| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
JJLehto 
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
|
 Posted: July 23 2016 at 14:56 |
 Dean wrote:
Electing Trump won't be a complete disaster. Of course it has the potential for being a complete disaster for the USA and the World in general and there is little doubt that the PotUS's adoptive title of "Leader of the Free World" will take a serious beating, but in the long-term taking the USA down a peg or two won't be a universal "bad thing". In the eyes of the rest of the World Trump will most likely be the most unpopular US president of the modern era and whatever credibility that Obama gained for the USA on the World stage will be lost overnight, however a blunt truth here is we don't like how you behave very much anyway nor do we like your bully-boy approach to foreign affairs and commerce but we do like your money. Your exports are crap (seriously, they are - USA produced goods are the McDonald's of the manufacturing industry) but boy do we love the American dollar. World leaders will bend over backwards (and take one for the team) to ensure the dollars keep flowing regardless of who sits in the Oval office; and the US Administration (whoever the mandarins sitting behind the throne may be) will keep us sweet to maintain the USA as the prime arms-dealer of the World. [The hidden purpose of TTIP is not in what it is proposing, but in what is excluded - military procurement, which is regulated separately by ITAR - smoke and mirrors].
Maybe with Trump as president the American people will see themselves as others see them. It won't come as a huge surprise to the rest of the World if he is elected because in too many respects Trump is a cruel caricature of how many non-Americans view the USA - a distorted stereotype of how first GIs and then American tourists were perceived by the countries they visited (idiom generator: pick two adjectives at random, prefix them with "over-" and end with "and over here"). Perhaps it will be a wake-up call against complacency and the shake-up that American politics sorely needs.
It could even be argued that Trump is a safer bet than Clinton (or anyone else come to that) because every one his many campaign promises are un-realisable in any practical sense - he will become embroiled in so many struggles with in his own Administration, his adoptive Republican party and with the Democrats that he will not be able to overcome with Executive Orders and Presidential Proclamations. He could be the most ineffectual US president in history, and given his character and dubious 'business' practices, he could be the most impeached.
Brexit has shown that you get what you deserve and perhaps the USA doesn't deserve better.  |
Well I have always said I feel Trump, if elected, would about face and abandon most of his extreme rhetoric, and would probably work with Democrats/whatever policy is feasible. He is obsessed with winning, and loathes to ever look like a failure, he will do what he can to stay a "winner" and "guy who gets stuff done"
I strongly believe he'd a moderate, fairly successful (in terms of achievement not agreeing with his policies), probably somewhat embarassing, President. Remember the guy used to be pro choice, pro gay marriage, pro universal healthcare and supported drug liberalization, assault rifle ban, and more third party power in politics. He actually aborted his 2000 campaign due to the influence of people like David Duke. He went off the rails after Obama was elected. I assume it's all just pandering on his part. It works so he's using it.
My biggest concern is the darkness he's brought up to the surface, his rhetoric, his tactics. How he exploits all this ugliness simply for his gain, is willing to fan these flames. Also I fear he would start a war, harm our civil liberties, and be a caterer to the wealthy/powerful but this will happen with any Republican, and hell it'd probably happen with Clinton/many Democrats too.
OR he will actually stick to his guns, try to achieve his stated policies, and be a massive failure. One term President, and I do believe there's a chance he'd try to be impeached. So either way I agree, it wont be the death of the country.
I do fear what it may do to our intl image, one that was being repaired under Obama, and would be thrown away. It always pained me to be lumped in with "all Americans" and it makes me angry the image we all are forced to live under, but hell I can't fault the world....I shake my head at what I see almost daily. I feel like there's 2 countries in our borders sometimes. I still take some comfort in the fact there's UKIP/Farage, Le Pen, Wilders, all the others in Europe. I like to think maybe we rational, sane people are in the same boat all over the world. BUT Trump takes it to a new level....as always the US must win, even in being crazy. 
Edited by JJLehto - July 23 2016 at 14:58
|
 |
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46828
|
Posted: July 23 2016 at 16:17 |
JJLehto wrote:
micky wrote:
so quick informal poll in a thead...
over/under of the life of the Republican Party. 8 years.
was... as some have suggested. Like Bush himself. That he was perhaps the last Republican President. ( haha.. there is a some sort of cosmic justice in that potential closing statement of his Presidency and the Republican Party in general)
The party is dying.. I don't think you have to be especially prescient to see that...
“Republicans are going to send me a bill for smaller government and it
contains eliminating Planned Parenthood? Give me a break,”
they have zero idea how to govern.. shown no ability to do so and their whole ideology is bankrupt.. if not outright contradictions and fantasy...
is it to be replaced by the Libertarian Party? Do they hit 15% this year. They definitely could. Setting themselves up as party to have something we haven't had a many many years.. a true 3 party race in 2020. Again giving the Presidency to the Democrats (Hillary) as the basic problem with the GOP in 2016 will get no better in 2020. They don't have good candidates.. no basis as a party other running 'against'. Be it Hillary or social progeression. Thus in 2024... does the GOP finally crash and burn.. the victim of of its own lack of ideas and vision. Watching the Libertarian Party closely this cycle... how many Republicans jump ship this cycle. It will likely only gain in traction as we go...
so what say you all...
8 years?
|
Nah. There were people that felt the Republican Party may come to an end after Goldwater's 1964 debacle. Today...his extreme anti government views and opposition to the Civil Rights Act seems, well mainstream. I think things will go as I said long ago: They will continue to lose the Presidency but keep owning Congress. Now dont get me wrong, they can barely hold together as a single party and cant actually get their own budgets passed without Dem help BUT they can keep obstructing. Keep championing themselves as the defenders of freedom and blah blah against that big bad government, holding the line against everything. They were extremely unified when in opposition.
Remember...it's not just about the PotUS, the GOP currently owns Congress. Yes, the Senate will likely flip Dem and they will make big gains in the House, but I read the long term outlook for Reps in Congress is good. Republicans also have a strong majority of governorships, and majority of state legislatures. It seems to me the Dems are kind of in trouble....outside the Presidency they are the minority nationwide.
|
interesting point.. good point. They suck at leading... having forgotten that it takes compromise to govern feeling they have some sort of mandate to RULE, to dictate. Thus we have the do nothing Congress of today. They do seem to be a party more suited to back bench bombthrowing than actually doing anything productive, like the hard work of getting legislation passed. You might be right about the future of the GOP... but my crystal ball is telling me I am. This cycle has shown the GOP has fully gone off the cliff.. 'batsh*t crazy' in Graham's famous quote...they long ago lost touch with common Americans.. now they have lost touch with their own base. I think, a growing number are beginning to think, that we are seeing in 2016 the first visible signs of the breakup of the GOP and the Libertarians are settting themselves up nicely to pick up the pieces. For them Brian winning the Presidency is everything.. think they are content with with being a party of backbench bomb throwers. They are looking at losing big not just this cycle but in the near future. It is a fair question. Was Bush the last GOP President. The electoral math already favors the Democrats. Why do they fear change so much... duh.. the changing demographics favor the Democrats. I think the Liberatarian Party needs to be watched closely. They'll likely clear 5%.. perhaps closer to 15% this year unless the possible does happen and Trump loses his marbles under the pressure of a full blown campaign and shows himself, as we all know, to be completely unsuited for the job. If that happened.. watch the Libertarians reach 25% and a sh*t load of money, and overall exposure kicks in and in 2020 you'll have 3 major parties in play... and you'll have to wonder how many Republicans jump the sinking ship of the failed (at a national level) GOP. Just my thoughts of course... and yeah.. the Democrats have their own issues to deal with but the key to oure problems is an easy one. The Democratic Party has a long way it can move to the left being still today a very centrist party. Many failed and lost elections taught old school Democrats that in order to survive.. you have to take the middle... but make no mistake that many centrists.. myself... Hillary... are full blown liberals.. experience has taught us that principal alone doesn't win elections.. pragmatism does. However the Democratic Party is slowly but surely drifting to the left. I posted that chart some time back in this thread showing the movement of away from the center over the last few years of both parties. The GOP is many years ahead of us in vacating the middle... the Democrats are starting to catch up and the party... Democrats themselves are moving to the left.
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46828
|
Posted: July 23 2016 at 16:34 |
|
one last bit on your post Brian... more of the US population identifies itself as Democratic than Republican and unless the GOP does a complete 180 and recognize that surviving and remaining political viable means jetisonning the political dead weight of white nativists, racists, and the holy rollers that forget we are secular nation not a theocracy temporaily hijacked by liberals from the intent of the founding fathers the numbers again don't look good for the GOP at a national level. As the demographics change.. as will the overall numbers edge for the Democrats.
The problem always had been.. due to their well known and yes.. effective tactic of playing upon fear and division the GOP mobilize their supporters to a greater degree than the more numerous but more prone to be politically apathetic Democratic segment of the population. Most notably in local elections.
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 64352
|
Posted: July 23 2016 at 17:33 |
micky wrote:
so quick informal poll in a thead...
over/under of the life of the Republican Party. 8 years.
was... as some have suggested. Like Bush himself. That he was perhaps the last Republican President. ( haha.. there is a some sort of cosmic justice in that potential closing statement of his Presidency and the Republican Party in general). The party is dying.. I don't think you have to be especially prescient to see that...
so what say you all...
8 years? |
Oh Mike if only I believed that; the commentators have been saying that for years now, decades even, and it never seems to come to pass. The GOP convention comes, goes, a sort of false enthusiasm forms, and they're off on another blind-leading-the-blind crusade that always seems to attract the worst Americans ... remember Crazy McCain Lady ? Oy - - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjfB1tdCO9I
|
|
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: July 23 2016 at 22:58 |
Dean wrote:
rogerthat wrote:
HP still makes good laptops, that I give, certainly my favourite as somebody who can't afford a Macintosh.
|
My HP ProBook is Made in China, my iPad is Made in China, my iPhone is Made in China.
And before everyone gets all exited by "designed in USA" Apple products - Sir Jonathan 'Jony' Ive is a Brit.  |
Yeah, I was referring more to the brand being American. But this is an important point: those high volume consumer products of American companies that are successful worldwide are manufactured in China so they don't count as American exports (though I am sure they do account for huge royalty inflows into America).
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: July 24 2016 at 04:04 |
JJLehto wrote:
Dean wrote:
Electing Trump won't be a complete disaster. Of course it has the potential for being a complete disaster for the USA and the World in general and there is little doubt that the PotUS's adoptive title of "Leader of the Free World" will take a serious beating, but in the long-term taking the USA down a peg or two won't be a universal "bad thing". In the eyes of the rest of the World Trump will most likely be the most unpopular US president of the modern era and whatever credibility that Obama gained for the USA on the World stage will be lost overnight, however a blunt truth here is we don't like how you behave very much anyway nor do we like your bully-boy approach to foreign affairs and commerce but we do like your money. Your exports are crap (seriously, they are - USA produced goods are the McDonald's of the manufacturing industry) but boy do we love the American dollar. World leaders will bend over backwards (and take one for the team) to ensure the dollars keep flowing regardless of who sits in the Oval office; and the US Administration (whoever the mandarins sitting behind the throne may be) will keep us sweet to maintain the USA as the prime arms-dealer of the World. [The hidden purpose of TTIP is not in what it is proposing, but in what is excluded - military procurement, which is regulated separately by ITAR - smoke and mirrors].
Maybe with Trump as president the American people will see themselves as others see them. It won't come as a huge surprise to the rest of the World if he is elected because in too many respects Trump is a cruel caricature of how many non-Americans view the USA - a distorted stereotype of how first GIs and then American tourists were perceived by the countries they visited (idiom generator: pick two adjectives at random, prefix them with "over-" and end with "and over here"). Perhaps it will be a wake-up call against complacency and the shake-up that American politics sorely needs.
It could even be argued that Trump is a safer bet than Clinton (or anyone else come to that) because every one his many campaign promises are un-realisable in any practical sense - he will become embroiled in so many struggles with in his own Administration, his adoptive Republican party and with the Democrats that he will not be able to overcome with Executive Orders and Presidential Proclamations. He could be the most ineffectual US president in history, and given his character and dubious 'business' practices, he could be the most impeached.
Brexit has shown that you get what you deserve and perhaps the USA doesn't deserve better. |
Well I have always said I feel Trump, if elected, would about face and abandon most of his extreme rhetoric, and would probably work with Democrats/whatever policy is feasible. He is obsessed with winning, and loathes to ever look like a failure, he will do what he can to stay a "winner" and "guy who gets stuff done"
I strongly believe he'd a moderate, fairly successful (in terms of achievement not agreeing with his policies), probably somewhat embarassing, President. Remember the guy used to be pro choice, pro gay marriage, pro universal healthcare and supported drug liberalization, assault rifle ban, and more third party power in politics. He actually aborted his 2000 campaign due to the influence of people like David Duke. He went off the rails after Obama was elected. I assume it's all just pandering on his part. It works so he's using it.
My biggest concern is the darkness he's brought up to the surface, his rhetoric, his tactics. How he exploits all this ugliness simply for his gain, is willing to fan these flames. Also I fear he would start a war, harm our civil liberties, and be a caterer to the wealthy/powerful but this will happen with any Republican, and hell it'd probably happen with Clinton/many Democrats too.
OR he will actually stick to his guns, try to achieve his stated policies, and be a massive failure. One term President, and I do believe there's a chance he'd try to be impeached. So either way I agree, it wont be the death of the country.
I do fear what it may do to our intl image, one that was being repaired under Obama, and would be thrown away. It always pained me to be lumped in with "all Americans" and it makes me angry the image we all are forced to live under, but hell I can't fault the world....I shake my head at what I see almost daily. I feel like there's 2 countries in our borders sometimes. I still take some comfort in the fact there's UKIP/Farage, Le Pen, Wilders, all the others in Europe. I like to think maybe we rational, sane people are in the same boat all over the world. BUT Trump takes it to a new level....as always the US must win, even in being crazy. |
Racism and racist play on and exploit inherent xenophobia - xenophobia is a natural survival-instinct that all animals have to protect themselves from the unknown. Fear and distrust of anything foreign, alien or unknown is natural because they are perceived as potential threats and the instinct for survival kicks in to evaluate a possibly harmful situation. That assessment of the available facts determines whether the threat is real or not and prompts the appropriate flee or fight defensive action if it is deemed to be real.
In itself, xenophobia is not "a bad thing" nor is it racist. Where is becomes racism is when the risk assessment fails through deliberate malice or ignorance that leads to inappropriate action (in deed or thought). I use the word ignorance with caution there - in the UK support for UKIP correlates strongly with areas of low immigrant population - which suggests the UKIP support there is born out of ignorance of the facts (of immigration and integration) rather than simply that all UKIP supporters are ignorant period - their xenophobic fear is due to a poor risk-assessment and that is when it ceases to be xenophobia and becomes racism. Racists exploit that by distorting the facts and exaggerating the threat to gain support. Farage, Le Pen, Wilders and Trump are racists because they exploit xenophobia and thus create more racists. Their supporters and followers are racist because they accept the lies and misinformation out of ignorance.
Conservatives by definition resist change, their aim is to conserve and preserve the status quo so like xenophobes they also fear the unknown. Rather than convert the unknown to known (through knowledge, education, understanding and proper risk-assessment), they promote and exploit that fear of the unknown in their supporters.
Between 1965 and 1986 London was governed by the Greater London Council (the GLC) and it's offices (County Hall) were on the south bank of the Thames directly opposite the Houses of Parliament. London, being a multinational, cosmopolitan metropolis has always been (and still is) the diametric political opposite of the rest of the UK - and, like the geographical opposing placement of County Hall and the Palace of Westminster, when the Socialist were in government Londoners voted for a Tory-led GLC and when the Tories won a general election they voted for a Socialist-led GLC.
In the mid-80s, at the height of Margaret Thatcher's supremacy, this was too much for Thatcherite control freaks so they mobilised their supporters (who didn't live in London and were not directly affected by anything the GLC did) by a campaign of fear and misinformation that exploited everything the Tory-voting white middle classes of middle England feared the most - newspaper stories of "Red Ken" and the "Marxist" GLC squandering tax-payers money supporting black lesbians in Tower Hamlets were rife. The fate of London's duly elected GLC was decided by people who were non-Londoners and in 1986 they succeeded in abolishing the GLC. Part of County Hall is now a Marriott Hotel and the rest of it is an indoor tourist attraction run by Merlin Entertainment Inc. (i.e., cosy US-owned corporate capitalist ventures).
Scaremongering is a proven powerful political tool - in the UK the sobriquet "Project Fear" is now used as a derogatory term to deflect attention away from (and to validate) their own scaremongering. The SNP first used it against the Unionists in the Scottish Referendum and lately the Brexiters used it (and still use it) against the Remain campaign while their whole argument was based upon scaremongering and xenophobic exploitation.
Trump is (possibly) the finest exponent of this we have seen in modern times and I wouldn't underestimate the damage he could do with this power. He is not only maliciously exploiting the xenophobic fear of the unknown, he is also feeding the ignorance that creates it. The test will be in how controllable he is, and that is another natural fear of the unknown.
Edited by Dean - July 24 2016 at 04:11
|
|
What?
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46828
|
Posted: July 24 2016 at 05:55 |
Atavachron wrote:
micky wrote:
so quick informal poll in a thead...
over/under of the life of the Republican Party. 8 years.
was... as some have suggested. Like Bush himself. That he was perhaps the last Republican President. ( haha.. there is a some sort of cosmic justice in that potential closing statement of his Presidency and the Republican Party in general). The party is dying.. I don't think you have to be especially prescient to see that...
so what say you all...
8 years? |
Oh Mike if only I believed that; the commentators have been saying that for years now, decades even, and it never seems to come to pass. The GOP convention comes, goes, a sort of false enthusiasm forms, and they're off on another blind-leading-the-blind crusade that always seems to attract the worst Americans ... remember Crazy McCain Lady ? Oy - -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjfB1tdCO9I
|
true that David. However we just saw a historical bad, disfunctional convention one ranked by non-partisans. Historians as a convention ranking with '68 (18 and 19 ) as the worst in American Political history. More than that... with exception of 1868 we have never seen one filled with more hatred, anger and outright xenophobism. Now we know that a certain segment of the American population is bigoted, racist and xenophobic but I can't believe that all Republicans believe that. Hell, I know they are not all like that. I have the friends (at least before before unfriended by many on Facebook ) that are Republican but are not closet KKK members. So what do they think of their party today.. it would be an interesting question to ask but even if this forum is very diverse in terms of its membership. It sure doesn't appear that way politically. If there are any Trump supporters they sure are hiding aren't they. Not that I blame them, god luck explaining that on a progressive leaning website. The point stands though. There are I suppose a good number of rational ..thinking.. Republcian voters. Does the Republican Party today represent them, their views, their interests. Make no mistake, Trump didn't appear out of nowhere and only in his decidely unpolished delivery does he differ from the establishment. The message he delivers is lock step with the establishment. Power is gained by appealing to fear and division. What happens when normal rational Republicans finally say.. this is not my party anymore. You would think they will find a like minded party that does share their views of limited government but not at the expense of .. but not when it comes to using Governement to intrude to please our religious zealots... or using minorities as scapegoats for every ill that plagues this country. What happens then... the Party splits.. will it happen. I would think so but defintiely wouldn't say it WILL happen. I do think the question is more a question a when rather than if myself. I dont' think the Republican Party has the guts, willpower, or smarts to turn its back on the supporters, it's base nowadays that are full of hate, anger and fear. The GOP added fuel to the fire to the point I think the fire has got out their control. As I said in my opening post.. interesting days and years ahead...
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
timothy leary
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 29 2005
Location: Lilliwaup, Wa.
Status: Offline
Points: 5319
|
Posted: July 24 2016 at 09:55 |
Dean wrote:
The Dark Elf wrote:
Dean wrote:
Your exports are crap (seriously, they are - USA produced goods are the McDonald's of the manufacturing industry) but boy do we love the American dollar.
|
Hmmm...which products are you referring to precisely? Given that most American production has been outsourced to Third World Countries, I am not sure your claim holds water. But products actually "Made in America" are very durable and well-crafted. My wife and I go out of our way to purchase American-made products, and find it increasingly difficult to find them. But we've been quite pleased with what we have. For instance, just try try take our Sub-Zero refrigerator and Viking range (both U.S. made) from my wife. She will break your fingers. Since we are on a prog site, as far as musical instruments, I just bought my daughter a Fender Precision jazz bass, and have used American-made Martins, Gibsons and Ovations (the Connecticut factory closed in 2014, unfortunately) for the past 40 years. I have never been disappointed; on the contrary, all my guitars are keepers. Powell flutes? Zildjian cymbals? Steinway pianos? Taylor, Carvin and Rickenbacker guitars? Dean Markley and Elixir strings?
Perhaps you are referring to the auto industry? Hmmm...I know the Jeep I drive was made in Ohio, and my wife's Subaru was assembled in Indiana (with engine and other parts from Japan). But since most cars are a hodgepodge of parts from all over the world, I don't know. Got any specifics? |
Are you having a laugh! Viking Range and Sub-zero Refrigerator... Seriously? A £10,000 cooker and a £15,000 'fridge. That's like claiming all Italian cars are great because of Ferrari and Lambourgini ... I owned a White-Westinghouse hob and it was a piece of crap. "Made in the USA" is not a marque of quality.
and Tim...
timothy leary wrote:
My wife does not want to part with her Kitchen Aid mixer.
|
My KitchenAid mixer is a terrific piece of kit and well made that's for sure, but it has "Made in China" stamped in the bottom. (...and not all it's cracked up to be though, having owned both I think the Kenwood Chef is better). As Madan suggested perhaps you keep the good stuff for the home market.
I guess my wife's mixer really does not count, it is 40 years old and still works just fine.
Odd that of all the negative things I said about the USA, this is the only thing you all pick up on. Sure, you guys are pretty good a making a few non-essential luxury items for home consumption, but that isn't where you earn your 1.5 trillion dollars of exports, $630 billion of which is in manufactured goods (irrespective of where the component parts are actually fabricated)... so no, you're not selling 42 million fricken' Sub-zero 'fridges world-wide.
...and as for counter-attacking British and English manufactured items - good luck with that, we sold off all our manufacturing to USA owned multinationals years ago... most of it going to GE.
/edit. PS: I work for an American-owned electronics company.
|
|
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
|
Posted: July 24 2016 at 14:30 |
micky wrote:
JJLehto wrote:
micky wrote:
so quick informal poll in a thead...
over/under of the life of the Republican Party. 8 years.
was... as some have suggested. Like Bush himself. That he was perhaps the last Republican President. ( haha.. there is a some sort of cosmic justice in that potential closing statement of his Presidency and the Republican Party in general)
The party is dying.. I don't think you have to be especially prescient to see that...
“Republicans are going to send me a bill for smaller government and it
contains eliminating Planned Parenthood? Give me a break,”
they have zero idea how to govern.. shown no ability to do so and their whole ideology is bankrupt.. if not outright contradictions and fantasy...
is it to be replaced by the Libertarian Party? Do they hit 15% this year. They definitely could. Setting themselves up as party to have something we haven't had a many many years.. a true 3 party race in 2020. Again giving the Presidency to the Democrats (Hillary) as the basic problem with the GOP in 2016 will get no better in 2020. They don't have good candidates.. no basis as a party other running 'against'. Be it Hillary or social progeression. Thus in 2024... does the GOP finally crash and burn.. the victim of of its own lack of ideas and vision. Watching the Libertarian Party closely this cycle... how many Republicans jump ship this cycle. It will likely only gain in traction as we go...
so what say you all...
8 years?
|
Nah. There were people that felt the Republican Party may come to an end after Goldwater's 1964 debacle. Today...his extreme anti government views and opposition to the Civil Rights Act seems, well mainstream. I think things will go as I said long ago: They will continue to lose the Presidency but keep owning Congress. Now dont get me wrong, they can barely hold together as a single party and cant actually get their own budgets passed without Dem help BUT they can keep obstructing. Keep championing themselves as the defenders of freedom and blah blah against that big bad government, holding the line against everything. They were extremely unified when in opposition.
Remember...it's not just about the PotUS, the GOP currently owns Congress. Yes, the Senate will likely flip Dem and they will make big gains in the House, but I read the long term outlook for Reps in Congress is good. Republicans also have a strong majority of governorships, and majority of state legislatures. It seems to me the Dems are kind of in trouble....outside the Presidency they are the minority nationwide.
|
interesting point.. good point. They suck at leading... having forgotten that it takes compromise to govern feeling they have some sort of mandate to RULE, to dictate. Thus we have the do nothing Congress of today. They do seem to be a party more suited to back bench bombthrowing than actually doing anything productive, like the hard work of getting legislation passed.
You might be right about the future of the GOP... but my crystal ball is telling me I am. This cycle has shown the GOP has fully gone off the cliff.. 'batsh*t crazy' in Graham's famous quote...they long ago lost touch with common Americans.. now they have lost touch with their own base. I think, a growing number are beginning to think, that we are seeing in 2016 the first visible signs of the breakup of the GOP and the Libertarians are settting themselves up nicely to pick up the pieces.
For them Brian winning the Presidency is everything.. think they are content with with being a party of backbench bomb throwers. They are looking at losing big not just this cycle but in the near future. It is a fair question. Was Bush the last GOP President. The electoral math already favors the Democrats. Why do they fear change so much... duh.. the changing demographics favor the Democrats.
I think the Liberatarian Party needs to be watched closely. They'll likely clear 5%.. perhaps closer to 15% this year unless the possible does happen and Trump loses his marbles under the pressure of a full blown campaign and shows himself, as we all know, to be completely unsuited for the job. If that happened.. watch the Libertarians reach 25% and a sh*t load of money, and overall exposure kicks in and in 2020 you'll have 3 major parties in play... and you'll have to wonder how many Republicans jump the sinking ship of the failed (at a national level) GOP.
Just my thoughts of course... and yeah.. the Democrats have their own issues to deal with but the key to oure problems is an easy one. The Democratic Party has a long way it can move to the left being still today a very centrist party. Many failed and lost elections taught old school Democrats that in order to survive.. you have to take the middle... but make no mistake that many centrists.. myself... Hillary... are full blown liberals.. experience has taught us that principal alone doesn't win elections.. pragmatism does.
However the Democratic Party is slowly but surely drifting to the left. I posted that chart some time back in this thread showing the movement of away from the center over the last few years of both parties. The GOP is many years ahead of us in vacating the middle... the Democrats are starting to catch up and the party... Democrats themselves are moving to the left.
|
And as you'll notice my GOP predictions aren't exactly bright...I'm pretty much relegating them to perpetual obstructionists, who can't do anything more than say no and hold the line, they certainly can never govern (couldn't even keep many of their top people in their positions!) and I know demographically....the future doesn't look good for them: more college graduates, more minorities, and the white working class will continue to dwindle, in fact saw a 538 article explaining how in perhaps 30 years the working class of America will be majority-minority. So they don't have a great outlook either.
I will be fair, they have tried to be more open and reach out to hispanics especially, but had to walk that line, and we saw in recent years when they made a decided effort to reach out, it lead to the Trump rebellion, so the deal they made with the devil (catering to white racists subtly) has really come back to get em.
Yeah, it's a shame what happened in 2010. The extreme anger that fueled the tea party was pretty much all due to Obamacare and the big deficits, which really pisses me off because it's not even that the Dems were too liberal/governed poorly...everyone just got up in arms over "Socialized/big gov healthcare" and "wreckless spending" but Obamacare is very moderate, it really is basically a giant subsidy to the private insurance sector, the gov sure as hell didn't take over anything, so it really angered me how off base the anger was. And the deficits were pretty short sighted, they've been low for years now and it's never really brought up anymore, so it was pure political pandering behind all that.
Well I'm all for pragmatism, I still consider myself one, just I think new tactics are needed. Ya know, ways to sell what are considered "progressive" ideas in different ways. Like how a public option can be pro business, and if they wanna spend $ they should do so in a good way, like on direct jobs programs, so we can "put people to work/ensure people dont abuse welfare" and they can "maintain/build their workforce skills" stuff righties will love to hear. While I disagree I can see why so many conservatives thought the stimulus was a failure, $800 billion and little direct, visible, impact. It's begging to be used to as "government sucks!" rhetoric.
I wont disagree on Hillary, Bill I'm not sure is a full blown liberal, he was a southern Dem from the 70s who was still willing to cater to racial worries for his benefit, but yeah I just want a new strategy: better education/getting the word out, aim farther and compromise then opposed to compromise from the start and go nowhere, and really gotta either get $ out of politics or find a way to beat it, but that's a real hard one to achieve. Necessary though, lobbying influences wrecked the health and wall street reform bills. I mean, lots of centrist Democrats are fairly pro labor...that used to Democratic strength in the south and midwest, pro labor politics and they wiggle on social issues. Now it's flipped, the mainstream is forced to be socially liberal, but also anti labor, pro finance/corporate/wealthy and willing to make cuts to social spending. I still wanna believe economic populism can be a successful tool for the Democrats. I can accept a social moderate in return, though I disagree.
Edited by JJLehto - July 24 2016 at 15:09
|
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
|
Posted: July 24 2016 at 14:46 |
As for the GOP splitting. We'll see..they did survive 1964, but who knows, the divide is getting fierce. It's beyond ideology now, but actually the soul of the party. While it seems a good number of Republicans (maybe 30-35%) believe in racial identity politics, the majority don't. I do wanna stress, Trump won in a crowded field. Generally the majority was against him, but they couldn't decide on their own candidate.
Anecdotal I know, but my college roomie is a center-right but dedicated Republican, is voting for Gary Johnson, and when I said dude, never thought you'd break from the party, he simply can't accept Trump. Two other conservative friends of mine (one a historic Santorum backer  , another a Ron Paul type) are going Gary as well, also citing they simply won't back Trump. Given Gary is up to 10-13% they are not alone.
The end game of all this really needs to be a multi party, proportional vote system. For a looooooooooong time 2 parties worked well, it kept extremism at bay and centrism in power, change could happen but only slowly. The problem is I think the opposite is going on, we're currently drifting more to the sides so centrists/mainstreamers are now the ones being shut out by the system. It's becoming too hard to reconcile all this within one party, to beat the dead horse the GOP is basically breaking into 3 parties and they all seem more unwilling to give in, and the Dems are years behind, but seems there own fissure is forming, again over the very soul and definition of the party.
|
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
|
Posted: July 24 2016 at 14:57 |
Anyway, I'm sure we all heard the news about the leaked emails basically confirming what we all knew, the DNC really wasn't neutral in the race and tried to actively thwart Sanders, apparently one person discussed using his religion against him, disgusting, and DWS has been booted from speaking at the DNC, pretty bad given she's the chair of the DNC and it's just broke she will be resigning her position.
Seems Marcia Fudge of Ohio is slated to be the new chair of the DNC, a very low key name (I actually have not heard of her before) and seems she is a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, so this is good news, this is what healing can look like.
It was a mistake to put DWS there anyway, the position should be neutral, and even before this campaign she was divisive and not terribly popular, I'd say she's been damaging to the party, glad she will be gone.
|
|
LearsFool
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 09 2014
Location: New York
Status: Offline
Points: 8618
|
Posted: July 24 2016 at 15:04 |
|
Good f**kin' riddance. Easily one of the worst party chairs of all time. In recent months even members of Hillary's camp were through with her malarkey. Now it's high time to save the Democratic Party from itself.
|
|
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46828
|
Posted: July 24 2016 at 15:07 |
JJLehto wrote:
micky wrote:
JJLehto wrote:
micky wrote:
so quick informal poll in a thead...
over/under of the life of the Republican Party. 8 years.
was... as some have suggested. Like Bush himself. That he was perhaps the last Republican President. ( haha.. there is a some sort of cosmic justice in that potential closing statement of his Presidency and the Republican Party in general)
The party is dying.. I don't think you have to be especially prescient to see that...
“Republicans are going to send me a bill for smaller government and it
contains eliminating Planned Parenthood? Give me a break,”
they have zero idea how to govern.. shown no ability to do so and their whole ideology is bankrupt.. if not outright contradictions and fantasy...
is it to be replaced by the Libertarian Party? Do they hit 15% this year. They definitely could. Setting themselves up as party to have something we haven't had a many many years.. a true 3 party race in 2020. Again giving the Presidency to the Democrats (Hillary) as the basic problem with the GOP in 2016 will get no better in 2020. They don't have good candidates.. no basis as a party other running 'against'. Be it Hillary or social progeression. Thus in 2024... does the GOP finally crash and burn.. the victim of of its own lack of ideas and vision. Watching the Libertarian Party closely this cycle... how many Republicans jump ship this cycle. It will likely only gain in traction as we go...
so what say you all...
8 years?
|
Nah. There were people that felt the Republican Party may come to an end after Goldwater's 1964 debacle. Today...his extreme anti government views and opposition to the Civil Rights Act seems, well mainstream. I think things will go as I said long ago: They will continue to lose the Presidency but keep owning Congress. Now dont get me wrong, they can barely hold together as a single party and cant actually get their own budgets passed without Dem help BUT they can keep obstructing. Keep championing themselves as the defenders of freedom and blah blah against that big bad government, holding the line against everything. They were extremely unified when in opposition.
Remember...it's not just about the PotUS, the GOP currently owns Congress. Yes, the Senate will likely flip Dem and they will make big gains in the House, but I read the long term outlook for Reps in Congress is good. Republicans also have a strong majority of governorships, and majority of state legislatures. It seems to me the Dems are kind of in trouble....outside the Presidency they are the minority nationwide.
|
interesting point.. good point. They suck at leading... having forgotten that it takes compromise to govern feeling they have some sort of mandate to RULE, to dictate. Thus we have the do nothing Congress of today. They do seem to be a party more suited to back bench bombthrowing than actually doing anything productive, like the hard work of getting legislation passed.
You might be right about the future of the GOP... but my crystal ball is telling me I am. This cycle has shown the GOP has fully gone off the cliff.. 'batsh*t crazy' in Graham's famous quote...they long ago lost touch with common Americans.. now they have lost touch with their own base. I think, a growing number are beginning to think, that we are seeing in 2016 the first visible signs of the breakup of the GOP and the Libertarians are settting themselves up nicely to pick up the pieces.
For them Brian winning the Presidency is everything.. think they are content with with being a party of backbench bomb throwers. They are looking at losing big not just this cycle but in the near future. It is a fair question. Was Bush the last GOP President. The electoral math already favors the Democrats. Why do they fear change so much... duh.. the changing demographics favor the Democrats.
I think the Liberatarian Party needs to be watched closely. They'll likely clear 5%.. perhaps closer to 15% this year unless the possible does happen and Trump loses his marbles under the pressure of a full blown campaign and shows himself, as we all know, to be completely unsuited for the job. If that happened.. watch the Libertarians reach 25% and a sh*t load of money, and overall exposure kicks in and in 2020 you'll have 3 major parties in play... and you'll have to wonder how many Republicans jump the sinking ship of the failed (at a national level) GOP.
Just my thoughts of course... and yeah.. the Democrats have their own issues to deal with but the key to oure problems is an easy one. The Democratic Party has a long way it can move to the left being still today a very centrist party. Many failed and lost elections taught old school Democrats that in order to survive.. you have to take the middle... but make no mistake that many centrists.. myself... Hillary... are full blown liberals.. experience has taught us that principal alone doesn't win elections.. pragmatism does.
However the Democratic Party is slowly but surely drifting to the left. I posted that chart some time back in this thread showing the movement of away from the center over the last few years of both parties. The GOP is many years ahead of us in vacating the middle... the Democrats are starting to catch up and the party... Democrats themselves are moving to the left.
|
And as you'll notice my GOP predictions aren't exactly bright...I'm pretty much relegating them to perpetual obstructionists, who can't do anything more than say no and hold the line, they certainly can never govern (couldn't even keep many of their top people in their positions!) and I know demographically....the future doesn't look good for them: more college graduates, more minorities, and the white working class will continue to dwindle, in fact saw a 538 article explaining how in perhaps 30 years the working class of America will be majority-minority. So they don't have a great outlook either.
they don't...and the question does have to be asked. Well.. it surely is being asked among top Republicans. What happens if Hillary wins..can the party really survive a generation or more out of power for Warren is waiting in the wings either to follow 8 years of her or to pick off a weakened ineffective Hillary after one term if she does not move the party to left. We saw the Reagan revolution... we will see I strongly believe.. the Warren revolution of a left-ward shift in this countries priorities. Bernie wasn't the one..he didn't have the political smarts or savvy to ..she does and is ...
I will be fair, they have tried to be more open and reach out to hispanics especially, but had to walk that line, and we saw in recent years when they made a decided effort to reach out, it lead to the Trump rebellion, so the deal they made with the devil (catering to white racists subtly) has really come back to get em.
they simply can not appeal to both. Immigrants and those that fear them, hate them, blame them for the problems in the country. One or the other. That is why of course their 'outreach' failed. Trust me they know the math as well or better than any of us as they dissected the previous election deeper than any of us could have and saw the numbers and trends. The problem is we are talking about career politicians here No guts or forward vision to tell the bigots, racists and religious fundamentalists to piss off...
Yeah, it's a shame what happened in 2010. The extreme anger that fueled the tea party was pretty much all due to Obamacare and the big deficits, which really pisses me off because it's not even that the Dems were too liberal/governed poorly...everyone just got up in arms over "Socialized/big gov healthcare" and "wreckless spending" but Obamacare is very moderate, it really is basically a giant subsidy to the private insurance sector, the gov sure as hell didn't take over anything, so it really angered me how off base the anger was. And the deficits were pretty short sighted, they've been low for years now and it's never really brought up anymore, so it was pure political pandering behind all that.
of course it was... all wrapped up in the current political bogeyman of 'socialism' when most Americans have not a frickin clue what Socialism really is. Good word to scare people with and we know that is page 1 of the GOP playbook... if in doubt.. you have no real policies or ideas of your own to stand upon.. just scare the voters...
Well I'm all for pragmatism, I still consider myself one, just I think new tactics are needed. Ya know, ways to sell what are considered "progressive" ideas in different ways. Like how a public option can be pro business, and if they wanna spend $ they should do so in a good way, like on direct jobs programs, so we can "put people to work/ensure people dont abuse welfare" and they can "maintain/build their workforce skills" stuff righties will love to hear. While I disagree I can see why so many conservatives thought the stimulus was a failure, $800 billion and little direct, visible, impact. It's begging to be used to as "government sucks!" rhetoric.
I wont disagree on Hillary, Bill I'm not sure is a full blown liberal, he was a southern Dem from the 70s who was still willing to cater to racial worries for his benefit, but yeah I just want a new strategy: better education/getting the word out, aim farther and compromise then opposed to compromise from the start and go nowhere, and really gotta either get $ out of politics or find a way to beat it, but that's a real hard one to achieve. Necessary though, lobbying influences wrecked the health and wall street reform bills. I mean, lots of centrist Democrats are fairly pro labor...that used to Democratic strength in the south and midwest, pro labor politics and they wiggle on social issues. Now it's flipped, the mainstream is forced to be socially liberal, but also anti labor, pro finance/corporate/wealthy and willing to make cuts to social spending. I still wanna believe economic populism can be a successful tool for the Democrats. I can accept a social moderate in return, though I disagree.
|
I read an interesting article on Politico today regarding the future of the Democratic Party. I think the rapid leftward shift and priorities of the Party did catch Hillary, and Obama by surprise. Again being much smarter many times over than I am, likely any of us are, they know that playing the centrist card (especially when looking at Trump as ones opponent) is the wise way to win this election but once in office they are likely going to be looking a very emboldened left wing of the Party. Perhaps I'm wrong.. but don't think I am.. she was always more liberal than Bill but obviously was not the President herself and had to position herself as a centrist to get where she is. While the progressive left is strong now.. it was non-existant as a real political force 4 years ago.. 8 years.. whatever. I'd be willing to bet we'll see Hillary comfortably move leftward and work in hand with a Democratic, and strong leftist Senate power block led by Warren. We shall see...
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46828
|
Posted: July 24 2016 at 15:09 |
LearsFool wrote:
Good f**kin' riddance. Easily one of the worst party chairs of all time. In recent months even members of Hillary's camp were through with her malarkey. Now it's high time to save the Democratic Party from itself. |
yep... she needed to go... though I'll miss seeing pictures of her splashed all over the place.. god I loved her hair...
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
|
Posted: July 24 2016 at 15:43 |
LearsFool wrote:
Good f**kin' riddance. Easily one of the worst party chairs of all time. In recent months even members of Hillary's camp were through with her malarkey. Now it's high time to save the Democratic Party from itself. |
Agreed on all counts, she's been detrimental to the party, and all this "preserving the legacy of Obama" stuff, but she threw out his rule on banning lobbying contributions...such BS.
BTW Micky final response to our loooong posts. The Democratic Party needs to realize, understand and react to current sentiments as well. I read an article a while back opining that McGovern and Mondale weren't too liberal, they weren't what was needed at the time. They were out of place, for that time.
It made me think, that's kinda what happened in 08. Clinton ran to the right of Obama, (which remember many also felt there were racial undertones to her campaign) and knocked his lack of experience/hyped hers up, ran as the pragmatic, gritty person and knocked Obama's lofty goals. But that isn't what we needed. We needed hope and yearn for change, we were more accepting of a liberal candidate than maybe was anticipated. Candidate Obama was far more populist than he was as President...
Look at the GOP. They clearly underestimated/failed to realize how strong anti gov sentiment really was, and how strong racial sentiment was. They misjudged and have paid mightily for it. (Not saying that stuff is right, just purely factual) So I wanna just keep that in mind, the party shouldn't be tooooo slow/stuck in their ways.
Edited by JJLehto - July 24 2016 at 15:46
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46828
|
Posted: July 24 2016 at 16:01 |
JJLehto wrote:
BTW Micky final response to our loooong posts. The Democratic Party needs to realize, understand and react to current sentiments as well.
I read an article a while back opining that McGovern and Mondale weren't too liberal, they weren't what was needed at the time. They were out of place, for that time.
It made me think, that's kinda what happened in 08. Clinton ran to the right of Obama, (which remember many also felt there were racial undertones to her campaign) and knocked his lack of experience/hyped hers up, ran as the pragmatic, gritty person and knocked Obama's lofty goals. But that isn't what we needed. We needed hope and yearn for change, we were more accepting of a liberal candidate than maybe was anticipated. Candidate Obama was far more populist than he was as President...
Look at the GOP. They clearly underestimated/failed to realize how strong anti gov sentiment really was, and how strong racial sentiment was. They misjudged and have paid mightily for it. (Not saying that stuff is right, just purely factual) So I wanna just keep that in mind, the party shouldn't be tooooo slow/stuck in their ways.
|
I might be wrong.. but I think President Hillary will be far more populist than Candidate Hillary. I suspect it is in her personal makeup but also because simply she will have no choice but to IF..IF it is a Democratic Senate she has to work with. Not just a Democratic one but one flush with a core of new progressive Senators that Warren has been working under the radar to get elected while Trump and Hillary having been working the main stage. If not.. all bets are off.. it will be back to Bill's excellent centrist playbook and incrementalism and compromise having to work with hostile houses of Congress. The Progressive revolution will have to wait another election cycle or two..perhaps till the GOP implodes or .till the voters FINALLY tire of an obstructionist no-nothing Congress and finally lay the blame where it belongs.. the fools they are electing.
Edited by micky - July 24 2016 at 16:02
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
|
Posted: July 24 2016 at 16:20 |
micky wrote:
JJLehto wrote:
micky wrote:
JJLehto wrote:
micky wrote:
so quick informal poll in a thead...
over/under of the life of the Republican Party. 8 years.
was... as some have suggested. Like Bush himself. That he was perhaps the last Republican President. ( haha.. there is a some sort of cosmic justice in that potential closing statement of his Presidency and the Republican Party in general)
The party is dying.. I don't think you have to be especially prescient to see that...
“Republicans are going to send me a bill for smaller government and it
contains eliminating Planned Parenthood? Give me a break,”
they have zero idea how to govern.. shown no ability to do so and their whole ideology is bankrupt.. if not outright contradictions and fantasy...
is it to be replaced by the Libertarian Party? Do they hit 15% this year. They definitely could. Setting themselves up as party to have something we haven't had a many many years.. a true 3 party race in 2020. Again giving the Presidency to the Democrats (Hillary) as the basic problem with the GOP in 2016 will get no better in 2020. They don't have good candidates.. no basis as a party other running 'against'. Be it Hillary or social progeression. Thus in 2024... does the GOP finally crash and burn.. the victim of of its own lack of ideas and vision. Watching the Libertarian Party closely this cycle... how many Republicans jump ship this cycle. It will likely only gain in traction as we go...
so what say you all...
8 years?
|
Nah. There were people that felt the Republican Party may come to an end after Goldwater's 1964 debacle. Today...his extreme anti government views and opposition to the Civil Rights Act seems, well mainstream. I think things will go as I said long ago: They will continue to lose the Presidency but keep owning Congress. Now dont get me wrong, they can barely hold together as a single party and cant actually get their own budgets passed without Dem help BUT they can keep obstructing. Keep championing themselves as the defenders of freedom and blah blah against that big bad government, holding the line against everything. They were extremely unified when in opposition.
Remember...it's not just about the PotUS, the GOP currently owns Congress. Yes, the Senate will likely flip Dem and they will make big gains in the House, but I read the long term outlook for Reps in Congress is good. Republicans also have a strong majority of governorships, and majority of state legislatures. It seems to me the Dems are kind of in trouble....outside the Presidency they are the minority nationwide.
|
interesting point.. good point. They suck at leading... having forgotten that it takes compromise to govern feeling they have some sort of mandate to RULE, to dictate. Thus we have the do nothing Congress of today. They do seem to be a party more suited to back bench bombthrowing than actually doing anything productive, like the hard work of getting legislation passed.
You might be right about the future of the GOP... but my crystal ball is telling me I am. This cycle has shown the GOP has fully gone off the cliff.. 'batsh*t crazy' in Graham's famous quote...they long ago lost touch with common Americans.. now they have lost touch with their own base. I think, a growing number are beginning to think, that we are seeing in 2016 the first visible signs of the breakup of the GOP and the Libertarians are settting themselves up nicely to pick up the pieces.
For them Brian winning the Presidency is everything.. think they are content with with being a party of backbench bomb throwers. They are looking at losing big not just this cycle but in the near future. It is a fair question. Was Bush the last GOP President. The electoral math already favors the Democrats. Why do they fear change so much... duh.. the changing demographics favor the Democrats.
I think the Liberatarian Party needs to be watched closely. They'll likely clear 5%.. perhaps closer to 15% this year unless the possible does happen and Trump loses his marbles under the pressure of a full blown campaign and shows himself, as we all know, to be completely unsuited for the job. If that happened.. watch the Libertarians reach 25% and a sh*t load of money, and overall exposure kicks in and in 2020 you'll have 3 major parties in play... and you'll have to wonder how many Republicans jump the sinking ship of the failed (at a national level) GOP.
Just my thoughts of course... and yeah.. the Democrats have their own issues to deal with but the key to oure problems is an easy one. The Democratic Party has a long way it can move to the left being still today a very centrist party. Many failed and lost elections taught old school Democrats that in order to survive.. you have to take the middle... but make no mistake that many centrists.. myself... Hillary... are full blown liberals.. experience has taught us that principal alone doesn't win elections.. pragmatism does.
However the Democratic Party is slowly but surely drifting to the left. I posted that chart some time back in this thread showing the movement of away from the center over the last few years of both parties. The GOP is many years ahead of us in vacating the middle... the Democrats are starting to catch up and the party... Democrats themselves are moving to the left.
|
And as you'll notice my GOP predictions aren't exactly bright...I'm pretty much relegating them to perpetual obstructionists, who can't do anything more than say no and hold the line, they certainly can never govern (couldn't even keep many of their top people in their positions!) and I know demographically....the future doesn't look good for them: more college graduates, more minorities, and the white working class will continue to dwindle, in fact saw a 538 article explaining how in perhaps 30 years the working class of America will be majority-minority. So they don't have a great outlook either.
they don't...and the question does have to be asked. Well.. it surely is being asked among top Republicans. What happens if Hillary wins..can the party really survive a generation or more out of power for Warren is waiting in the wings either to follow 8 years of her or to pick off a weakened ineffective Hillary after one term if she does not move the party to left. We saw the Reagan revolution... we will see I strongly believe.. the Warren revolution of a left-ward shift in this countries priorities. Bernie wasn't the one..he didn't have the political smarts or savvy to ..she does and is ...
I will be fair, they have tried to be more open and reach out to hispanics especially, but had to walk that line, and we saw in recent years when they made a decided effort to reach out, it lead to the Trump rebellion, so the deal they made with the devil (catering to white racists subtly) has really come back to get em.
they simply can not appeal to both. Immigrants and those that fear them, hate them, blame them for the problems in the country. One or the other. That is why of course their 'outreach' failed. Trust me they know the math as well or better than any of us as they dissected the previous election deeper than any of us could have and saw the numbers and trends. The problem is we are talking about career politicians here No guts or forward vision to tell the bigots, racists and religious fundamentalists to piss off...
Yeah, it's a shame what happened in 2010. The extreme anger that fueled the tea party was pretty much all due to Obamacare and the big deficits, which really pisses me off because it's not even that the Dems were too liberal/governed poorly...everyone just got up in arms over "Socialized/big gov healthcare" and "wreckless spending" but Obamacare is very moderate, it really is basically a giant subsidy to the private insurance sector, the gov sure as hell didn't take over anything, so it really angered me how off base the anger was. And the deficits were pretty short sighted, they've been low for years now and it's never really brought up anymore, so it was pure political pandering behind all that.
of course it was... all wrapped up in the current political bogeyman of 'socialism' when most Americans have not a frickin clue what Socialism really is. Good word to scare people with and we know that is page 1 of the GOP playbook... if in doubt.. you have no real policies or ideas of your own to stand upon.. just scare the voters...
Well I'm all for pragmatism, I still consider myself one, just I think new tactics are needed. Ya know, ways to sell what are considered "progressive" ideas in different ways. Like how a public option can be pro business, and if they wanna spend $ they should do so in a good way, like on direct jobs programs, so we can "put people to work/ensure people dont abuse welfare" and they can "maintain/build their workforce skills" stuff righties will love to hear. While I disagree I can see why so many conservatives thought the stimulus was a failure, $800 billion and little direct, visible, impact. It's begging to be used to as "government sucks!" rhetoric.
I wont disagree on Hillary, Bill I'm not sure is a full blown liberal, he was a southern Dem from the 70s who was still willing to cater to racial worries for his benefit, but yeah I just want a new strategy: better education/getting the word out, aim farther and compromise then opposed to compromise from the start and go nowhere, and really gotta either get $ out of politics or find a way to beat it, but that's a real hard one to achieve. Necessary though, lobbying influences wrecked the health and wall street reform bills. I mean, lots of centrist Democrats are fairly pro labor...that used to Democratic strength in the south and midwest, pro labor politics and they wiggle on social issues. Now it's flipped, the mainstream is forced to be socially liberal, but also anti labor, pro finance/corporate/wealthy and willing to make cuts to social spending. I still wanna believe economic populism can be a successful tool for the Democrats. I can accept a social moderate in return, though I disagree.
|
I read an interesting article on Politico today regarding the future of the Democratic Party. I think the rapid leftward shift and priorities of the Party did catch Hillary, and Obama by surprise. Again being much smarter many times over than I am, likely any of us are, they know that playing the centrist card (especially when looking at Trump as ones opponent) is the wise way to win this election but once in office they are likely going to be looking a very emboldened left wing of the Party. Perhaps I'm wrong.. but don't think I am.. she was always more liberal than Bill but obviously was not the President herself and had to position herself as a centrist to get where she is. While the progressive left is strong now.. it was non-existant as a real political force 4 years ago.. 8 years.. whatever. I'd be willing to bet we'll see Hillary comfortably move leftward and work in hand with a Democratic, and strong leftist Senate power block led by Warren.
We shall see...
|
Yeah I agree, Hillary was certainly more liberal and has played the centrist card, Bill I just don't know. I do get and can't argue with borader appeal/centrism in an election like this, where Trump is alienating more and more people. As for what she would do as PotUS and how they'd deal with an increasingly liberal party, we shall see indeed. I hope I am wrong, and I will admit if I am. If she does stick to her guns and push a liberal agenda and work to get things done in a forward moving fashion, and the party does acknowledge the growing movement, I will gladly admit to being wrong and 2020 will stump for Clinton hardcore.
I will say, I am not sure the speed has caught people by surprise. In 08 Obama ran on pro middle class, semi anti inequality platform, discussed our bad trade deals (though he certainly made no effort and has instead continued them) pro universal healthcare. A more moderate version of Bernie, or more like he's been a more extreme version of Obama. The 2016 map does look a lot like 2008, and many Obama 08 Democrats were Sanders 16. I kinda feel like it's more like Sanders backers are those who continue to push for what they wanted in 08. Once the election is over, it would be wise to emulate the tea party and build bottom up, and dedicate to these progressive ideas. Bernie did very well in places like Indiana, West Virginia....he won both white working class voters, and young progressives. Rural kentucky and Seattle. Absolutely this was proof of how they can expand their base and really win the future. Just hope they learn that.
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46828
|
Posted: July 24 2016 at 16:56 |
oh I'd have no doubt that speed of the leftward shift of the party has completely taken everyone by surprise... most of those driving it were not even able to vote when Obama was elected for heaven's sake. The liberal wing of the Party then only consisted a few radiicals...California flakes and flower children that never grew up. As you noted earlier.. this grew from the grassroots... on college campuses and the internet...and it grew completely under the radar to its depth and passion.
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46828
|
Posted: July 24 2016 at 17:59 |
something interesting to chew on.... we were just talking about this last week at my office where 3 of us are Gulf War vets who have our own experiences with PTSD and reintegrating and with close eyes on gun violence and radicalization and the politics of it all.... Here is your government in action ... I'm not sure what was worse... having your patriotism questioned as a vet for not supporting the 2nd Gulf War or being seen as some sort of half assed hero in which the mere thought of doing anything bad become radioactive political fodder... http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/gop-veteran-radicalization-dhs-dallas-baton-rouge-214089
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
Sardonite Calamity
Forum Newbie
Joined: June 09 2016
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 31
|
Posted: July 24 2016 at 18:04 |
Plain and simple: I'm for Donald Trump. Too bad I'm canadian... 
|
|
I used to have a really good signature but I forgot it...
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
American Politics the 2016 edition