The American Politics Thread - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: June 09 2017 at 17:22

rogerthat wrote:

JJLehto wrote:

What do you mean by "given up" exactly? I don't know if the Democrats have given up on the midwest, or just assumed they will always vote for Democrats. This was a fatal flaw in the Clinton campaign who ignored the rust belt under the assumption they will automatically back her. Unless you mean specific liberal writers/liberals in general in which case I can't say I have an answer. All I can think of is as the party has become increasingly liberal on social issues, dedicated to college graduates and urban dwellers maybe they view the midwest as rednecks, backwards, too conservative etc etc Which would be a damn shame.

That'd just be arrogance. I'm a middle class, dense suburb raised, college graduate from the northeast and I don't look down on the midwest. The opposite, I do feel for lots of people who voted for Trump. While misguided, there are major problems out there for a lot of Americans who have been left behind by changes.

There does seem to be some more agreement from the mainstream even that globalization has at least not worked as smoothly as believed. I agree, it's actually a stupid idea that's been pushed. You said it, there is simply not enough tech/white collar/knowledge jobs to support 100 million people. Especially with globalization creating intl competition...a good friend of mine is always nervous that he needs to train the south african branch of his company, because they are paid much much less and can design websites right there, he fears he's training his own replacement. Anyway, it's certainly unrealistic to think the "new" economy will just absorb all these people. Especially with a lack of resources. To even have a chance at landing a job like that you need college. So 4 years and many thousands of dollars. What about a 35 year old who has only worked that job and has a family. Can't exactly just go to school to study computers. Especially with such weak public assistance.

I was referring to that when I said "given up". Like saying "if you don't want to get on our social platform, then go f*** yourselves". Maybe they have done exactly that...by voting in Trump, who will also make life miserable for everyone in general along with those who were 'forgotten' by previous govts.

Ah, yeah no doubt. Progress is progress, moderate or conservative Democrats need to accept this is a party and they are in the minority, but the party was foolish to abandon so many people economically as well. Obama proved the rust belt will hold onto social liberals long as they still believe the person has their interests in mind.

While I am a social liberal, and believe any national candidate should be, we should be tolerant of diversity below. I recall Sanders took some flak for endorsing a pro life Mayor, and Tom Perez said how all democrats need to be 100% pro choice, guns were made SUCH a big issue and frankly that's not wise. We need to do all we can to keep people in the tent. Focus on economics, allow some moderation at state and local level.

rogerthat

Prog Reviewer

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869

Posted: June 09 2017 at 22:15

JJLehto wrote:

While I am a social liberal, and believe any national candidate should be, we should be tolerant of diversity below. I recall Sanders took some flak for endorsing a pro life Mayor, and Tom Perez said how all democrats need to be 100% pro choice, guns were made SUCH a big issue and frankly that's not wise. We need to do all we can to keep people in the tent. Focus on economics, allow some moderation at state and local level.

And let me add that such doctrinaire convictions are not very, well, liberal so at least they could stop pretending to be liberals if they want to force everyone to align with their positions.

Edited by rogerthat - June 09 2017 at 22:34

SteveG

Forum Senior Member

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20616

Posted: June 10 2017 at 04:16

Atavachron wrote:

^ Not at all; this is a politics thread, you have to expect serious disagreement but you don't have to be part of any tribe (except maybe a diatribe). Of course Hillary was a bad candidate, but compared to Trump she's a brilliant stateswoman. Never going to be elected? She was elected, which is why Trump is down to 19% or so of loyal followers. He will be driven out of Washington so fast his orange skin will turn green before our eyes as the Marshals cuff him and lead him out of the White House, Trump grinning and muttering "You'll all miss me...that I can tell you, that I can tell you. It's gonna be yooj".

Nice one David! The bottom line is that no matter how flawed Hilary is, she is and will always be superior to the lunatic that is now our President. End of story. Jooj! ;)

This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.

micky

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838

Posted: June 10 2017 at 07:02

well said my friend. Oh tribal politics is alive and well.. on the right at least. They knew Trump was fundamentally unfit and unqualified to be elected and still elected him because their political identification would not allow them to possibly vote for a much more qualified,experienced, emphatic politician who while personally flawed.. would still work to improve the lot of all Americans.. not just those that supported her.

The basic calculus of American politics is that tribalism on the right motivates their voters to get out and vote, fear and hate are powerful motivators.. along with an ideological purity that leaves little place for common sense politics. Hense the GOP Heath Care attempts which are much more about feeding the ideological beast.. less taxes,, less government. .than acually ummm.. trying to fix health care.

While the greatest strength and the greatest weakness of the Democratic Party is its pragmatism. Pro Choice Republicans? hah... yet there are many Democrats ..liberal ones like myself that are pro-gun, pro states rights that have a home in the party. Is the Democratic party ideologically based? Does one know anything about politics? Of course it is not.. that again is its greatest strength.. diversity of opinions and looking more than the 5 feet in front of their collective faces and yet its greatest weakness. Note.. almost 30 districts voted for Clinton yet elected a Republican representative. That pragmatism is best for America.. yout know.. thinking rational voters... yet bad for the party. That is a notion that is nonexistent on the right... it is not America first.. it is party first.

Said it once.. said it a 100 times. Trump voter? Be ashamed of yourself .. you knew he was not up the job.. this was not Bush.. all the signs.. warning signs were there.. but you ignored them for voting with the tribe..putting that first... not for country... not putting that first. They voted for him becubecause you didn't put the country first.

The Dark Elf View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

VIP Member

Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 13089

Posted: June 10 2017 at 09:26

Former FBI Director James Comey stated matter-of-factly during his testimony:

"There should be no fuzz on this whatsoever. The Russians interfered in our election during the 2016 cycle. They did it with purpose, they did it with sophistication. They did it with overwhelming technical efforts and measures driven from the top of that government. There's no fuzz on that. It's not a close call. That happened. That's about as unfake as you can possibly get and it is very, very serious, which is why it's so refreshing to see a bipartisan focus on that. Because this is about America."

And yet Donald Trump and his associates have tried repeatedly to lift sanctions against Russia, start a secret back channel with Russia, and for all intents and purposes, ignore that the U.S. was attacked by Russia, even to the point where Trump at one time congratulated Putin for the interference and asked for more. Trump also invited Russian diplomats into the White House (without any U.S. reporters allowed in) and tells them state secrets about an ally.

This isn't "fake news". Every intelligence agency in the U.S. states the same thing. Doesn't anyone consider this anti-American behavior? Trump himself has done nothing but downplay the Russian attack (actually not mentioning it at all, unless it revolves around him not criminally colluding). What president since the Cold War began would ever do that? Is it even fathomable that Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, Reagan or Bush would allow that? Hell no!

This "new norm" in Washington is abnormal. And I despise it. But the Constitution is regularly ignored.

...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: June 10 2017 at 11:25

SteveG wrote:

Nice one David! The bottom line is that no matter how flawed Hilary is, she is and will always be superior to the lunatic that is now our President. End of story. Jooj! ;)

Yeah, and sadly some on the left still hold onto some whack ass views. I know some who still push the "they were the same" "no real difference" line. I never once bought into that, but now that he's actually in power no sane person from the left can say she wouldn't have been better. Every issue Clinton had, Trump has but amplified 100X and he has many other additional problems as well.

How can we forget the conservative rage at Obama for bowing down to the Saudi King? Pic surfaces of Trump bowing to the Saudi King, magically the right is silent LOL

I post an article of Trump's Saudi arms deal with the comment "Didn't people have an issue with Clintons various arms deals as Sect?" again: silence.

Every hypocrisy I point out no one says a peep and basically that's what is wrong with this country.

I had some big issues with Clinton but I am fair and will call out Trump for doing the same things. We lack that....we can't disagree like the old days, we have to refuse to even acknowledge the other person is human and defend/attack at all costs. I mean people jumped to f**kin Milo's defense after his support of pedophiles comment, I was like "Not only is this screwed up but you are a conservative, right?"
I dont know where this tribalism has come from but it's kind of killing our nation. I wanna say the right has stoked this flames for 8 years under Obama, which they have, and I don't recall Dems being THIS vitriolic under Bush, but who knows where it stems from

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: June 10 2017 at 11:31

Yeah Micky, people will never believe us because they can just yell "bias!" but the Democratic party is a pragmatic, open party and the Republicans are not. I used to disagree with them, then I kind of feared/loathed them, but now I hate to say...I'm starting to hate many, I think if they had their ways it would actually destroy this country. And I was never like this, but I just don't know man.

Mitch McConnell has the nerve to say "The Democrats are impeding the Senate" or "I knew they would try to slow things down, typical liberals". Or how after 8 years of Bush the right could suddenly demand fiscal restraint and accounting for every penny under Obama. The Republican Party gets away with this: because the base lets them. That simple

But no one is immune. I did see during the Dem primaries alot of very tribalistic, closed minded and biased behaviors, even people going so far as to defend anti democracy, and no I'm not exaggerating.

Edited by JJLehto - June 10 2017 at 11:33

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: June 10 2017 at 12:07

rogerthat wrote:

JJLehto wrote:

While I am a social liberal, and believe any national candidate should be, we should be tolerant of diversity below. I recall Sanders took some flak for endorsing a pro life Mayor, and Tom Perez said how all democrats need to be 100% pro choice, guns were made SUCH a big issue and frankly that's not wise. We need to do all we can to keep people in the tent. Focus on economics, allow some moderation at state and local level.

And let me add that such doctrinaire convictions are not very, well, liberal so at least they could stop pretending to be liberals if they want to force everyone to align with their positions.

I agree it's not right to force this from top to bottom.

I do think it's fair a national candidate should be socially liberal since large majorities of Democrats are, but I'm all for moderation at lower levels, especially the states. That was supposed to be the "50 state strategy" pushed by Howard Dean to unite democrats even if they moderate-conservative on economic issues, from the bottom up.

Then Obama and Dems won huge, they got lazy (and the mainstream doesn't believe in economic populism) so that never panned out. Clinton and her group were especially hostile to the idea, which cost her in 08 and she actually said how we need a "50 state strategy" in a debate. I was impressed but then...she ignored the rust belt, focused on driving out her "core" voters, and well....sighs.

Chuck Schumer seems to be reaching out more, and Perez has also said we need to attract non blue state Dems, so I am hoping they finally have learned their lesson after 2 Clinton losses in 8 years.

micky

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838

Posted: June 11 2017 at 12:09

JJLehto wrote:

Yeah Micky, people will never believe us because they can just yell "bias!" but the Democratic party is a pragmatic, open party and the Republicans are not. I used to disagree with them, then I kind of feared/loathed them, but now I hate to say...I'm starting to hate many, I think if they had their ways it would actually destroy this country. And I was never like this, but I just don't know man.

well in all honesty Brian.. what the GOP has done ..has worked. They learned with Willie Horton how distortion and playing to fear and bigotry worked and it would have been stupid to not go back to that playbook again and again.. as they have again and again... Trump just gave the master class on how to exploit, misinform and flat out lie to the bigoted and the willfully ignorant as only one who 'outside' the system could.

as far as Democratic tribalism.. sure there was some on display... but small potatoes sh*t there man. As we both know... the party itself is too divided right now.. into its left and center elements to truly do what the GOP has.. to fully tribalize after it when it destroyed its moderate wing in the sake of achieving ideological purity in which you either tow the line and don't compromise or you get run out of town. Now what happens in the years to come.. very interesting... Trump will unite all Democrats. .but come 2024 and beyond? Will be very interesting to see if the ascendant left decides in the name of party purity to stamp out the moderates. We shall see...

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: June 12 2017 at 23:59

Oh yeah, like I said the GOP will get away with it long as their base lets em. Technically can't even fault the GOP, well we can for being so immoral, but pure strategy wise it is indeed working. It's like this constant drift they take into the extreme. I keep thinking "OK they've hit the limit on anti gov sentiment, or anti immigrant sentiment" and nope, someone steps up the plate next for a bigger swing.

Well both parties are split. The GOP one is obvious and has been going on since 2009ish but while everyone says the Democratic one is new, I actually don't know about that. The 2016 fight was in many ways like 2008, certainly many of the same people lined up the same way, and for black heavy southern states Clinton took this time around, there were many white working class states Sanders won that Obama didn't. To this day, I still see Clinton and Obama take jabs. Seriously. During the campaign David Axelrod took more than a few shots at Clinton. Even Biden has taken many jabs at Clinton post election. Not just saying she was a bad candidate but claiming he knew a month in advance she'd lose battleground states. Even if this is just fun/tough guy talk....the fact Biden of all people can so quickly express such resentment. I'm not sure Clinton was as 150% beloved and worshipped as we thought.

And really, Sanders was a, (more leftist) continuation of 2008 Obama, what his bloc wanted. Universal healthcare, higher taxes, regulating wall st, middle class policies, reworking trade deals. All things Obama spoke of back then. I really think the 2016 split was just a reopening of the 2008 split.

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: June 14 2017 at 22:13

Oh not sure I mentioned this, part of why this thread may be getting slow, and a big reason of why I've not been in it much: All we have is Trump and his latest screw up, insane comment/action or Russian revelation. There has been like, nothing in terms of legislation. His travel ban for the 3rd time is being held up by the courts (hey guess those smart people who said it'd never hold up in court knew what they were saying!), healthcare bill isn't talked about anymore, even tax cuts the one thing all Republicans agree on has been on the shelf. Bush had a very mixed Congress and got a massive tax cut signed by this point!

He did pull out of TPP but, like I figured, he never followed up. What about trade deals/relations we already have with those nations? China? NAFTA and CAFTA? Oh sure, he brought up Canadian lumber and how we're getting such a bum deal, then..nothing.

So yeah we do harp on Trump alot and sometimes things get slow but the Republicans are giving us nothing else to talk about! Which I guess is good....because I really don't want their health care plan or tax cuts, but still I keep realizing that we all get bogged down by the spectacle or Russian issue and miss that thus far Trump has achieved nothing at all. Hell, even his opting out of the Paris accord is being ignored by hundreds of leaders and numerous organizations. Even there he's a looooser

Edited by JJLehto - June 14 2017 at 22:19

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: June 14 2017 at 22:33

Well....I stand corrected, some actual news!

The Senate has just passed a bill, 97-2, putting new sanctions on Russia, and limits Trump's ability to lift them.

Only 2 opposed were Mike Lee and Rand Paul (I know, it's soooo shocking)

We shall see if this passes the House and if so, if Trump would sign this. I'm glad to see the direct challenge to Trump and that almost everyone was on board.

Atavachron View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65289

Posted: June 14 2017 at 22:55

^ Maybe they're on board because Trump's a treasonous, emotionally disturbed toad.

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: June 15 2017 at 23:30

Atavachron wrote:

^ Maybe they're on board because Trump's a treasonous, emotionally disturbed toad.

sh*t...that hasn't deterred them thus far LOL

Paul Ryan and Jason Chaffetz and all of em were pretty content to just keep brushing it away. Sure, the McCain's and others we'd expect paid lip service but they've been doing that for all of Trump and always just cave in the end. So I am kind of shocked.

Even more shocking, seems a special council has formed too look into if Trump obstructed justice. According to 538 (aka their word is gold) there's possibility for it to actually be something legitimate. For the first time there's a ray of hope for the impeach crowd.

Atavachron View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65289

Posted: June 15 2017 at 23:38

That's always been our one hope: the law.

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: June 19 2017 at 23:21

Found this weeks ago, realized I never posted it.

For any data nerds, this is the greatest breakdown of the election one can possibly have.

This is the 2016 election map by precinct. Not county, not even city, but precinct.

http://decisiondeskhq.com/data-dives/creating-a-national-precinct-map/

Kudos to a UW grad student who basically had to call/email/write every US precinct to get their data and often had to use maps to draw the lines himself.

Anyway, really cool. You can see the variations in counties, and it's interesting to see just how much red there is in places like Connecticut, New Hampshire, likewise you can see blue spots sprinkled throughout places like Indiana, Oklahoma, even Utah. There's nothing tooooo shocking. Cities are blue, rural areas are red. What I do find interesting is the suburbs are pretty much the factor. You can compare the last 3 elections, and from 2008 to 2016 which is a 180 flip in results, the red and blue is largely the same at its core but the suburbs (and small cities) are the swing.

Gunna make a blog post of it but for the example of Florida, here are some interesting results from 2012-2016

Cities remain blue, the burbs bleed red

The whole Tampa/St Pete suburban sprawl pretty much wiped out. The 5 counties I've shown, their swing accounts for most if not all of Trump's victory in FL.

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: June 21 2017 at 00:02

Gah....lot of hope on Georgia's 6th district. The Dems came up just short, losing 52-48

Disheartening, but the district has backed Republicans, fairly conservative ones, for 40 years. I mean it was the seat of Newt Gingrich. Their wins were always over 60%

So, if shifts like this keep happening, 2018 could bode well for the Dems. Especially that, apparently, moderate Repubs and women jumped ship. This was a conservative, affluent but also highly educated district.

There's hope?

SteveG

Forum Senior Member

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20616

Posted: June 21 2017 at 08:03

^And this is the problem. Repubs generally do not win by landslides. These 2-4 point wins are devastating to the Dems! What will it take to turn the tide?

This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.

Catcher10

Forum Senior Member