Jump to content

US Politics - And Now it Begins


Lollygag

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, DMC said:

 

The Homeland Security pick is widely reported to be Alejandro Mayorkas, who is Cuban-American but also, ya know, a man.  Also being reported John Kerry as climate czar and Avril Haines as DNI.  Fine with both, but also pretty uninspired.  Yellen, too, is a way too cautious pick IMO.  Thus far I'm not a fan that Biden appears to be scared of nominating anyone the GOP may even try to put up a fight against.

Ahhh, I have the wrong cabinet post then, they did say the first Latino woman to hold the post. I’ll have to see who that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

According to this guy, the US is already an effectively failed state - and he lived through the half-assed but successful coup in another nation.  Lot's of hyperbole, but he has a point.  And from my POV, Biden is nothing more than an interim figure.

There's certainly a risk that Biden is a Paul von Hindenburg figure; an old man who is the only one that can keep a semblance of the old order alive, and once he dies/is term-limited out it falls to pieces. But 4/8 years is a very long time in politics, and there's no telling where things might be then.

It's true that so long as the GOP has its current anti-democracy view point and is capable of winning a national election that means that every election will in truth be "the most important election of our lifetime" because if they win even once it'll all be over. But we don't know how long both those conditions will be true; and they very much might have to give up one to keep the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Fez said:

There's certainly a risk that Biden is a Paul von Hindenburg figure; an old man who is the only one that can keep a semblance of the old order alive, and once he dies/is term-limited out it falls to pieces. But 4/8 years is a very long time in politics, and there's no telling where things might be then.

It's true that so long as the GOP has its current anti-democracy view point and is capable of winning a national election that means that every election will in truth be "the most important election of our lifetime" because if they win even once it'll all be over. But we don't know how long both those conditions will be true; and they very much might have to give up one to keep the other.

That reminds me of that interview I posted, with an author of a book about authorianism. (Gessen?) She pointed out that Orban was voted out after his first term, too... Well, we know how that ended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in New York news, the NY-22 election sounds like a complete mess:

It's quite literally on the level of Florida 2000. Only instead of "hanging chads" the issue is "stickies", as in sticky notes that were used to denote the status of various ballots. Sticky notes that are now missing from many of the ballots.

The counties in question may have to start their vote counting over from scratch; with all ballot challenges starting over as well. This may affect the margins of a few other races as well. But it mostly affects the NY-22 race, where the margin is only 200 to 300 votes apart (and the precise margin appears to actually be unknown, with different state and county sources reporting different totals).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Michigan has certified the election finally. The state canvassing board voted either 3-0 or 3-1 (it's unclear if one GOP commissioner abstained or voted no, but the other voted yes with the Democrats).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GrimTuesday said:

I'm sorry, but I'm pretty bothered by Biden's picks here. It's just a continuation of American empire which is ultimately the strongest through line of every single American administration in the modern era. Biden's administration won't be quite as outwardly nasty as Trump, but it's not like they are going to bring Israel to heel, we're going to keep dropping bombs on innocent civilians in the middle east, we're going to keep supporting the IMF and the World bank in their exploitative practices of developing nations and the Global South, we're going to keep interfering with other nations whose national interests are in conflict with those of American capital, and we're going to keep propping up monsters around the world because they buy planes and bombs from us.

Let me be clear, I am not surprised that this is what we are getting, but I don't see how people can look at this and be ok with it. We keep giving these people who keep going round and round in the revolving door of the private and public sector, which is something we attack Republicans for but are suspiciously silent when a Democrat does it. Of course, this revolving door means that we continue to perpetuate the same world system that has made these people rich off the back of the rest of the world. Things are going to be better for us Americans, this is irrefutable, but for the rest of the world (with a few exception), basically nothing is going to change.

Yes. So?

I'm quite serious. Right now you have a nation that barely - 67 thousand votes in three states - chose to vote in a moderate Democrat over an authoritarian party which peddles regularly in absurd conspiracy theories. And that authoritarian party also gained more power in the House and still controls the senate.

What did you expect was going to happen? 

And I'm really curious - how do you want the US to 'bring Israel to heel'? How do you purport to bring one of our oldest allies which is armed with nuclear weapons and is one of the only footholds in the region to 'heel'? How do you expect the US to avoid dealing with IMF and the world bank? What are your proposals here? 

Here's the deal: what you got is the thing every progressive should expect in the US: someone who will actually listen to your demands and occasionally implement or do something with them. You are not going to get a super progressive person elected as the POTUS in the US in your lifetime; you'll be lucky if you continue to get actual free  elections in the next 20 years. Your energy should be in making sure you are pushing those moderates further and further left and getting them to make deals that you care about, because the alternative is that you will have zero foot in the door and zero chance of anything happening at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DMC said:

Flournoy will unquestionably be a return to Obama/Clinton style foreign policy (are are/will be all of Biden's national security picks), but it's hardly fair to equate her with Bolton or neo-cons.  There's a huge ass and important difference that was made pretty damn clear during Dubya's administration.

Pardon, but I disagree with your assessment of her. Correct me if I am wrong. But she was in favour of Dubya's Iraq adventure, and she supports the idea of pre-emptive wars. So how is she an upgrade, ideologically speaking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GrimTuesday said:

I'm sorry, but I'm pretty bothered by Biden's picks here. It's just a continuation of American empire which is ultimately the strongest through line of every single American administration in the modern era. Biden's administration won't be quite as outwardly nasty as Trump, but it's not like they are going to bring Israel to heel, we're going to keep dropping bombs on innocent civilians in the middle east, we're going to keep supporting the IMF and the World bank in their exploitative practices of developing nations and the Global South, we're going to keep interfering with other nations whose national interests are in conflict with those of American capital, and we're going to keep propping up monsters around the world because they buy planes and bombs from us.

Let me be clear, I am not surprised that this is what we are getting, but I don't see how people can look at this and be ok with it. We keep giving these people who keep going round and round in the revolving door of the private and public sector, which is something we attack Republicans for but are suspiciously silent when a Democrat does it. Of course, this revolving door means that we continue to perpetuate the same world system that has made these people rich off the back of the rest of the world. Things are going to be better for us Americans, this is irrefutable, but for the rest of the world (with a few exception), basically nothing is going to change.

Did you hear that? You want MORE?!?!?! You'll get what you get, and you should be bloody well grateful for it! No, of course we won't even think of changing our strategy; no, we will just keep chasing those "moderates" right over the fucking cliff!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Fez said:

Back in New York news, the NY-22 election sounds like a complete mess

Jeebus.  Maybe use something less prone to accidentally falling off than fucking sticky notes!!!

5 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Pardon, by disagree with your assessment of her. Correct me if I am wrong. But she was in favour of Dubya's Iraq adventure, and she supports the idea of pre-emptive wars. So how is she an upgrade, ideologically speaking?

I'm not aware of her stance on the Iraq War during its lead up/Dubya's administration, and I wouldn't be surprised if she didn't express anything publicly.  That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if she initially supported it like 95% of the Democratic establishment at the time.  I have no idea where you're getting that she supports pre-emptive wars.  She did express support for preemptive strikes on weapons stockpiles, but that's hardly the same thing.  The leftist criticism against her largely focus on her integral role in devising Obama's troop surge strategy in Afghanistan.

Anyway, if you can't tell the difference between, say, Hillary Clinton and George W. Bush on foreign policy; or Flournoy compared to John Bolton as their advisors; or the Clinton/Obama Dem establishment compared to the neo-conservative movement, that's a you problem I don't really care to belabor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, DMC said:

Anyway, if you can't tell the difference between, say, Hillary Clinton and George W. Bush on foreign policy; or Flournoy compared to John Bolton as their advisors; or the Clinton/Obama Dem establishment compared to the neo-conservative movement, that's a you problem I don't really care to belabor.

Amen

edit: I have no problem with criticism of Democratic establishment foreign policy, where it is warranted, but saying there is no difference between that and neo-conservativism is a fundamentally flawed analysis 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, DMC said:

Well, I think you had to know the national security picks were gonna be a given.  I thought Treasury though was a good opportunity for Biden to make a splash with a confirmable nominee like Sarah Bloom Raskin.  Even Brainard would've been a more positive sign for leftists (and myself).  Pretty disappointed by the Yellen pick.  Also wish he would've went with Jay Inslee for the climate czar rather than dusting off John Kerry, but to be fair it's entirely possible Inslee turned the job down.  Still, even if he did, I'd think you could come up with a more inspired candidate in that role than Kerry.

Like I said, I haven't been particularly surprised by anything that Biden has done here, but that doesn't change how angry it makes me. People keep on talking about how Biden can be pushed left or Kamala is totally more progressive than Sanders or some other bullshit that is just plain delusional and now we see laid bear that Biden is going to govern like a center right Democrat who is going to keep propping up the same policies that got us here.

As for Inslee, I think that he would probably decline a position in any government right now if he was asked. Speaking as a Washington resident (and someone with a tertiary connection with him), I think he is really trying to steer our state through this crisis, and would feel duty bound to stay in office. Kerry isn't the worst pick, one of the gals from the Sunrise movement was speaking well of him on twitter earlier today. We shall have to wait and see.

47 minutes ago, DMC said:

Again, Alejandro Mayorkas is a Cuban-American (and Jewish) man.  I think Bird is getting that pick mixed up with Avril Haines, who will be the first female DNI (not exactly groundbreaking even if the job wasn't only 15 years old).

I hope this Mayorkas fella isn't a crazy reactionary anti-communist like a lot of Cuban Americans, because frankly that's the last thing we need right now.

2 minutes ago, Kalbear Total Landscaping said:

Yes. So?

I'm quite serious. Right now you have a nation that barely - 67 thousand votes in three states - chose to vote in a moderate Democrat over an authoritarian party which peddles regularly in absurd conspiracy theories. And that authoritarian party also gained more power in the House and still controls the senate.

What did you expect was going to happen?

What I expected was exactly this, I said as much in the post. The fact that we got exactly what I expected it does not mean that I can't be angry or disillusioned by it. But keep punching left, big guy, I'm sure you'll get the Democrats to move left and do fucking anything that significantly benefits you over their corporate masters.

Quote

And I'm really curious - how do you want the US to 'bring Israel to heel'? How do you purport to bring one of our oldest allies which is armed with nuclear weapons and is one of the only footholds in the region to 'heel'? How do you expect the US to avoid dealing with IMF and the world bank? What are your proposals here?

You realize that the backing of the US is what allows Israel to take the posture it does, right? We give them a ton of money and weapons in addition to our foreign policy that actively seeks to diplomatically support Israel. If we stop doing that, and instead start punishing them for their crimes against humanity in the same way that we do with any other country (that we aren't propping up) that is doing the same shit that Israel is doing. As for the IMF and the World Bank, you realize that we are one of the principle actors in those bodies, right? We actively use them to further the interests of American capital to extract the wealth of the global south back the the US and other wealthy nations.

Quote

 Here's the deal: what you got is the thing every progressive should expect in the US: someone who will actually listen to your demands and occasionally implement or do something with them. You are not going to get a super progressive person elected as the POTUS in the US in your lifetime; you'll be lucky if you continue to get actual free  elections in the next 20 years. Your energy should be in making sure you are pushing those moderates further and further left and getting them to make deals that you care about, because the alternative is that you will have zero foot in the door and zero chance of anything happening at all. 

Dude, you're such a fucking defeatist. People like you are exactly why we are going to keep going the way we are, because you just keep excusing the actions of those in power under the pretense that they don't actually have any power to change anything because they never change anything. Maybe if you actually started pushing for better we could do better than vainly try to push left a bunch of people whose interests lie in maintaining the status quo. Of course, maybe it is just that you yourself are of a class that is completely disconnected from the struggle, so you don't see any urgency in the fight because you benefit from this system too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said:

I hope this Mayorkas fella isn't a crazy reactionary anti-communist like a lot of Cuban Americans, because frankly that's the last thing we need right now.

He's definitely not.  In fact he played a prominent role in the Obama administration's talks/efforts to open up Cuba.  Also, didn't know this til a couple hours ago, but he received no GOP votes when he was appointed Deputy Secretary under Obama - which you'd think would be a good sign.  Albeit they did have ammo in that the Homeland Security IG was investigating him for favoritism, but still.  Sure McConnell and co. are gonna enjoy rehashing that during confirmation, that may be a tough vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a hawkish defense pick, I'm not big on that, but if it's more of a clear message to the likes of China, Russia, etc, to not try one fucking thing while we're down, then I'm all for that. Certain other pics send a message that certain things are off the table.

-----------------------------------

Massive message switch from Never Trumpers on tv in the past day or two, but especially today. Silence on destroying democracy norms and disenfranchisement especially black voters en masse seems to be the hard deal breaker. They're stating outright that there is no return to the Republican party after this which they've hedged on before. Sounds like a new party in the wings and by what they're saying, small government and pro-civil rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Kalbear Total Landscaping said:

Here's the deal: what you got is the thing every progressive should expect in the US: someone who will actually listen to your demands and occasionally implement or do something with them. You are not going to get a super progressive person elected as the POTUS in the US in your lifetime; you'll be lucky if you continue to get actual free  elections in the next 20 years. Your energy should be in making sure you are pushing those moderates further and further left and getting them to make deals that you care about, because the alternative is that you will have zero foot in the door and zero chance of anything happening at all. 

Just to be clear: not only is the left not allowed to express an opinion on the Cabinet picks of the President-elect we helped elect, but we shouldn't even have an opinion and should be grateful for the opportunity to maybe push some moderate neo-liberal slightly more to the left than fascism?

Fuck your appeasement strategy. 

Seriously, how many lefties are going to come out and vote with this strategy? Good way to kill the party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lollygag said:

On a hawkish defense pick, I'm not big on that, but if it's more of a clear message to the likes of China, Russia, etc, to not try one fucking thing while we're down, then I'm all for that. Certain other pics send a message that certain things are off the table.

Nor am I -- though from what I've read (Vox and others), she sounds like an extremely effective leader and executive manager. I expect that Biden's relative dovish outlook will blunt the hawkishness. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

 

This would be a fine argument if not for the fact that any time the Left flexes its muscles people start screaming about how the left is sabotaging the party and we need to shut up and get in line like good little soldiers. I don't think a lot of people in the center of the Democratic party understand how much the establishment of the Democratic party despise the left. The Democratic establishment have enjoyed signalling that they support progressive causes while not actually doing anything until it becomes overwhelmingly popular (gay marriage) because they can hide behind Republican hostility. Now you have a significant number of people who are holding their feet to the fire, and suddenly you can't just pay lip service because if you set a marker, you now have people who will try and actually make it a policy, and the platform to push for it.

2 minutes ago, DMC said:

He's definitely not.  In fact he played a prominent role in the Obama administration's talks/efforts to open up Cuba.  Also, didn't know this til a couple hours ago, but he received no GOP votes when he was appointed Deputy Secretary under Obama - which you'd think would be a good sign.  Albeit they did have ammo in that the Homeland Security IG was investigating him for favoritism, but still.  Sure McConnell and co. are gonna enjoy rehashing that during confirmation, that may be a tough vote.

Well in that case I'm pleasantly surprised. I still think that DHS needs to just go away, but I guess it not being used as a pseudo-military organization against political opponents is a step up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said:

What I expected was exactly this, I said as much in the post. The fact that we got exactly what I expected it does not mean that I can't be angry or disillusioned by it. But keep punching left, big guy, I'm sure you'll get the Democrats to move left and do fucking anything that significantly benefits you over their corporate masters. 

And again, I ask - what is your alternative that you propose? Feel free to be as disappointed in it as you like - I certainly am! - but the notion that this is somehow a massive defeat should be obviously wrong.

18 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said:

You realize that the backing of the US is what allows Israel to take the posture it does, right? We give them a ton of money and weapons in addition to our foreign policy that actively seeks to diplomatically support Israel. If we stop doing that, and instead start punishing them for their crimes against humanity in the same way that we do with any other country (that we aren't propping up) that is doing the same shit that Israel is doing. As for the IMF and the World Bank, you realize that we are one of the principle actors in those bodies, right? We actively use them to further the interests of American capital to extract the wealth of the global south back the the US and other wealthy nations. 

I realize that if we don't back Israel Israel probably ends up starting a nuclear war with another country. That's probably not as great as you might think it is for keeping them in check. As to 'punishing them for their crimes against humanity' - please. Israel is barely a smidge compared to the likes of China or, hell, the US itself. I don't know why Israel specifically is a big deal to you, but so it goes.

As to the IMF and World Bank - the US isn't nearly as big a deal in those things as we used to be, and again I ask - what is your proposed alternative? 

18 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said:

Dude, you're such a fucking defeatist. People like you are exactly why we are going to keep going the way we are, because you just keep excusing the actions of those in power under the pretense that they don't actually have any power to change anything because they never change anything. Maybe if you actually started pushing for better we could do better than vainly try to push left a bunch of people whose interests lie in maintaining the status quo. Of course, maybe it is just that you yourself are of a class that is completely disconnected from the struggle, so you don't see any urgency in the fight because you benefit from this system too.

Yep, that's me, the disconnected elitist who is totally fine with the status quo. What a fucking thing to say. I grew up in housing projects and was homeless for a good chunk of my childhood. We were on welfare. My clothes were free donations from the fucking 70s - do you know how much you get teased for wearing bell bottoms in 1984? Fuck you for that. 

At some point you have to accept what the US is before you change it. You have to accept that 50%+ of the voting population does not care about this shit or barely even knows Israel exists on a map. You have to understand just how illiberal and undemocratic the US currently is and what the limits of power actually are. Now, here's the thing - on a lot of foreign policy these are places where Biden can be pushed, and I recommend that he does get pushed significantly. But the idea that the US is going to stop being a capitalist, consumerist country because I 'excuse' things? Please. Grow the fuck up already. 

This isn't about maintaining the status quo; this is about maintaining some semblance of representative democracy in the most powerful nation on the planet for the next 10-15 years. You are bitching about the IMF policies of someone who hasn't even done anything when we still haven't even put that guy in office yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...