US Politics: Primary Schoolin'

[Kalbear]

Meanwhile we're already getting awesome results from AI: robocalls with deepfake Biden telling NH democratic voters not to vote:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/01/robocall-with-artificial-joe-biden-voice-tells-democrats-not-to-vote/

 

[Larry of the Lawn]

There is one other pretty specific issue that Biden failed to deliver that could also be a factor in keeping people home - student loan debt.   Sure, they made things a little better but the reversal of the $10k / $20 k policy probably didn't help him any.  

[Phylum of Alexandria]

23 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

The important factor is not about WHY it didn't get better because it doesn't matter; the important part is that they voted for Biden on the promise that it would get better in those ways and it didn't turn out that way. 

All true, but that's the rationale for a referendum vote. 2020 will be a choice election. A choice between (at worst) "not great" and "fucking insane and terrible."

That's the case that has to be made, at least. But I think that's a reasonable feat to achieve.

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

Okay, I know what I meant and that was what I meant. Feel free to keep telling me that I'm wrong though, that's worked out super well for you in the past. 

??????????????????????  You can know what you think but don't expect others to mind-read.  And again, abortion was a big factor for rhe 2020 election, but neither Israel nor Ukraine had glimmered.

So haven't a clue as to what you refer.  But alas, in any case everything about which I've expressed fears and notice in these so-called political matters, from abortion to fascism, has come to pass, while having been told over and over I was lost in tinfoil hat world, just starting with abortion.

And right now there are big reports in venues such as both the WaPo and The Hill about Dems pushing on Biden in regard to his weapons support of Netanyahu -- and yes, even Bernie Sanders has signed on to this.

[IheartIheartTesla]

4 hours ago, TrackerNeil said:

While I've no doubt some few will swing back to Trump--it's a big country, after all--I sincerely doubt that most Republicans who voted Biden in 2020, against their own party, are going to change their minds. After all, both Trump and Biden are pretty much the same candidates they were in 2020. (Trump has more indictments than he did then, it is true.)

Yeah, I am hoping the 'reluctant Democrats' will come back to the fold too, in enough numbers. Keep in mind that while the polls right now show Trump slightly shading Biden, we'd the latter to have a comfortable cushion of 3-4 points (at least) because of the built in EC advantage for the Republicans, which concurrently would also show he's doing better in the key 'swing states' 

Only reason we are talking national polls at this stage is because those state polls are exceedingly sparse. The NYT/Siena one is the only one in recent memory.

[The Anti-Targ]

6 hours ago, TrackerNeil said:

Your hope may prove well founded.

I think political opinions get baked in after awhile, and I suspect that opinions about Trump are as baked as one can imagine. Aside from Democratic downballot performance, that's another reason I don't place much stock in those swing-state polls from last autumn. Who exactly is changing minds on Donald Trump? Young anti-Israel protestors? Abortion advocates?

While I've no doubt some few will swing back to Trump--it's a big country, after all--I sincerely doubt that most Republicans who voted Biden in 2020, against their own party, are going to change their minds. After all, both Trump and Biden are pretty much the same candidates they were in 2020. (Trump has more indictments than he did then, it is true.)

Hmmm, I wonder. They were willing to take 4 years of Biden to rid themselves of Trump, but are they willing to take 8 years of Biden before they can get a Republican back into the White House? I'm not sure, their calculus may now be "how bad can 4 years of Trump be? At least after that he will be gone forever...right?"

[drawkcabi]

I think this is a really good piece

(and really bad for my acid reflux)

We can't trust polls as much because their methods aren't keeping up with the times (cell phones). But I think we can get a bit of reflective data from them and a few other means and what that data says isn't good. Significant portions of Gen Z and other voting blocks on the left aren't going to show up for Biden, they are going to vote 3rd party or not at all.

I think with all Trumps legal issues, Biden's still in this and maybe can still turn things around...but yeah, this puts good focus on a what's been worrying me.

 

 

[kissdbyfire]

3 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Hmmm, I wonder. They were willing to take 4 years of Biden to rid themselves of Trump, but are they willing to take 8 years of Biden before they can get a Republican back into the White House? I'm not sure, their calculus may now be "how bad can 4 years of Trump be? At least after that he will be gone forever...right?"

Shouldn't both Republicans and Democrats be used to it by now? I mean, it's almost as if the term is 8 years instead of 4, given how few presidents didn't manage to get reelected in the last 50 or 60 years... There's been... 3? Carter, Bush Sr. and Trump?

[The Anti-Targ]

They're stupid. There are only 2 things progressive voters need to be thinking about when deciding how to vote: On a national basis - re-balancing the Supreme court; on a global basis - climate change policy. How is your vote going to influence those issues?

Kick out the 1 term Republican because he's not conservative enough is a thing no conservative voter has ever said. Trump didn't lose in 2020 because he lost conservative support, If anything he gained support, given he got ~12 million more votes in 2020 than in 2016.

But it seems progressives are all too keen to kick out Democratic presidents because they're not progressive enough.

And people wonder why Democrats keep losing.

[TrackerNeil]

12 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Shouldn't both Republicans and Democrats be used to it by now? I mean, it's almost as if the term is 8 years instead of 4, given how few presidents didn't manage to get reelected in the last 50 or 60 years... There's been... 3? Carter, Bush Sr. and Trump?

Yes, it is always good to remember that the fundamentals often matter more than current events. Most incumbent presidents are reelected, so all things being equal the smart money is usually on the incumbent. 

Also, it's vital to remember that this political situation is, for everyone currently alive in this nation, a first: a president who lost reelection running for another term. That's going to scramble many of the normal political calculations, and has already done so. Trump's had the Republican nomination clinched for about two years, even if some people didn't see it. (Ron DeSantis, I am looking in your direction.)

Edited January 23 by TrackerNeil

[Martell Spy]

Donald Trump has a big problem ahead
A whole swath of GOP voters appears firmly committed to not voting for Trump in November.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/01/23/trump-moderate-republicans-problem-00137112

Quote

 

Donald Trump has a problem no matter what happens in New Hampshire on Tuesday night: There’s a whole swath of the Republican electorate and a good chunk of independents who appear firmly committed to not voting for him in November if he becomes the nominee.

It’s an issue that became starkly apparent in polling ahead of the Iowa caucuses, when an NBC News/Des Moines Register/Mediacom poll of voters in that state found that fully 43 percent of Nikki Haley supporters said they would back President Joe Biden over Trump. And it’s a dynamic that has been on vivid display as the campaign shifted this week to New Hampshire.

“I can’t vote for Trump. He’s a crook. He’s too corrupt,” said Scott Simeone, 64, an independent voter from Amherst, who backed Trump in 2016 and 2020. “I voted for him, and I didn’t realize he’s as corrupt as he is.”

 

 

[kissdbyfire]

Excellent pod w/ Heather Cox Richardson, where she shares many positive takes and one big concern of hers regarding the blasted Electoral College.

https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/on-with-kara-swisher/id1643307527?i=1000642473142

 

[TrackerNeil]

14 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

But it seems progressives are all too keen to kick out Democratic presidents because they're not progressive enough.

There's something quite illiberal about some of these progressives, methinks. They remind me of the religious right, back in the 80s: utterly certain of every belief, intolerant of dissent, and prepared to smite those who dare to question that certainty. I don't care for ideological rigidity no matter what side of the politcal spectrum spawns it.

[Zorral]

JAMELLE BOUIE
Did No One Tell Ron DeSantis That Trump Was Running, Too?

Like the cruelty, 

"The chaos isn’t a distraction; it’s the point."

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/23/opinion/desantis-trump-republicans-primaries.html

Quote

 

... nearly a decade after Trump announced his first real campaign for the White House, elite conservatives still don’t understand the source of his appeal or his connection to Republican voters, who were itching to vote for him as far back as the 2012 Republican presidential primary campaign. Trump, in some of the earliest trial heats in that race, led Mitt Romney among Republican voters.

Or rather, the two groups ultimately want two different things. Elite conservatives want a president who will reconfigure and consolidate the executive branch to their advantage and cement conservative influence on the federal judiciary and in the federal bureaucracy.

Republican voters, on the other hand, want a fighting champion. They want a spectacle. DeSantis promised a Trump presidency without the drama, but Republican voters want the drama. The chaos isn’t a distraction; it’s the point.

Republican voters like that Trump is disruptive and unruly. They like that he alienates and polarizes Democrats and liberals against him. They like that he crashes through the American political system, indifferent to either the damage or the consequences. Republican voters like Trump not despite his failings; they like Trump because he is Trump. And there’s nothing any other Republican can do about it.

 

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

33 minutes ago, Zorral said:

JAMELLE BOUIE
Did No One Tell Ron DeSantis That Trump Was Running, Too?

Like the cruelty, 

"The chaos isn’t a distraction; it’s the point."

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/23/opinion/desantis-trump-republicans-primaries.html

 

My real slogan for American politics going forward is:

”Make Government Boring Again”.

The pro-wrestlization of US Politics is insane.  It should be boring policy wonks… but no… we get Trump MTG and Boebert…

[Kalbear]

7 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

My real slogan for American politics going forward is:

”Make Government Boring Again”.

The pro-wrestlization of US Politics is insane.  It should be boring policy wonks… but no… we get Trump MTG and Boebert…

I meant to respond to this earlier, but the reason you thought politics were boring is because all the damage that was being done wasn't being done to you. Now that you've got skin in the game you're wanting it to go back to just hurting minorities, non-photogenic foreign countries and poor people like the good old days. 

[Liffguard]

12 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

My real slogan for American politics going forward is:

”Make Government Boring Again”.

The pro-wrestlization of US Politics is insane.  It should be boring policy wonks… but no… we get Trump MTG and Boebert…

Those policy wonks who you want to go back to are the same people who created the conditions that led to our current situation. Why would it be different a second time around?

[TrackerNeil]

Just now, Liffguard said:

Those policy wonks who you want to go back to are the same people who created the conditions that led to our current situation. Why would it be different a second time around?

I don't read Ser Scot's words that way. Instead, I see this as a desire for politicians who won't suck up all of the oxygen in existence on a daily basis. I'd rather have a Brendan Boyle, who just tends to the mechanics of government, than Marjorie Taylor-Green, who spends her time either shrieking on the floor of the House or shrieking to Fox News.

One of the best things about Biden's presidency is that I don't have to spend time every day wondering what the fuck is happening in the White House.

Others seem to have interpreted Ser Scot's comment as some blithe statement of privilege, but I don't.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

8 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

I don't read Ser Scot's words that way. Instead, I see this as a desire for politicians who won't suck up all of the oxygen in existence on a daily basis. I'd rather have a Brendan Boyle, who just tends to the mechanics of government, than Marjorie Taylor-Green, who spends her time either shrieking on the floor of the House or shrieking to Fox News.

One of the best things about Biden's presidency is that I don't have to spend time every day wondering what the fuck is happening in the White House.

Others seem to have interpreted Ser Scot's comment as some blithe statement of privilege, but I don't.

Thank you.  
 

@Kalbear @Liffguard

I certainly don’t think the US Government was perfect before the current era.  I don’t think it worked perfectly or protected those it should have protected… and failed to do its duty to (or actively persecuted) racial minorities and people in the LGBTQ sphere.

However… I also don’t think it actively attempted to destroy itself via bizarre theater as the current Republican Party seems to desire.  

All I’m saying is that I would prefer serious policy wonks running the US Government to the conspiracy kooks and dominionists the Republican Party now offers.  

Edited January 23 by Ser Scot A Ellison

[Zorral]

@Ser Scot A Ellison   A new book that might be of interest to those who yearn for boring politics:

The Taft Court: Making Law for a Divided Nation, 1921-1930,” a two-volume study by Robert C. Post, the most recent contribution to the Oliver Wendell Holmes Devise History of the Supreme Court of the United States.

Jill Lapore provides a lengthy review of it in The New Yorker -- 

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/01/29/the-taft-court-robert-c-post-book-review

But you know politics was never boring for large swathes of Americans, even before the War of Independence -- think of the Taney court, for instance. Woodrow Wilson's administrations that codified and solidified legally Jim Crow, etc.  The plots to assassinate Theodore Roosevelt. The Civil Rights era in which so many Black people lost their lives in their search for freedom. The horrors experienced by women arrested for seeking their right to vote -- not to mention being denied not only legal abortion but contraception of every kind, and so on and so forth.  Labor unions fighting to get decent wages and working conditions.  Not to mention Native Americans attempting to merely survive.

As you know, it's merely that well meaning white middle class males could afford to settle into boring politics, other than occasionally tut-tutting.   For the rest of us, not so much.

And indeed many of those who were our state and federal government have tried to destroy them before. And succeeded in doing so for quite a few years.