US Politics: A Game of Chicken (with Constituents lives)

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, The Great Unwashed said:

I’m not even sure that it’s process that we disagree on - while I quibble with some of your tactical suggestions, I mostly agree that, from a purely electoral and political perspective, some kind of deal is vastly preferable than no deal.

 I think our differences lie in whether the kind of electoralism you support as a long-term strategy is even viable any longer. I was hopeful that it might be after Dems scored the trifecta in 2021, but my sincere belief is that “bipartisanship for the sake of bipartisanship” tendencies of some centrist holdouts has effectively killed that strategy for good.

My read is that the U.S. is locked into a feedback loop death spiral and Republicans have control of the wheel. While our institutions are slowing the descent, Republicans have shown their willingness to undermine those institutions. 
 

Given all that, it is my most sincere belief that this bipartisanship fever in the Democratic Party has to be broken - Republicans in Congress literally conspired to kill their Democratic colleagues, and no one in the Republican Party is doing anything about it, and some Democrats in Congress think there is still some comity to be had? It is rank madness.

And I accept that this may mean that nothing gets done, and I accept that means that Democrats will get wiped out in the midterms. But that is a preferable scenario to the one we’re currently in where “logical, reality-based centrists” literally cannot see that they’re contributing to the fascist takeover of the U.S. government.

Moderates have been capitulating to Republican demands for 40 years and look where we are.

I don't think I've argued in a long time for bipartisanship for the sake of bipartisanship. At least not when it's other than anything but for show. My consistent argument has been that things need to get done, and if you accept that then you have to be realistic about how you achieve that. And give the current political landscape, that does ultimately mean compromising, but right now that's within your own party.

What I don't accept is what you've written, that getting nothing done and getting wiped out is an acceptable outcome. That's the literal definition of political suicide, and the other side is dreaming that you do so for some needless show of purity. You can shit on moderates all you want, but look in the mirror and realize you may be one of the biggest allies of Republicans if you pursue the strategy you're suggesting.

[DMC]

Ray Odierno passed away from cancer at 67.  He had a stint as the top commander in Iraq, and later served as Army chief of staff, but I will always remember him first and foremost as the guy that shaved Stephen Colbert's head.

[A True Kaniggit]

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

Ray Odierno passed away from cancer at 67.  He had a stint as the top commander in Iraq, and later served as Army chief of staff, but I will always remember him first and foremost as the guy that shaved Stephen Colbert's head.

Poor Stephen Colbert…..

Did you happen to see the recent Fat Bear Week thing?

[DMC]

3 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:

Did you happen to see the recent Fat Bear Week thing?

No I did not.

[A True Kaniggit]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

No I did not.

The relevant part starts at 8:40.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RVFMKnPp7o

It's all about the ears apparently. 

[DMC]

6 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:

It's all about the ears apparently. 

Heh, yeah that was pretty funny.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

41 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

I’m not saying that you’re arguing for bipartisanship for its own sake.

 And I’m absolutely not shitting on moderates - I’m saying that Manchin and Sinema and their ilk aren’t really moderates and are allowing Republicans to drive us into fascism. 

I think that's deeply unfair, even if you strongly oppose what they're doing. 

[TrackerNeil]

20 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Can't say that's ever been true in my adult lifetime. Otherwise the Republican party would already be dead. What's scary is the willingness to embrace obvious lies. Just like the fascists in Europe did in the 20s, 30s and 40s.

I grew up in the 80s, when the fear of nuclear annihilation was rampant, but I have never felt more pessimistic about the world than I do now. I think the real danger is not people blowing everything up at once, but people permitting a slow decline of democracy, government, infrastructure, the environment...anything that requires work and faith. Our political system enables a nihilistic minority to almost entirely stymie the efforts of the majority to make those things function as they must, and consequently our democracy misfires, our government is increasingly ineffective, our infrastructure crumbles around us, and the planet is turning into a slowly heating petri dish for super-storms.

Humanity won't be quickly incinerated by a nuclear blast, I think; instead, we'll be slowly suffocated by a cloud of cynicism, faux worldly-wise sneering, and a total unwillingness to believe in anything or anyone. The end of the world won't be abrupt and spectacular but protracted, stupid, and embarrassing. 

[Fragile Bird]

Speaking of feeling pessimistic, over the last week or two I saw these stories pop up on my Facebook page saying there are estimates out there suggesting the possibility of civil war in the US in the next ten years is up to 35% now.

Anyone know anything about this?

Also, I just caught part of a loony interview Pence gave on Fox, saying Biden is trying to deflect from his failures by focusing on ‘one day in January’. The guy does the right thing, the most right thing he’s ever done in his life, and the freak is right back in the middle of the shit-show?

[DMC]

8 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Speaking of feeling pessimistic, over the last week or two I saw these stories pop up on my Facebook page saying there are estimates out there suggesting the possibility of civil war in the US in the next ten years is up to 35% now.

Anyone know anything about this?

No put I'd certainly like to see how someone constructed a probabilistic model to come up with such a percentage.

[A True Kaniggit]

23 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Also, I just caught part of a loony interview Pence gave on Fox, saying Biden is trying to deflect from his failures by focusing on ‘one day in January’. The guy does the right thing, the most right thing he’s ever done in his life, and the freak is right back in the middle of the shit-show?

Ha. I've heard this as well. Just respond that it's as if America only went to war against Japan in 1941 for focusing on, 'one day in December'.

The whole thought process is ridiculous. 

[Fragile Bird]

11 minutes ago, DMC said:

No put I'd certainly like to see how someone constructed a probabilistic model to come up with such a percentage.

Professor Goldstone and Peter Turchin are names that come up. Also, I see about 45% of the US public aren’t feeling too optimistic.

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Peter Turchin are names that come up

Heh, figures.

[Zorral]

2 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

these stories pop up on my Facebook page saying there are estimates out there suggesting the possibility of civil war in the US in the next ten years is up to 35% now.

The more more people read fb the more likely.  Dump fb and save the world.  And your own life.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

3 hours ago, The Great Unwashed said:

I’m not saying I think they’re deliberately doing so - most likely they’re too stupid or short-sighted to see it, but the outcome will be the same, and they will bear their share of the blame for being blinkered morons who think they can negotiate with traitors. How stupid can someone possibly be? But I digress.

Agreed on the stupidity and shortsightedness but let's not forget corruption. Doubtless they rationalize their choices to themselves but when you have a clear financial stake in the policies at issue (as with Manchin) or when you apparently revel in big-dollar fundraising (as with Sinema), there is going to be an influence. And most of the party is subject to these influences, to a greater or lesser degree. 

[DMC]

Most Senate Republicans don't want to see Trump run again:

Quote

These GOP senators definitely don’t want to see Trump announce a bid before the 2022 midterm elections, fearing that could sink their hopes of winning back the Senate.

More broadly, they’re generally reluctant to see him on the ballot in 2024 at all because of his track record with independent and swing voters.

Several Republican senators, who requested anonymity to discuss Trump frankly, said they don’t want to see Trump return as the party’s standard bearer.

Now, I'm skeptical if it's actually "most," or if the authors of the article could even be sure of that, but I do believe at least 17 GOP Senators share this sentiment.  Which begs the question why they didn't prevent him from running again when they had the chance.  Fucking craven little Eichmanns.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

16 hours ago, TrackerNeil said:

I grew up in the 80s, when the fear of nuclear annihilation was rampant, but I have never felt more pessimistic about the world than I do now. I think the real danger is not people blowing everything up at once, but people permitting a slow decline of democracy, government, infrastructure, the environment...anything that requires work and faith. Our political system enables a nihilistic minority to almost entirely stymie the efforts of the majority to make those things function as they must, and consequently our democracy misfires, our government is increasingly ineffective, our infrastructure crumbles around us, and the planet is turning into a slowly heating petri dish for super-storms.

Humanity won't be quickly incinerated by a nuclear blast, I think; instead, we'll be slowly suffocated by a cloud of cynicism, faux worldly-wise sneering, and a total unwillingness to believe in anything or anyone. The end of the world won't be abrupt and spectacular but protracted, stupid, and embarrassing. 

This is a direct result of the cultural hegemony specific to capitalist societies. That's why it is so important to end this supposed economic system which is actually just a method designed so a few people can hoard all the wealth, all the values, all the laws, rules, institutions, etc.

Capitalism has been so pervasive that it has never been removed wholly from a country. That should be scary to more people. 

[Kalbear]

The other cynical possibility is that Manchin and Sinema are right, in that they see how the US is going to become a single party county in practice and want to ensure that they are at least palatable to that single party of oligarchs. And that their survival and their families survival and success rides on them not rocking the boat too much. 

The concept that this could at all change or get better is both obviously wrong and not particularly interesting to them. 

[HoodedCrow]

It is good for oligarchs to know who to bribe. Having close numbers enables buying the key vote.
 

[Ran]

1 hour ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

Capitalism has been so pervasive that it has never been removed wholly from a country. That should be scary to more people. 

You are sending this out on a hosted forum by typing the above on a device that sends it over a network made up of millions of miles of wires and cables being routed by complex machinery and software that are powered by electrical generators fueled by various forms of energy from renewables to fossil, and every step of that is the work of capitalism.

Every. Single. Step.

You can convince me that there are problems with capitalism, but you'll never be able to convince me that the solution is that capitalism must be done away with. Until such time as we reside in a Star Trek/Culture future of post-scarcity, capitalism seems, like democracy, to be the worst form of economy, except for everything else we've tried.