US Politics XII: shutting down Interference until @U2 agrees to pay for a firewall

[DaveC]

The results of the 2018 election were due to the Democrats winning areas like Orange County, whichbis now almost entirely blue (if not totally). The base absolutely needs to turn out, but you win when you win the suburbs.

You will not move non-voters to vote by running a mythical candidate who will turn them out suddenly. That candidate has never materialized. The non-voters didn’t turn out for Bradley in 2000. They didn’t for Bernie. And they won’t suddenly awaken from their slumber in 2020.

"we can never have an actual leftist president because we should always nominate someone that people who don't give a shit about politics might vote for but actually won't in reality because they never vote anyways."

this comment has been brought to you by /r/enlightenedcentrism.

 

[BVS]

Fresh blood is badly needed, but as I outlined, seemingly the whole of Generation X in Democratic politics abandoned the left. What they need is to start finding more Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's to start building a strong, left coalition of young, energetic Democrats who have an eye on the future. There is a major appetite for many of the policies she is championing. That's the sort of thing that can drive out young voters, instead of desperately vying for some mythical batch of independents.

I did see upthread someone say that independents decide every election. I very much disagree with that, or at the very least would argue that it's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Cortez has great energy, but she seriously lacks on her grasp of the facts, or at least communicating her understanding. The left will have to avoid buying into a leftist version of Trump. It will not work, it works with regression but not progression.

And Medicare for all will be a hard sell, no matter how you slice it. The only way it gets done is if someone has a clear cut plan that they can easily communicate to the masses. Sanders proves there is interest in the concepts, but he had no plan, he couldn’t speak to the math, he couldn’t speak to the how.

AND they’re going to have to back the f*ck away from diving head first into issues like the Catholic school event this past weekend. Trumpists were justified and emboldened over the fact that people couldn’t hold off to see the entire picture.

Currently, I’m not hopeful, I don’t see a candidate that excites the left, and a platform against Trump isn’t enough(though it should be). The way I see it, unless we have a surprising candidate that proves me wrong, we have to hope Trump destroys himself.

 

[DaveC]

Cortez has great energy, but she seriously lacks on her grasp of the facts, or at least communicating her understanding. The left will have to avoid buying into a leftist version of Trump.

holy dear sweet shit

we have an early frontrunner for hottest take of the 2020 election right here folks. place your bets.

 

[BEAL]

It’s not a hot take, it’s very much real.

When sanders releases his tax plan i had serious reservations. I make a good salary, have zero debt, and get id still have to severely downgrade my living standards to survive (i live in San Diego). I am not part of the 1%, instead I’m probably upper middle class and would have been affected negatively by his plan

So there was no way i was going to support him against Clinton.

Now put him against trump and id consider moving above screwing over minorities and wrecking our entire democracy

But there are plenty of people like me who see getting taxed more as a great reason to look the other way.

 

[DaveC]

"that nonsense he said about AOC is very much real, as evidence here's my opinion of bernie sanders"

 

[IWasBored]

BVS called AOC a leftist version of Trump and Beal defended it by rambling about Bernie? Is that what I’m reading?

 

[DaveC]

either that's exactly what you're reading, or this is what the french call "la folie a deux".

 

[Irvine511]

"we can never have an actual leftist president because we should always nominate someone that people who don't give a shit about politics might vote for but actually won't in reality because they never vote anyways."

this comment has been brought to you by /r/enlightenedcentrism.

I typed up several responses to this, but the more I read it the less sense it makes. So I’ll ask you to explain yourself.

 

[trojanchick99]

Cortez has great energy, but she seriously lacks on her grasp of the facts, or at least communicating her understanding. The left will have to avoid buying into a leftist version of Trump. It will not work, it works with regression but not progression.

And Medicare for all will be a hard sell, no matter how you slice it. The only way it gets done is if someone has a clear cut plan that they can easily communicate to the masses. Sanders proves there is interest in the concepts, but he had no plan, he couldn’t speak to the math, he couldn’t speak to the how.

AND they’re going to have to back the f*ck away from diving head first into issues like the Catholic school event this past weekend. Trumpists were justified and emboldened over the fact that people couldn’t hold off to see the entire picture.

Currently, I’m not hopeful, I don’t see a candidate that excites the left, and a platform against Trump isn’t enough(though it should be). The way I see it, unless we have a surprising candidate that proves me wrong, we have to hope Trump destroys himself.

That is the worst take. AOC is a 28 year old congresswoman who gladly admits she doesn’t know everything. She will learn a ton and is the most exciting Dem since Obama. I love that more progressive ideas are starting to become more mainstream.

As for 2020, the Dems will be in a good position. This isn’t 2004.

 

[Irvine511]

The right is obsessed with AOC. Obsessed.

They fear her deadly political talents. And they should.

Let’s let her develop.

 

[DaveC]

I typed up several responses to this, but the more I read it the less sense it makes. So I’ll ask you to explain yourself.

i was out when i posted that and on a second read i probably overreacted a bit to your post.

but i guess my point was that i feel like i'm so far past worrying about swaying the mythical swing voter that it seems so pointless to worry about finding a candidate that appeals to the middle.

trump won in 2016 by almost literally threading a needle through the electoral college despite losing by several million votes. by the election he'll have had almost four years of proving to that soft middle (that has been polling *hard* against him lately) that he's beyond unfit for the job. he's going to implode on the campaign trail when it becomes obvious that he's losing badly. we're already seeing his brain literally melt before our eyes as time goes on.

this is the best chance the left has had in decades to elect a candidate who might really do something good for the working class. yes most of us here are middle class but i strongly believe in the proverb that a rising tide lifts all boats. history has shown many times that when a society lifts up their lowest classes, everyone benefits.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Howard Dean 4 president

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

re: AOC.

Calling her the left's version of Trump is over the top.

She does need to prove that she's more than an agitator. Can she legislate? Is she going to be able to bring people together?

She doesn't have to assimilate or change her ideals - but alienating those who she'll need job her side to actually get something done isn't exactly winning strategy.

re: Dave's last point.

This is the only time you'll ever see me agreeing to even consider a candidate who would even mention something like, oh, a 75% tax rate. So have at it

 

[BVS]

Relax folks, I only meant in terms of grasping the situation and information. Yes she’s young, but you put her in front of a camera and she’s prone to gaffes, sometimes even self unaware. She comes off as if she’s making it up as she goes, and that’s with a pretty friendly media so far.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

https://twitter.com/SikhProf/status/1087839672007622658

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

AOC is human and gladly displays her foibles unlike king of all narcissists . She's trying to learn and she comes from humble beginnings. Is she hopelessly naive to think that she can actually make a difference in Washington? Yes. But she's not Pelosi, she's not Schumer. And yes it's very interesting psychologically that some people are clearly so threatened by her. At least she doesn't have the power of Trump with the same lack of grasp of the issues. If it is indeed the same, and I say no.

In brain intelligence and emotional intelligence, i give the win to Alexandria.

Pos Hannity calling her O Scary O and O Crazy O, and look at who he has aligned himself with. The double standard hypocrisy is insane. And he's hardly the only one.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Trump's disapproval rating is at an all time high. Time for more hamberders. And some more diversion. Meanwhile federal employees are suffering and Washington doesn't care.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/23/trump-government-shutdown-approval-rating-1119877

 

[Irvine511]

So ... we aren’t suffering, but we are looking at a second paycheck held hostage by the President. I also worry about the psychological toll this is starting to take on federal workers. They really are stuck, and there really is no end in sight. Two weeks ago no one thought this would go on for two more weeks, yet here we are. It’s the uncharted territory that’s so scary — the current resident of the Oval Office is crazy enough to hold out indefinitely, and as nerve wracking as this is, were Pelosi to cave all that would do would be to embolden him to do this every time he wants a new toy that won’t ever get passed through Congress. Holding steady now should hopefully prevent this in the future.

 

[womanfish]

i was out when i posted that and on a second read i probably overreacted a bit to your post.

but i guess my point was that i feel like i'm so far past worrying about swaying the mythical swing voter that it seems so pointless to worry about finding a candidate that appeals to the middle.

trump won in 2016 by almost literally threading a needle through the electoral college despite losing by several million votes. by the election he'll have had almost four years of proving to that soft middle (that has been polling *hard* against him lately) that he's beyond unfit for the job. he's going to implode on the campaign trail when it becomes obvious that he's losing badly. we're already seeing his brain literally melt before our eyes as time goes on.

this is the best chance the left has had in decades to elect a candidate who might really do something good for the working class. yes most of us here are middle class but i strongly believe in the proverb that a rising tide lifts all boats. history has shown many times that when a society lifts up their lowest classes, everyone benefits.

I don't disagree here. I think the large pool of nominees will be a great thing for the party as a whole. Truth is, i have varying degrees of issues with all the candidates, and that's a good thing. I believe we all should, or there's a problem. That was one of my main issues with Bernie, or maybe i should say with the over the top fanbase that Bernie created.
He was given a free pass on just about everything because of this cult of personality that was born out.
I had a very comprehensive list of why i changed from a Bernie follower to a solid Hillary supporter a couple years ago. But off the top of my head:

The "deal" with the NRA to secure his Senate win.
Supported the "Charleston loophole"
Voted repeatedly against the Brady Bill
The support of the disastrous F-35 program
Voted for NRA-backed laws to give gun manufacturers legal immunity
Voted to allow guns on Amtrack
Was against immigration reform bills
Opposed Import Export Bank
Voted to deregulate credit default swaps, one of the main drivers of the financial collapse.
The Sierra Blanca nuclear waste dumping

On a more personal note. The fact that he held no real job for until his 40's and was a deadbeat dad.
His wife's shady financial dealings and his reluctance to share his tax returns
His actions late in the campaign against Clinton... It just didn't sit well with me at all. It seemed he bought into his own mythology that was created by his fanbase. It was disappointing to see.

AGain, I can't remember them all, but these are a few. It would have totally killed any other "left" candidate, but Bernie fanatics wouldn't hear of it.

Bernie loyalists need to stop and realize that they were played just about as badly as Trumpists. Russian and other Eastern European troll farms created fake Bernie/anti-Hillary sites spreading misinformation and ginning up hate and division in the party. They fell for it. And it has resulted in catastrophic consequences. Especially in the Judicial realm.

All that said, if Bernie were to somehow become the nominee again, I would crawl over broken glass to vote for him against Trump.

This is more of an illustration that every candidate is going to make a bad judgement call or do something not "left" enough throughout a long career, and shouldn't dismiss them from getting a vote when put up against the living nightmare of Trump or Pence or others...

I see it starting already. the list of Harris's mistakes as a DA. Like that should somehow disqualify her even though she is in the top 10 most liberal senators. (qualifer - I am not in any way a Harris backer, just making an observation)

I think we all need to take a step back and assess the coming large field with an open mind. I am open to anyone at this point. I have issues with all of them at this point. Convince me. win me. Prove you are the best candidate at this time. Bring it on.

 

[DaveC]

so nobody cares about that list of things she did as a prosecutor? that doesn't give anybody pause about, say, what sort of judges she might appoint, or what kind of person she might choose as attorney general?

also gotta say it's getting a bit frustrating that every time i point out anything problematic about a democratic candidate someone inevitably replies "i guess we're disqualifying candidates on single issues now"...like, no. i've never once said or even implied that any candidate should be disqualified on any one thing. i'm not saying "don't vote for her because of this". i just want to have a full discussion, about both the good and the bad. so can you guys please cut that out.

 

[womanfish]

so nobody cares about that list of things she did as a prosecutor? that doesn't give anybody pause about, say, what sort of judges she might appoint, or what kind of person she might choose as attorney general?

also gotta say it's getting a bit frustrating that every time i point out anything problematic about a democratic candidate someone inevitably replies "i guess we're disqualifying candidates on single issues now"...like, no. i've never once said or even implied that any candidate should be disqualified on any one thing. i'm not saying "don't vote for her because of this". i just want to have a full discussion, about both the good and the bad. so can you guys please cut that out.

Not saying you would vote for Trump over her because of those things. But lets be real. You think she would nominate a conservative justice?? I think that is a huge leap in logic. Especially considering if she were to be in the position to nominate judges - that she wouldn't err on the liberal side??
I'm just asking for some common sense.
If Hillary were there right now. If she hadn't been derailed by an absolute bullshit misinformation campaign, we would have the legislative branch arguing over affordable healthcare or debt free college right now instead of 5.7 billion for a wall. Perspective, its not too much to ask for at this moment.
Let it give you pause, let it sway you to another candidate, that's fine. But please lets not get into the "she or he is not a "real" progressive... or the "lesser of two evils" BULLSHIT again. please

 

[DaveC]

you have so wildly missed my point in so many ways that i'm honestly not sure how to even begin to reply to that post.

 

[womanfish]

you have so wildly missed my point in so many ways that i'm honestly not sure how to even begin to reply to that post.

I think i answered pretty straight-forwardly and non-judgmentally. Maybe you should re-read. Not saying YOU would disqualify her.

You floated the notion that she would nominate judges and AG that weren't going to be "left" enough. I think that's preposterous. But again, as i said in the initial response. Let that sway you to support someone else, that's fine. I'm just saying in general, IF she were to make it to the nomination, that shouldn't make her somehow "the lesser of two evils" that completely exploded the last election process. She wouldn't be the lesser of two evils but the obvious, and left-friendly choice.

I think we agree that no one should be disqualified for single issues. And that is the responsible way to view all the incoming nominees.

 

[DaveC]

in your last two posts you seem to be assuming that i said or implied a whole bunch of things that i definitely never said or implied.

but it's neither here nor there. in general, we agree.

 

[BEAL]

The GOP hates government.

The shutdown is a means to bring it down and start privatizing parts of it.

It's also a means to obstruct justice for Trump since the FBI can't do it's job anymore.

So a win - win for Trump and the GOP. They have no desire to open the government, and the shutdown isn't hurting the people they care about, their donors / lobbyists.

The dems need to start impeachment proceedings. Get information out to the public instead of waiting for Mueller. The more people know the better.

 

[womanfish]

The GOP hates government.

The shutdown is a means to bring it down and start privatizing parts of it.

It's also a means to obstruct justice for Trump since the FBI can't do it's job anymore.

So a win - win for Trump and the GOP. They have no desire to open the government, and the shutdown isn't hurting the people they care about, their donors / lobbyists.

The dems need to start impeachment proceedings. Get information out to the public instead of waiting for Mueller. The more people know the better.

Who wants a government shutdown of the US? Putin

that's the beginning and the end.

 

[womanfish]

in your last two posts you seem to be assuming that i said or implied a whole bunch of things that i definitely never said or implied.

but it's neither here nor there. in general, we agree.

Agreed. I look forward to what is presented in the coming year or so. It's gonna get interesting.

 

[Irvine511]

Who wants a government shutdown of the US? Putin

also: people who want to hamper the FBI.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

https://twitter.com/CraigCaplan/status/1088152347572924421

 

[DaveC]

so it appears there's going to be an "intervention" in venezuela, for totally humanitarian reasons and definitely not to distract from the shutdown and trump's cratering approval ratings. let's also not concern ourselves with the happy coincidence that every country that america seems to threaten to "intervene" in these days is sitting on an ocean of oil.