US Politics V - now with 20% more echo chamber

[BEAL]

In all seriousness we need a change to our election process. Our primary system is too fucking long, and i still don’t know what a damn caucus is. How is that even democratic ? Seems more like an auction

The day to vote needs to move to a Saturday. Open early, close late.

No more electoral college. Twice now we’ve elected a person the majority of people didn’t want. And both times it’s damn near destroyed the country and parts of the world. Trump will succeed with the latter if we drop nukes on NK

Mandatory voting wouldn’t be so bad either. The country is a mess (and has been) and it’s time we start taking a part in trying to fix it. At least by voting you’ve done the bare minimum

 

[Nick66]

Ditto.

The Women’s March was a massive show of force, or resistance, to the idea of Trump as normal or acceptable. I marched several times against the Iraq War, as well as a massive pro-choice march on the Mall. There are times and places for it, and whether or not it does any measurable “good,” marches do inspire many in many different ways.

What I think is interesting about this, and I promise you absolutely no offence is intended, is the privilege that comes along with the notion. And it's something that I've heard many people say...that they'll take to the streets if Mueller is fired.

Real, genuine, grass level mass protests, work disruptions, strikes, etc. happen because people are without hope and desperate. Or oppressed (see the Civil Rights Movement). But firing Mueller is purely a political thing. Something that frankly most Americans won't care about. Oh, if you ask them in a poll, they'll say they care. But Mueller and the Russia investigation, serious as they are, aren't things most people worry about. Even if firing Mueller could spark a Constitutional crisis. I can't remember who it was, but someone called the Women's March, and protests like this, "Middle Class Protests".

Firing Mueller doesn't take food from anyone's table, or take anyone's job, or put anyone in prison. It's a privilege, a luxury to be so angry about such an action that you take to the streets.

Again, I genuinely mean no disrespect in saying this, firing Mueller would anger me as well. But IMO any protests coming out of this would, one, be mostly organised by groups like MoveOn, and two, be short lived expressions of anger.

And as an aside, I don't think any peaceful mass protest movements have forced any kind of significant change in policy since the 1960's. The anti-nuke movement didn't stop nuclear weapons, the ERA demonstrations didn't pass the ERA, the Iraq war protests didn't keep the US out of Iraq, none of the anti-Globilization protests have added up to anything, Occupy became more about the encampments than what they were protesting...etc., etc., etc. The Vietnam protests, and the Civil Rights protests certainly brought about change (though only partially b/c of the protests), but since then? What?

 

[corianderstem]

I don't take offense, nor do I disagree. I have a shit-ton of privilege.

 

[Irvine511]

One could argue that the Iraq War protests laid the groundwork, and intellectual framework for Obama — had HRC opposed the Iraq War in 2003, she would have won in 2008. By 2006, the Democrats, and the country, were fully anti-War and swept back into power in the midterms.

I’m not seeing what’s so privileged or not about protesting? It’s something citizens in representational democracies do, and just because they aren’t starving or subjected to mass detainment by the state doesn’t mean they’re silly to do so, as if it’s only worthwhile if you win?

Mueller being fired would be a clear, quantifiable step into authoritarian rule — it’s actionable. Thus, protests. Battles must be picked.

 

[Nick66]

In all seriousness we need a change to our election process. Our primary system is too fucking long, and i still don’t know what a damn caucus is. How is that even democratic ? Seems more like an auction

The day to vote needs to move to a Saturday. Open early, close late.

No more electoral college. Twice now we’ve elected a person the majority of people didn’t want. And both times it’s damn near destroyed the country and parts of the world. Trump will succeed with the latter if we drop nukes on NK

Mandatory voting wouldn’t be so bad either. The country is a mess (and has been) and it’s time we start taking a part in trying to fix it. At least by voting you’ve done the bare minimum

Well ditching the electoral college and mandatory voting are pipe dreams. You'd have to change the Constitution and that's not going to happen anytime soon. In fact it's almost impossible.

Saturday voting, extended voting hours, mail in ballots, etc. are all good ideas that make sense, and are things in general that most Democrats want. But none of that can happen without bringing Republicans on board...their priorities are things like voter ID. So any comprehensive legislation changing when and how people vote in the US would have to involve give and take with the GOP, and that would certainly mean very strict voter ID.

And remember that the Constitution primarily leaves how voting is conducted up to the individual states, so there's some debate on just how much authority Congress has in this matter anyway.

I’m not seeing what’s so privileged or not about protesting?

Protesting in itself isn't necessarily privileged (though it's a right most of us take for granted that many in the world don't have). But what you choose to get up and protest about can certainly be a reflection of privilege.

 

[anitram]

And anyone who asks why people aren't taking to the streets should first ask themselves why they aren't on the streets.

I am assuming you are referring to ME since I posed the question.

I am not an American citizen nor do I reside in the US any longer so it's not a relevant question in any event.

People are very complacent, that much is true. And yes, it is different when you are dealing with a state that is under collapse which means you're unemployed and hungry. But nevertheless I found that all the protests thus far and the entire notion of the Resistance has been pretty futile and restricted to a lot of Twitter venting as most people here have pointed out.

The Trump book quotes sources saying he referred to Sally Yates as a c*** prior to firing her, that's par for the course and another example of what we women have to live with on a daily basis, and this message is being sent from the very top. But even the women's march didn't really go anywhere productive...

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I'm sure Trump uses the c word about women on a daily basis. That's who he is, a misogynist pig.

 

[anitram]

I'm sure Trump uses the c word about women on a daily basis. That's who he is, a misogynist pig.

Have you read this nugget yet from the book:

Trump liked to say that one of the things that made life worth living was getting your friends’ wives into bed. In pursuing a friend’s wife, he would try to persuade the wife that her husband was perhaps not what she thought. Then he’d have his secretary ask the friend into his office; once the friend arrived, Trump would engage in what was, for him, more or less constant sexual banter. Do you still like having sex with your wife? How often? You must have had a better fuck than your wife? Tell me about it. I have girls coming in from Los Angeles at three o’clock. We can go upstairs and have a great time. I promise… And all the while, Trump would have his friend’s wife on the speakerphone, listening in.

 

[iron yuppie]

How that comment about "grabbing them by the p***y" didn't sink him is still beyond me. I simply cannot understand how any woman came to vote for him after that. Where in recent history has there been such an explicit attack on a large demographic from a major party candidate?

 

[BoMac]

Edit: never mind.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Well you see, there's a scale of sexism...

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

Good lord, that quoted bit that anitram shared from that book...that literally made my stomach churn. Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting.

How that comment about "grabbing them by the p***y" didn't sink him is still beyond me. I simply cannot understand how any woman came to vote for him after that. Where in recent history has there been such an explicit attack on a large demographic from a major party candidate?

I really don't get it, either. The only logical explanations I can think of are a) a lot of women unfortunately shrug off sexist language and behavior because we've been raised for so long to just accept that this is how men supposedly talk about and treat women and so be it. I lost count of how many comments I'd hear from women saying things like, "My husband/sons/brothers say things like that all the time, it's just what guys do." The recent news regarding all the sexual assault allegations coming out is further proof of that as well. Look at how many women kept quiet about the shit men did to them for so long because they felt it wasn't worth it to speak out, or were told to just deal with it.

The other option is b) Some women just naturally go along with their husbands when it comes to politics and don't really have much independent thought of their own. I've mentioned before that my mom has a co-worker like that. The woman's husband and son watch Fox News and tell her that's the only real news outlet out there and she just accepts that and trusts they know what they're talking about.

Those are the only two reasons for women supporting Trump that make any sort of sense to me, because any other possible reason that would exist out there just does not compute.

 

[BEAL]

How that comment about "grabbing them by the p***y" didn't sink him is still beyond me. I simply cannot understand how any woman came to vote for him after that. Where in recent history has there been such an explicit attack on a large demographic from a major party candidate?

Tribalism.

One of my bosses is a female and Trump supporter. Repeated they talking points of it being locker room talk.

Then said anything is better than Hillary.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Grab em by the pussy had a tribalism fallback as "locker room talk."

How "duhhh I don't know what I said" didn't sink him long before that... that shit is beyond me.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Have you read this nugget yet from the book:

No I hadn't read that. He's a sick individual.

 

[kiwilad]

No I hadn't read that. He's a sick individual.

That sounded like something that evil guy from Game of Thrones who chopped off penises and skinned people alive, would do.
It's pyschotic. Torturous. Cruel. Disgusting. And again highlights his mindset that women are sexual possessions to be traded and boasted about.
I feel this book is changing things somewhat, as it's partially dividing his base. Some of the Breitbart reader comments are dripping with confusion and fear.
Unfortunately there are clearly millions of people who literally don't care what anyone says about Trump. He has somehow created a cult.

 

[mama cass]

How that comment about "grabbing them by the p***y" didn't sink him is still beyond me. I simply cannot understand how any woman came to vote for him after that. Where in recent history has there been such an explicit attack on a large demographic from a major party candidate?

it's incredibly depressing... i just think they must have been so full of hate for Obama/Clinton that they just chose to ignore it all...

i've heard evangelicals for instance using all kinds of excuses for him - "he's human", "God uses flawed individuals", "everyone is a sinner" blah blah and best one - "he is the modern day Balaam's ass"

 

[Nick66]

Well you see, there's a scale of sexism...

That's right, there is. Just like there's a scale to most behaviour.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Imma let you finish...

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

That's right, there is. Just like there's a scale to most behaviour.

No comment on any of this disgusting stuff about Trump? Are you such a contrarian/lawyer that you will do that here even about this stuff? Just wondering.

I believe every word in that book as far as his misogyny is concerned. It's probably even worse. It's indefensible, even if it's just for some whatever reason on a U2 forum. Because there's an "echo chamber" about misogyny? Is that a bad thing?

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

The Daily Beast: Wolff Book: Trump Privately Rationalized KKK After Charlottesville. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw-YGNqDo


Privately rationalized why someone would be a member of the KKK

 

[BEAL]

Well the book was released today so we’ll hear a lot more of this stuff.

And 35% of the country will make excuses for his behavior.

Looks like Ryan is going to go down with the Nunes ship too. All in

 

[Nick66]

I believe every word in that book as far as his misogyny is concerned. It's probably even worse. It's indefensible, even if it's just for some whatever reason on a U2 forum. Because there's an "echo chamber" about misogyny? Is that a bad thing?

With regards to the stories about Trump's misogyny, I also believe all of it. Or rather, I have no reason to doubt it. I thought trump was a misogynist early on, and said so. I don't even think he's a racist the way he's a misogynist. You can tell that he's a misogynist in his core, it comes second nature to him.

As for the rest of the book, as I haven't read it, and wasn't inside the White House, I really can't say. I do know that the writer has a very controversial reputation, and many journalists, including on the left, have a problem with his veracity and ethics and regard parts of the book at least as not credible.

So in many ways, I think the book is just an example of confirmation bias...if you're inclined to believe every nasty thing said or printed about Trump, you'll likely digest this book whole without much critical thought. Others who are support Trump no matter what will be just as quick to dismiss everything in it. The same predictable pattern happened with every salacious book written about President Obama.

As for myself, in the excerpts I've read many things ring true, while others seem to stretch credibility with me. I'm sure like most of these things, some of the stories are exaggerated...and some aren't. The truth is probably somewhere in between (but no matter what it doesn't make a pretty picture of Trump, or his government).

No comment on any of this disgusting stuff about Trump? Are you such a contrarian/lawyer that you will do that here even about this stuff? Just wondering.

Am I required to comment on every issue of the day? What's the point in joining in on a pile on? I don't see what another "Trump is disgusting" comment really adds to the conversation (even if I agree with that sentiment).

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

With regards to the stories about Trump's misogyny, I also believe all of it. Or rather, I have no reason to doubt it. I thought trump was a misogynist early on, and said so. I don't even think he's a racist the way he's a misogynist. You can tell that he's a misogynist in his core, it comes second nature to him.

As for the rest of the book, as I haven't read it, and wasn't inside the White House, I really can't say. I do know that the writer has a very controversial reputation, and many journalists, including on the left, have a problem with his veracity and ethics and regard parts of the book at least as not credible.

So in many ways, I think the book is just an example of confirmation bias...if you're inclined to believe every nasty thing said or printed about Trump, you'll likely digest this book whole without much critical thought. Others who are support Trump no matter what will be just as quick to dismiss everything in it. The same predictable pattern happened with every salacious book written about President Obama.

As for myself, in the excerpts I've read many things ring true, while others seem to stretch credibility with me. I'm sure like most of these things, some of the stories are exaggerated...and some aren't. The truth is probably somewhere in between (but no matter what it doesn't make a pretty picture of Trump, or his government).



Am I required to comment on every issue of the day? What's the point in joining in on a pile on? I don't see what another "Trump is disgusting" comment really adds to the conversation (even if I agree with that sentiment).

Could you provide us with a list of salacious books written about Obama? I'm putting together a book club.

I'd like you to focus on books written by authors who were allowed to shadow the President, WITH THE PRESIDENT'S PERMISSION. Thanks

 

[anitram]

Yeah I am also struggling to recall all of these salacious books about Obama. No Drama Obama pretty much summed up his personal life and interpersonal relationships while he was at the WH.

 

[Mac_Fly]

i've heard evangelicals for instance using all kinds of excuses for him - "he's human", "God uses flawed individuals", "everyone is a sinner"

Unless it's the other side they want to talk about . . . then it's "they are Satan's pawn," "Hell is too good for them," "they'll get theirs on the Day Of Judgement," etc.

 

[anitram]

The evangelicals have exposed themselves as total frauds. Even their own publications have started questioning the movement’s political choices in recent years. The rest of us have always known they are morally corrupt opportunists.

 

[mama cass]

Unless it's the other side they want to talk about . . . then it's "they are Satan's pawn," "Hell is too good for them," "they'll get theirs on the Day Of Judgement," etc.

ugh yeah they are vile

The evangelicals have exposed themselves as total frauds. Even their own publications have started questioning the movement’s political choices in recent years. The rest of us have always known they are morally corrupt opportunists.

 

[BVS]

Could you provide us with a list of salacious books written about Obama? I'm putting together a book club.

I'd like you to focus on books written by authors who were allowed to shadow the President, WITH THE PRESIDENT'S PERMISSION. Thanks

Oh come on, you remember when 'Obama: Worst President in History' was trending and everyone was talking about it and all the echo chambers twisting and turning? No?

How about when that movie by that guy Dinesh' that everyone saw and the news cycles were racing to spin it their way? No?

Oh, that's strange...

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

With regards to the stories about Trump's misogyny, I also believe all of it. Or rather, I have no reason to doubt it. I thought trump was a misogynist early on, and said so. I don't even think he's a racist the way he's a misogynist. You can tell that he's a misogynist in his core, it comes second nature to him.

As for the rest of the book, as I haven't read it, and wasn't inside the White House, I really can't say. I do know that the writer has a very controversial reputation, and many journalists, including on the left, have a problem with his veracity and ethics and regard parts of the book at least as not credible.

So in many ways, I think the book is just an example of confirmation bias...if you're inclined to believe every nasty thing said or printed about Trump, you'll likely digest this book whole without much critical thought. Others who are support Trump no matter what will be just as quick to dismiss everything in it. The same predictable pattern happened with every salacious book written about President Obama.

As for myself, in the excerpts I've read many things ring true, while others seem to stretch credibility with me. I'm sure like most of these things, some of the stories are exaggerated...and some aren't. The truth is probably somewhere in between (but no matter what it doesn't make a pretty picture of Trump, or his government).



Am I required to comment on every issue of the day? What's the point in joining in on a pile on? I don't see what another "Trump is disgusting" comment really adds to the conversation (even if I agree with that sentiment).

No of course you're not required to. But you think emphasizing that there's a scale of sexism adds to the conversation, when the conversation is centered around vile misogyny out of the mouth of the US President? Trump can handle a pile on by FYM, he behaves exactly like a baby but he is 71. If he ever found us via Google hopefully his widdle feewlings would survive.

Barack Obama respected women highly, I have no reason to believe otherwise. I didn't agree with every move he made as President, nor did I think he was the greatest President. But for me the way he treated his wife, his daughters, and women in general-well, that's a big part of what constitutes a good man in my eyes. A real man.