The Bigly 2016 US Presidential Election Thread, Part XV

[Irvine511]

They need to be crushed.

Electorally, absolutely.

But not when it comes to actual governance.

 

[martha]

I don't know; they're seriously threatening to withhold SCOTUS confirmations for the bext four years. They need to be made irrelevant and powerless.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Irvine511]

I don't know; they're seriously threatening to withhold SCOTUS confirmations for the bext four years. They need to be made irrelevant and powerless.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

Let them marginalize and ghettoize themselves. A crushing electoral victory will hopefully send a message that obstruction is not the way to retain power. It's already becoming effectively a party of white identity politics, the Romney faction may permanently split (or the Trump TV crowd may).

I just don't think we need to Treaty of Versailles a political party.

 

[Axver]

this might be the dumbest post you've ever made, and that's saying something.

i'm getting really damn sick of this insinuation that somehow a hillary presidency is going to spell doom for america, just in a different way than trump would. "the worst candidate ever", "she's evil", "further despair", like seriously, fuck off. you clearly don't know what true "evil" is, and if you think she's even in the bottom 100 of worst candidates ever then you might as well just post "i know nothing at all about american history" because you're broadcasting that you're a complete idiot. george wallace? andrew jackson? you honestly think she's that much worse than any of the idiots who ran for the GOP nomination this time? hell fucking no. "evil", jesus tapdancing christ. like she's just the white lady version of robert fucking mugabe (or idi amin, or pol pot, or whatever other corrupt tinpot third-world dictator) or someshit. it's so goddam asinine that i instantly lose all respect for the intelligence of a person who seriously thinks that way, because it's absolutely fucking brain-dead stupid.

There are valid criticisms of Hillary but calling her evil is the luxury of a person who has been lucky enough not to experience real evil in life.

As an aside I know people like to jump on BMP here but he is right about one thing - the GOP has become the party of no compromise. Candidly they have been better at digging in their heels since the gerrymandering. To get anything done you really do need to bend WAY too far in their direction. All the more reason to vote D up and down the ticket and hopefully crush them.

These, pretty much.

There is some merit in the argument that the fixation on Trump obscures Hillary's flaws, but ironically I think many of the people who pursue that line of argument obscure Hillary's flaws too. Legitimate critiques are lost within the wailing and gnashing of teeth about her being practically the Apocalypse, proudly sponsored by Big Business. Disagreement with any of her stances does not require depicting her as the devil, or as on the same level as Trump when she quite obviously is not. So instead of an actual debate about real shortcomings, we just have loud shouting about imagined evil.

 

[PhilsFan]

im definitely rolling my eyes at you, peef.

Alright. Cool, man.

 

[DaveC]

Alright. Cool, man.

yea, a politician said it's nice having the support of people with money. stop the fucking presses so we can tell everyone about this new development - wealth brings political influence. shocking.

 

[martha]

Let them marginalize and ghettoize themselves. A crushing electoral victory will hopefully send a message that obstruction is not the way to retain power. It's already becoming effectively a party of white identity politics, the Romney faction may permanently split (or the Trump TV crowd may).

I just don't think we need to Treaty of Versailles a political party.

You're usually right about these things and far more rational about them than I am.

I still won't vote for one. (I may never have to here in Cali. )

 

[Kieran McConville]

yea, a politician said it's nice having the support of people with money. stop the fucking presses so we can tell everyone about this new development - wealth brings political influence. shocking.

Well sure I guess, though these kind of spats show just how far the window has drifted, even among vaguely left/centre-left people.

Do you know what Franklin Delano Roosevelt said about the extremely rich of his era? "I welcome their hatred."

 

[DaveC]

different times were different.

 

[Axver]

Let them marginalize and ghettoize themselves. A crushing electoral victory will hopefully send a message that obstruction is not the way to retain power. It's already becoming effectively a party of white identity politics, the Romney faction may permanently split (or the Trump TV crowd may).

I just don't think we need to Treaty of Versailles a political party.

I don't agree with this. Never rely on your opponent to "marginalise and ghettoise themselves". Do it for them.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

Electorally, absolutely.

But not when it comes to actual governance.

They won't compromise. I don't get why people are blind to this or act like I'm being a dick when it comes to this sort of thing.

I'm totally down with finding the middle ground with Republicans on minimum wage, immigration, etc. The problem is that there is no middle ground. They refuse to budge. You've had eight years of their obstructionism to paint this truth for you time and again.

As I've said for about the dozenth time in this thread, I am for compromise. It's not my way or the highway when it comes to governing. They won't compromise, therefore, there is nothing Clinton or any Democratic President could do to accomplish anything left leaning. It's an absolute fact.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

Tell me again, folks, how the hard left and the hard right can't be compared.

Just switch the words out and you get something right out of the mouths of the more deplorable parts of the talk radio swamp.

Seriously, go take a critical thinking class if you can't understand where I'm coming from here.

 

[Kieran McConville]

different times were different.

Right-ho, you sure told me, man!

 

[cobl04]

There seems to be a tendency in here to say "oh all politicians are tied up with money". "oh all politicians are strategic" regarding Hillary. To wave away legitimate issues. I agree with Peef in that once Trump loses and Hillary goes out on her own, the positivity might wear off fairly quickly.

 

[Irvine511]

Seriously, go take a critical thinking class if you can't understand where I'm coming from here.

Seriously, go look at what you wrote and tell me you aren't advocating the kind of obstructionism of which you're criticizing the right.

 

[Irvine511]

I don't agree with this. Never rely on your opponent to "marginalise and ghettoise themselves". Do it for them.

One could say that the Obama "give 'em enough rope" theory is what has gotten us to this point -- the GOP facing the biggest electoral defeat in a generation, and the discrediting of the entire party in the minds of many, many voters.

 

[cobl04]

How many innocent people get damaged in that strategy? Sure it'll be great if he gets destroyed but how many Muslims have been bashed by white nationalists throughout his campaign?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Irvine511]

How many innocent people get damaged in that strategy? Sure it'll be great if he gets destroyed but how many Muslims have been bashed by white nationalists throughout his campaign?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

I'm not sure I understand. Like, actual bashing? Or, does provoking Trump to attack the Khan family actually work to create more sympathy and understanding for Muslims because he's such a raging asshole and these are literally the most sympathetic people alive and we see actual Muslim bashing as it happens? I saw Hillary's Kahn ad (which I'll try to find) the other morning and was honestly in tears at the end of it. When we see actual Muslim bashing in the media, a somewhat abstract concept is made very real, and most normal people -- maybe people who have never met a Muslim -- are going to say, "oh, well, I want no part in that." Though it came at some political cost, there was also benefit to using the "deplorable" line. Donald Trump and his supporters really do support deplorable ideas and policies.

When it comes to governance, I don't think Obama has been passive, or hasn't fought for legislation, or hasn't hit back against critics, or isn't twisting the knife in these final few weeks of his presidency.

What he's done is be patient, play the long game, and build what has been a very successful presidency. Not perfect, there's plenty of room for criticism, and we're all depressed that the GOP is a suicide cult. But change has happened.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Martin Shkreli has promised to release his copy of the unreleased Wu Tang album if Trump wins. So maybe there's reason to vote for Trump after all

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Martin Shkreli has promised to release his copy of the unreleased Wu Tang album if Trump wins. So maybe there's reason to vote for Trump after all

It was him? HE bought the album?

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

It was him? HE bought the album?

Of course it was. Would you expect anyone else?

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Of course it was. Would you expect anyone else?

 

[DaveC]

Right-ho, you sure told me, man!

sorry, i wasn't trying to "tell you", but i certainly was being a bit flippant laying in bed after a long day.

my point was that in the 30s, during the great depression and before world war 2, "the left" in the united states was a very different beast, and communist parties were active and important parts of that side of politics that a leftist politician would absolutely have to court. publicly embracing wealth would have instantly lost him millions of votes. FDR was a shrewd politician and surely knew this, and took advantage of it.

today, outside of some of the most hardcore of bernie bros (who wouldn't vote for hillary if they had a gun to their heads anyways), we don't have any communists in mainstream american politics. to stand any realistic chance in today saying "i hate money" would be political suicide, because it would all flow to your opponent. you literally can't do anything in politics without the backing of the wealthy.

that being said, FDR most certainly was not pure of heart. i am quite certain that this was a public political statement for the benefit of his consitutents rather than any truly held belief. i don't have time to do this before work but i'm sure with a cursory amount of digging it wouldn't be too hard to find evidence of FDR deeply in bed with big business. he would have needed to be. you need a lot of money to become president, and you always have, point blank.

this is not a new phenomenon. politics and money have been completely intertwined since at least the days of the gracchus brothers and their assassination for attempting land reform to benefit the poor. pretending otherwise is just idealism.

 

[anitram]

Electorally, absolutely.

But not when it comes to actual governance.

Who is talking about Treaty of Versailles-ing them??

If they suffer an absolutely crushing defeat, then maybe they will split (into the crazies and a more moderate corporatist party headed by Romney et al) or they will try to clean house which they refused and/or failed to do thus far. The reason that they have had the luxury of remaining obstructionist and non-compromising is because they have been winning elections aside from the presidency. This is thanks to gerrymandering. Yes, the new census in a few years will set them back but dealing crushing defeat after defeat after defeat may speed that up.

I say that as somebody who could very likely be persuaded to vote for a centrist (gasp! even corporatist) party because in truth, they typically don't care about pursuing socially conservative issues and are sometimes needed to get the debt in order in a responsible way.

 

[Diemen]

It's an absolute fact.

Obama seemed to still be able to accomplish some left leaning things even with the obstructionists in congress.

Maybe it's not as absolute as you think.

Also, complaining about obstructionists is one thing, extrapolating that to "she must be stopped" is quite another.

 

[Irvine511]

Who is talking about Treaty of Versailles-ing them??

BMP is talking about crushing them, no compromise, no surrender, no middle ground.

i am absolutely in support of crushing electoral defeats. i'm not in favor of furthering political trench warfare. i am also someone who is now, apparently, more of a centrist than a progressive, and, like you, could stomach a Romney-type, at least from a financial standpoint, for the reasons you lay out.

the new census is our biggest hope. that, and the need for people to actually turn out in the midterms. to my mind, that's Obama's biggest failure.

 

[DaveC]

i gotta say i'm loving all the world war one metaphors going on in here lately. [/historian]

 

[Irvine511]

 

[iron yuppie]

If they suffer an absolutely crushing defeat, then maybe they will split (into the crazies and a more moderate corporatist party headed by Romney et al)

This is the most likely scenario IMO. The interests of the business types who don't want social intervention and the financial illiterates who want dramatic social intervention are too conflicting to fit within the parameters of one party anymore. When you try to bridge the gap between the two, you get a monstrous hybrid like Trump.

 

[Diemen]

Going back to this notion that Hillary is just going to cave into Republican demands in the hopes of getting something done: she got to witness the results of that approach under Obama's first term. She knows exactly what she's getting into, and I doubt she'll waste as much time extending the olive branch before she takes on Obama's 2nd term approach of identifying what she can do as the executive, and (probably more effectively than Obama given her connections) work to support congressional and senatorial candidates to flip seats, while pressing the issue to the public.

Given her history of withstanding constant inquisitions and attacks from the right, I really don't know where this notion came from that she's a pushover who just wants to make people happy.