Usually some shit about Obama's birth certificate or "well, they only go after people who did something else wrong".  Their political commitments come from a different place, on a few specific issues, of which abortion looms large 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

Sure, but that stuff costs money too.  I've been getting involved with DSA stuff this spring and summer but am still a registered Dem and our local Dem shit is starting to organize.  I almost want to move to a battleground state where I could actually do something 

It's actually not that costly, at least in urban and suburban communities. That said, Texas is a lot trickier due to its size and how the populace is spread out. 

2 hours ago, Maithanet said:

Of course, in Texas, you have to take a state class that has very limited spots in order to legally register voters.  So big voter registration drives are essentially illegal. 

I'm loosely aware of this without knowing the exact details. How hard would it be for the Steyers or the world to organize citizens to always make sure those classes are full?

2 hours ago, TrueMetis said:

Make sure to include the various non-white US citizens that were also locked up. Remember, the Republican focus on "illegal" immigration is just a starting point.

Obviously you would include more. I just used that as an example.

1 hour ago, Paladin of Ice said:

My opinion as a New Yorker with limited knowledge of Texas:

Voter registration, hell yes. But the cages and immigration issues cannot be the only issues relied on to reach and fuel the voter mobilization. I’ve seen and heard many, many times over the years (including in these threads) how frustrated Latinx voters get when Democrats and Liberals get when we make the mistake of acting like immigration is the only issue that matters to them.

 If you think otherwise, you’re seriously underestimating the ability of people to “other” different groups of people, even ones who look very much like themselves and come from a similar background. I can also point you in the direction of many Hispanic advocacy groups and Texas Hispanics who are conservative Dems that will echo those points.

Yes, I'm well aware of this, but it's still a salient issue for many. The larger point though is that above all else, voter registration in the South is the key to making it next to impossible for Republicans to ever win the WH while also making the Senate more competitive. The numbers always change and I don't have them in front of me, but there is a shockingly high level of unregistered minorities across the South. If you can fix that, you might be able to fix some of the current problems our government is experiencing. 

1 hour ago, Fragile Bird said:

No one has mentioned the fact that Trump has added another 10% in tariffs on more Chinese goods, starting in September, ostensibly because the Chinese didn’t buy enough US agricultural goods. So much for trade talks going well.

Indeed. Every article I've read suggests that trade talks have failed. I'm curious what will happen on Wall St. tomorrow, The Dow was up like 250 points when Trump tweeted about the tariffs. In 15 minutes, all the gains were gone. Another 15 minutes later, the Dow was down 200, closing more than 300 points overall. In total there was a 600 point swing today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Usually some shit about Obama's birth certificate or "well, they only go after people who did something else wrong".  Their political commitments come from a different place, on a few specific issues, of which abortion looms large 

What a load of crap.  :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I just watched the second night on YT. (Did you know that officially, CNN only offers a 5+ hour version with running commentary?!)

As for Booker, to me, he doesn't come accross as fake (well, not any more than most of the other candidates... De Blasio looks far more insincere to me), but as someone who doesn't really care. he's witty, says good stuff, is lively and entertaining, but just ALMOST passionate about the issues. (While Castro, for example, comes across as sincere, pssionate, and serious about his issues). That said, I wouldn't mind him, much less a Warren/ Booker ticket.

Very disappointed by Harris. Tired? Maybe. To me, she seemed constantly annoyed, right from the start, but not in a good, angry or even cranky woman kind of way... Arrogant? Dismisive? I cannot put my finger on it, but I didn't like it.

I share Zorral's opinion of the media (and only the so-called social media are worse than tv, imho), so I thought Yang's comment towards the end, regarding no tie... media circus... this is how we got Trump in th first place...  was very elegant. He was surprisingly strong, although I know nothing about him beyond those debates, and not planning to change that.

(I'm only watching from the sidelines anyway.)

Now on to the first night... tomorrow, maybe.

Edited by Mindwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Usually some shit about Obama's birth certificate or "well, they only go after people who did something else wrong".  Their political commitments come from a different place, on a few specific issues, of which abortion looms large 

I have the same problem with my family. You won't believe the shit they thought was in that New York abortion act from January.

Apparently Democrats are willing to rip fetuses out of bellies just for the hell of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
Quote

 

Ezra Klein was emphatically correct in pointing out that Pete Buttigieg made the single most important point at Tuesday’s Democratic debate when he noted that if Democrats really hope to achieve anything after taking back the White House, they will need to reform basic Democratic structures and institutions first. Indeed it’s fair to say that lost in the breathless reality-show silliness of the debate format is the fact that Buttigieg was the only Democratic candidate who even mentioned reforming the Supreme Court over both days of debate.

Candidates also neglected to mention the partisan gerrymandering now blessed by five Supreme Court justices or the more than 140 judges Donald Trump has placed on the federal courts. Just a quick reminder that of those Supreme Court justices, four were appointed by minority-elected presidents and confirmed by senators representing less than half of the country. And yet, Mayor Pete was the only person on the debate stage willing to say what nobody else acknowledges out loud: The courts, the Senate, and the presidency are institutions that are broken and warped by dark money and minority rule. You can call it “structural change” as Buttigieg does, or you can call it #zzzzzzzzz, but failure to talk about it doesn’t make it go away.

 

Quote

As the must-see TV debates were happening this week, Mitch McConnell was pushing 13 more of Trump’s judicial picks through the approval process, jamming them through in advance of the Senate’s August recess. 

Democrats Still Haven’t Learned Their Lesson About the Courts
Even after Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, the presidential candidates still don’t have a plan for Mitch McConnell.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/08/democrats-courts-what-will-it-take-debates-election-2020.html

Edited by Martell Spy

Share this post


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

Usually some shit about Obama's birth certificate or "well, they only go after people who did something else wrong".  Their political commitments come from a different place, on a few specific issues, of which abortion looms large 

What a load of crap.  :(

Share this post


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

Democrats Still Haven’t Learned Their Lesson About the Courts
Even after Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, the presidential candidates still don’t have a plan for Mitch McConnell.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/08/democrats-courts-what-will-it-take-debates-election-2020.html

Ummm... partisan gerrymandering has no influence on either the Presidential election (with the potential exceptions of Nebraska and Maine) or the Senate.  Only the President and the Senate are involved in selecting and confirming Supreme Court Justices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Ummm... partisan gerrymandering has no influence on either the Presidential election (with the potential exceptions of Nebraska and Maine) or the Senate.  Only the President and the Senate are involved in selecting and confirming Supreme Court Justices.

The issues all intertwine though. Republicans steal the Presidency using the SC in 2000. Which in turn gains them the SC. They steal the Presidency by encouraging/allowing Russian influence in 2016, again gaining the court for a generation. The SC allows partisan gerrymandering to run amok, as well as massive voter suppression, and pumping dark money into politics.  They also steal a SC seat by breaking norms. The only thing they haven't figured out how to do yet is to steal a Senate seat.  

And now that Republicans have opened the door to foreign influence, more actors will get involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

What a load of crap.  :(

 

16 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

What a load of crap.  :(

Am I seeing double?

Edited by A True Kaniggit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Ummm... partisan gerrymandering has no influence on either the Presidential election (with the potential exceptions of Nebraska and Maine) or the Senate.  Only the President and the Senate are involved in selecting and confirming Supreme Court Justices.

I didn't read the slate piece Martell Spy linked but I did read the Ezra Klein piece it's discussing in what's quoted.  The point isn't solely about gerrymandering - it's about emphasizing systematic reform of the political system.  In fact, the Buttigieg quote Klein was responding to doesn't even mention gerrymandering:  

Quote

[This is] the conversation that we have been having for the last 20 years. Of course, we need to get money out of politics, but when I propose the actual structural democratic reforms that might make a difference — end the Electoral College, amend the Constitution if necessary to clear up Citizens United, have DC actually be a state, and depoliticize the Supreme Court with structural reform — people look at me funny, as if this country was incapable of structural reform.

This is a country that once changed its Constitution so you couldn’t drink and changed it back because we changed our minds, and you’re telling me we can’t reform our democracy in our time. We have to or we will be having the same argument 20 years from now.

 

Share this post


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

×