Election Day

Posted by: Greger

Election Day - 11/06/18 03:58 PM

Well, today's the day. Will "owning the libs" be enough incentive to get the Republicans out in greater numbers than Democrats?

Or will the "anger on the left" be enough to win the day?

Later tonight we'll find out for sure.

I'll be more than happy if Dems pick up a single seat in the senate, and I expect them to take the House. Florida desparately needs Gillum to win and for his victory to carry Senator Nelson to victory against Governor Rick Scott.

But we shall soon see.
Posted by: rporter314

Re: Election Day - 11/06/18 04:48 PM

i am ambivalent on any prediction. I think what Mr Trump has done is expose a very large constituency occupying the underbelly of a dark American bigotry.

I believe bigotry is the primary driving force of Mr Trump's supporters. Bigotry is an irrational fear of others. It is an irrational belief in superiority over others. Irrationality is the key. It fits in the narcissists playbook. Feed the fear. It is effective when your supporters are irrational.

Today I am from Missouri. I have to see it.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/06/18 05:08 PM

If you're from Missouri, vote McCaskill..... heh. No early voting in Missouri, by the way, and you can bet there will be 3% "miscounted" votes, so she needs to win by more than that. R Voter fraud much greater threat than election hacking, Missouri's Jay Ashcroft says (KC Star).
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/06/18 07:04 PM

Not so much need to correct the record on voting fraud, since the actual records show that it is virtually non-existent. What needs to be fixed is all the Republicans lying about it, so they can suppress legitimate voting. Suppression causes thousands of times as much damage to the voting process.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/06/18 07:46 PM

Quote:
Today I am from Missouri. I have to see it.


LOL

I didn't mean to really make a prediction, that's just what it would take for me to get any satisfaction out of this election. Historically speaking, elections have seldom been happy times for me and I think the 2016 election broke something inside me. That wound is still fresh but there are a lot of old wounds that still ache when the political winds blow cold. Bush vs Gore, Bush re-election. The Obama hope thing barely lasted two years before Republicans blasted it out of the water. They've been kicking our asses ever since. I've learned to just hunker down and expect the worst.

And yeah...Bigotry/fear/irrationality...that's the Grand Old Party in a nutshell.
Posted by: rporter314

Re: Election Day - 11/06/18 08:05 PM

SoS Ashcroft is wrong and right.

First the right. Yes some elections are very close, so voter integrity should be paramount in the minds of those who oversee elections.

Wrong. If he believes Russian hacking did not influence any voters then he should also believe that all the money donors give to candidates does not sway voters.

The question is and always will be, how many voters were influenced. Based on known voter fraud cases (and almost all ... about 99.99% of all cases ... are individuals being stupid ... the other 0.01% are actual cases of voters trying to subvert an election with a few votes) I would guess there were more than the handful of individuals who committed voter fraud who were influenced by Russian meddling. I can not say more than 80k people were influenced, but almost certainly more than the handful of known voter fraud cases.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/06/18 08:25 PM

Quote:
SoS Ashcroft is wrong and right.


Nope. He's a Republican. He's lying.
Posted by: Schlack

Re: Election Day - 11/06/18 10:47 PM

Hello Hello Hello old friends. its that time again!

Taken tomorrow off, got a crate of beer and settling down for an evenings electioneering.

America, do not F*ck it up this time!
Posted by: Schlack

Re: Election Day - 11/06/18 10:50 PM

5.2 billion spent on this election cycle

what the hell is wrong with you people?

and for the laugh heres our president in action against the right wing shock jock

(before he was elected)
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/06/18 11:30 PM

Good to see ya Schlack! If we f*ck it up this time, stick a fork in us. We're done.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/07/18 01:38 AM

Well, is not looking like I'd hoped, but like what I expected.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/07/18 01:43 AM

94% in and my guys are losing. No blue wave here.
Posted by: Schlack

Re: Election Day - 11/07/18 02:02 AM

not looking super stellar at this point, WTF is wrong with you people?
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/07/18 02:18 AM

We're stupid.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/07/18 02:23 AM

Okay, my analysis...Dems overplayed the Kavanaugh thing and that caravan thing played right into Trump's hands. Them folks might as well turn around right now and save themselves the walk.

See you in 2020, Shlack! Where we'll see Trump re-elected.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/07/18 02:40 AM

Actually, the caravan is headed for Mexico City now. I think the city will swallow them whole. Any remnant that gets to the US border will just stop on the Mexico side. Last caravan, three people got asylum.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/07/18 03:53 AM

The caravan itself doesn't matter, never did. It was just a tool for Trump to scare his base into voting.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/07/18 02:55 PM

Actually, the results were entirely as predicted. There has been no significant change in the electorate, and we're still in serious trouble.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/07/18 04:48 PM

While I'm terribly disappointed at the results in my own state I'm generally satisfied with the overall election. It has allayed my fears that Democrats would f*uck up their chances in 2020. It certainly hasn't eliminated them because, as we've seen once again, Democrats can always find a way to lose.

Beto O'Rourke for president? If a single shining star emerged from this election it was him.

Florida's new Governor Elect has come out of the starting block in a remarkably sensible fashion. He graciously complimented his opponent on a race well run and when asked what his first action would be as governor he cited Florida's water problems and said that he would seek bi-partisan support by working to solve them. He's not(so far) the greedy scoundrel our current Governor and Senator Elect Rick Scott is and has been. Perhaps this won't be as bad as I think it's going to be.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/08/18 05:59 AM

Not every Republican is a scumbag. Some are decent folks with different values than you or I. I am friends with some hard-core Republicans and some devout Christians, Jews, Muslims, and Buddhists. (I have Hindu friends, too, but I don't think they are very devout.)

I think they are wrong, but not bad.
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Election Day - 11/08/18 01:02 PM

NM went all blue. Got rid of a corrupt Republican governor and replaced a scumbag TEAParty Representative in a very red congressional district with a moderately progressive woman, who happens to be someone I worked with some years ago when she was a staffer for Senator Udall.

We also got a very progressive Public Regulation Commissioner (will fight against a coal-addicted rubber stamp electrical generation culture - I had several conversations with him about Biochar+Energy during the campaign) and a new environmentally minded Public Lands Commissioner (they are responsible for oil and mineral leases on state lands).

Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/08/18 04:07 PM

But nearly all republican organizations are scummy. How about continuing to suppress the vote AFTER the election?: Arizona GOP sues to limit mail-in ballots in McSally-Sinema race (CBS)
Posted by: Kaine

Re: Election Day - 11/08/18 05:07 PM

Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
But nearly all republican organizations are scummy. How about continuing to suppress the vote AFTER the election?: Arizona GOP sues to limit mail-in ballots in McSally-Sinema race (CBS)

That's pathetic! Kinda like not letting those in line vote after poll closing time.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/08/18 05:51 PM

Newt's old district in Georgia went to a Democrat. Not just a Democrat, though: A Democrat women of color, advocating sensible gun control measures! Georgia's demographics are changing just like everywhere else.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/09/18 12:48 AM

You be you Florida!
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/09/18 01:12 AM

Yup, it appears that Gillum has to "unconcede" and Scott's campaign actually said Nelson was trying to "steal" the election by waiting until all the votes are counted. Both races (as well as the Georgia Governor's race - CNN) are within mandatory recount margins.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/09/18 01:26 AM

We got two congressional races being recounted here in Upstate New York.
Solidarity Florida!
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/09/18 02:16 AM

Another good sign: Yutes turning out
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/09/18 02:19 AM

I mentioned somewhere that election times are seldom happy times for me. I'm not gonna get caught up in the post election drama. It seldom changes anything.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/09/18 02:45 AM

I agree with that sentiment Gregor. The quality of the elections and cut of cloth we have to chose from have not gotten better. Mostly been coronation ceremonies from the two parties followed by a national popularity contest to decide who is the 'most likeable'.
As far as recounts go, make the bastards sweat.
I hear Gillum got out the Yutes. Is that your impression?
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/09/18 03:32 AM

Yeeesh!
Sweating it out in Arizona senate race:

Sinema now has slim lead
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/09/18 04:01 AM

I've been watching some news tonight and a VERY GOOD point was made. There REALLY WAS a blue wave, and it IS historic. Dems overcame a significant tilt toward the GOP; the percentage of vote margin for Democrats is +/- 7% over Republicans; many of the seats won are in SOLID RED States/Districts. Moreover, there are still votes to be counted. AND almost ALL of the movement in Districts and States are in one direction - LEFT.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/09/18 05:09 AM

I'm trying to decide whether Rick Scott is a slimy sleazebag or a sleazy slimeball... Scott files lawsuit over Florida Senate vote as recount odds grow (the Hill). It's not the lawsuit itself, it is what he said that proves he is an a-hole. "I will not sit idly by while unethical liberals try to steal this election," he added. That is particularly taking coming from someone who has repeatedly taken unethical actions to block voting, losing consistently in court every time. Rick Scott has made enemies over voting rights during the last eight years (Tampa Bay Times).
Quote:
In the nation's largest swing state, Scott's actions on voting have angered county election supervisors, the League of Women Voters, college students and federal judges, one of whom recently dismantled Florida's system of restoring voting rights to convicted felons.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/09/18 05:55 PM

If there is an elected official anywhere in the USA who is as corrupt and self serving as Donald Trump, it would be Rick Scott. He is often referred to as "Lord Voldemort" here due to his uncanny resemblance to JK Rowlings' anti-hero, both in appearance and demeanor. Beyond that, the adjectives used here to describe him are considerably less PC or SFW as the ones you have chosen.
Posted by: rporter314

Re: Election Day - 11/09/18 06:43 PM

Not necessarily LEFT ... but certainly to stem the tide in the wrong direction it was going.
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Election Day - 11/09/18 10:42 PM

My new Representative was down by five points in the polls going into election day and won by 1.4 points.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/10/18 03:56 AM

Sinema's lead in Arizona reaches 20,000 but many votes are uncounted. Maricopa County (Phoenix et al) has a huge number of mail ballots left to count, which is good news for Sinema since big cities tend to vote for Democrats over rural areas. I predict a much larger lead, and Arizona gets a Democratic Senator.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/10/18 06:17 AM

A good question to ask in these dark and colorfull times:
What now?...
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/10/18 12:49 PM

2018 was a WAY better election for Democrats than most people seem to think (CNN). I admit I was one of those who went to bed disappointed on Tuesday night. As I said then, it was what I expected, not what I hoped. The news since then has continued to get better, and the Democratic wave has materialized in the House, with the largest gains since Watergate, closer to 40 than 30. What blunted enthusiasm, I think, has been two things: slow counting, and Marquee races.

I, like so many, was suckered by the splashy campaigns of O'Rourke, Abrams and Gillum. It's not that they aren't exciting and well-qualified, it's that they were always long shots. We were rooting for underdogs. They were underdogs for a reason, and that reason is institutional. Voting systems are antiquated and attitudes even more so. Florida, Texas and Georgia are the deep South. Things just move slower there.

We were anticipating a "blue tsunami", but what we got was a blue tide. O'Rourke, Abrams and Gillum may not have won, but multiple Congressional races were swept along in their currents. My old hometown in Kansas is now represented by a gay, native American Democrat in a State with a Democratic Governor. KANSAS.

It may take time for it to sink in, but the swing to the left is palpable. Hopefully we're still in the middle of an incoming tide.
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Election Day - 11/10/18 02:40 PM

Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
We were anticipating a "blue tsunami", but what we got was a blue tide.

Maybe we're getting a rising Blue Ocean, due to political climate change.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/10/18 03:30 PM

Originally Posted By: logtroll
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
We were anticipating a "blue tsunami", but what we got was a blue tide.

Maybe we're getting a rising Blue Ocean, due to political climate change.
Oh, that's really good!
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/10/18 03:42 PM

BTW, in addition to gaining seven governorships, there are nearly as many new Democratic Attorneys General - especially the wins in Colorado, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin are big news. In recent years, State Attorneys General have been "Yuge" influencers on national issues - both good and bad.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/10/18 09:18 PM

**Sighs a weary sigh**
Oh, somewhere in this favoured land the sun is shining bright,
The band is playing somewhere, and somewhere hearts are light;
And somewhere men are laughing, and somewhere children shout,
But there is no joy in Florida...Andrew Gillum has struck out.

Take it from a Floridian who has spent a lifetime dealing with this crap...the recount won't change the results. We have paper ballots so there's no digital hocus pocus with our votes. Mail in votes are always the last to be counted. Unless there's a recount some might never get counted at all. I expect it's a logistics problem; getting the mail in votes gathered up and run through a counting machine right when the counting machines are getting trucked back to the warehouse for storage. State counting machine toting and relocating crews are all probably in a tizzy trying to connect with the used paper ballot recycling dept and get the mail ins counted too?
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/12/18 06:35 AM

The Republicans are getting desperate. Elections they thought they won are going to Democrats as more mail-in and provisional ballots get counted. In Florida, DeSantis is trying a pretty transparent "stop the count" lawsuit because he's a bit ahead at the moment. Gore vrs Bush all over again.
Posted by: pdx rick

Re: Election Day - 11/12/18 12:06 PM



Looks like Arizona is sending a Democrat to the Senate. smile
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/12/18 09:59 PM

It is appalling, but actually unsurprising, that the election system in Florida remains so dysfunctional. Republicans are grossly incompetent, and unethical, and it is to their advantage that things remain chaotic. The local (Dem) leadership has been obviously incompetent for some time now (remember "butterfly ballots", which actually doomed Gore in 2000). Again, an incompetent ballot design will probably doom Nelson.

We need a national standard for minimal voting security and processes to ensure free and fair elections. That can never happen with Republicans in charge.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/12/18 11:02 PM

Trump's claim that mail-in ballots should not be counted would deprive me of the right to vote, because my district is so small we have mail-only. Not to mention what it would do to Arizona where most ballots are mail-in.

Elections are about counting all the ballots, last time I checked. I wonder how Trump voted?
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/13/18 02:49 PM

Welp, now that there's a Democrat majority in the house there's the dispensation of favors and rewards with Committee Chairmanships and leadership positions being decided. Now the real back room commodification begins and getting a jump out of the gate is Pelosi signaling to the corporate boards that she's ready for business and reaching across the aisle to create a 'marketplace of bipartison ideas'. Cuz that's what a "LEFT" political party does. Break bread with white nationalists.
God bless these feckless boomer Democrats holding on to power by virtue of their nihilistic money raising death grip. Their brains are like so many dying malls thru out merica. Not able to think outside their self created boxes thrown up in the late seventies they return time and time again with new Sunday supplement appeals hoping to stir up enthusiasm with coupons and grand openings of a new bar stool store.
Even faced with an unpopular polling of herself as leader Nancy hauls out that tired game of identity politics to claim what's rightfully hers.
It's the year of the women y'all.

It would be stunning to see the party leadership do anything less.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/13/18 08:01 PM

Way back in '08 when Obammer took over I was a little concerned about the Democratic leadership. The casino bagman from Nevada is gone but Pelosi still hangs on after devastating Democratic losses year after year after year. Chuck Schumer has done nothing to assuage my concerns about weak leadership in congress either.

So yeah, there's no reason I can see to keep her in that position any longer. Democratic voters have moved left she hasn't.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/13/18 11:33 PM

Quote:
Break bread with white nationalists


Not at all. But break bread with Chamber of Commerce Republicans who think extremism and racism is bad for business. Meet with Christian Republicans who ended up there simply because of abortion. Did you know Hillary is a Methodist and has taught Sunday School?

Honest businessmen don't belong in the same party as Trump. Liberal Christians don't belong in the Republican Party, much less the Trump Abomination.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/14/18 03:07 AM

Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
Quote:
Break bread with white nationalists


Not at all. But break bread with Chamber of Commerce Republicans who think extremism and racism is bad for business. Meet with Christian Republicans who ended up there simply because of abortion. Did you know Hillary is a Methodist and has taught Sunday School?

Honest businessmen don't belong in the same party as Trump. Liberal Christians don't belong in the Republican Party, much less the Trump Abomination.


I guess it makes sense if her pastor was one of them ones that goes out and blesses bombs being loaded on the Tarmac.

You could also embrace a progressive platform of clearly articulated goals that would help Americans with their basic needs.
The current Republican Party is the chamber of commerce with the facade stripped away. Trump is what you get. He's the result of this two party rightward grope. You want more rightward grope PIA?
Why?
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/14/18 05:08 AM

You cast all Republicans as identical monsters. That is naive, and prevents recruiting more liberal Republicans to join the anti-Trump effort. Just like every other Party, the GOP is a coalition of several different factions. Each has their own reasons for being there. But in the Trump era, maybe some of those reasons are not valid any longer.

You win elections by getting lots of people to vote for your party, not by making Party membership ideologically pure and excluding everybody who doesn't meet your standards.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/14/18 03:35 PM

The republican party is now a party of mostly old white racists. If you don't know what time it is then I can't help you with that. You heven't been paying attention.

I'm sorry PIA, I've been asleep since the 'Contract with America' was promoted. How has the center right's passion for compromise been working out? Has the center right wimg Democrats brought about a fairer and more just society? Have they rolled back the damage of Reagans tax cuts and gotten the rich to start kicking in again? Did we finally pass medicaid for all? No?

Hmmmmm....

Well at least you've probably stopped the most egregious goals of the Ultra right from moving forward then....

Keep at it, there's gotta be a horse down there somewhere...
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/14/18 10:10 PM

Quote:
The republican party is now a party of mostly old white racists.

I disagree. I know lots of Republicans who are NOT old White racists. I would agree that if you are an old White racist, you almost certainly are a Republican (or KKK, or Nazi but vote Republican).

There is also a large faction of business people who may not be racist at all. Also a large faction of evangelical folks who are there because they've been suckered in by the Republican pose on abortion. And don't forget the rich who feel the GOP best represents their financial interests. All three of these factions do include some Black and Hispanic people. Finally, there are young people who vote Republican because their parents did and "young punks" who are alt-right members because they are revolting from mainstream politics.

You probably can't recruit from the pool of old white racists: You just have to wait for them to die or become too senile to vote. Individuals from any of the other factions maybe could be convinced their reason for being there no longer applies.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/14/18 11:06 PM

Lemme make sure I have this correct PIA

Instead of trying to appeal to disenfranchised voters with bold policy proposals and force a contrast between Democrats and the nihilistic fascist opposition party, you want right wing Democrats to reach across the aisle and try and work with:

Business people who may not be racist at all.
Evangelical folks who are trying to get abortion banned.
Disaffected young punks (AKA Proud Boys, Trads, Maga Chuds, NeoNazi's)

Did I get that right?

Your saying you would rather work on getting these groups to come over in some kind of coalition building with the extreme right than appeal to non voters?

O.K., Ill play along. What would you suggest a coalition of the right wing Democrats and the Ultra right moderates actually propose?

Mind you, we have biblical wealth inequality, a dying planet, rising ethnic fascist nationalism. The neoliberal destruction of large swaths of american communities, organized labor under critical threat and market world being pushed on some of the last remnants of public space created under the old liberal order.

With that backdrop (and correct me if you think I'm being hyperbolic or inaccurate) what would the continuation of punching left while moving right hope to do to address any of those issues, from your perspective?



Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/15/18 02:12 AM

The Democratic party is NOT going to win moderate Republicans over to their side. If they did they would just become Republican light.


Oh wait...
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/15/18 04:25 PM

Without broad and immediate structural changes to the democratic party, it will pave the way to neofascism as it has done in many parts of the world already.
PIA just articulated how it will come about.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/15/18 06:58 PM

You started your reply with a straw man, and then proceeded to demolish it. Well done!

I never said anything about right-wing Democrats and I never proposed that Democrats should change to more right-leaning policies. I just said talk to some of the factions in the Republican Party, because they may be demonizing Democrats with little understanding what our positions are. Have some faith that our policies and proposals would be good for the country and if people give them a fair listen, they might actually like them.

Remember all those Tea Party folks who said: "Keep the government's hands off our MediCare and Social Security"? Do you think maybe somebody should have explained to them in very simple terms that those were both government programs created by Democrats, that Republicans have been trying to kill for decades? If that had been a priority, maybe a lot of Tea Party members would now be Democrats. Do you really think they would have decided to embrace Republican ideas about killing MediCare and Social Security?
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/15/18 07:32 PM

Shucks PIA, I was going for the trifecta of straw man argument, logical fallacies and ad hominem attacks. Just straw man?

Go back and read the thread. I was beefing about thestrategy of boomers fetishising 'bi-partisonship' and framing it as a 'marketplace of ideas'.

There's a lot to attack about that neutered approach to politics. The most obvious is one of humanitarian reasons. The republican party is trumps party and you defend trying to find bipartisonship with mythical moderates. You gave some pretty eyebrow raising examples of who they might be.

That's your position. Fine. I would challenge that argument and did. It's also how you turn a mildly left party into a ineffectual center right party and cede ground to a rising fascist ultra right.

I agree there are many overlapping areas of common interest in the public sphere. Your two examples, Social Security and Medicare are from the old liberal political force that went away with Carter. The neoliberals are an empty, hollowed out, market world oriented pathology that has led the democratic party away from what was it's historic role (with bumps and warts included). It has no ideas except norms and values (whatever the heck that means), habitual desire for bi-partisanship (that gets them played every time), and a constant hard on for free market solutions for capitalist problems. The Bewitched 'if capitalism got you into this problem then capitalism can get you out' fixation.

The current right wing has some very definite ideas. All of them even worse than neoliberalism.

I'm saying we need leadership to throw this car in reverse and mat it like a big lizard is on our arse. Your saying lets cautiously go forward and find those mythical conservatives, that are not a part of Trumps cult, cuz market places and bipartisonship. Good luck with that.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/15/18 08:03 PM

OK, reality check. Bipartisanship (a word and concept that I hate, as it implies only two points of view) is a requirement in the upcoming Congress. Democrats control only one House of the Congress. They have great leverage, no question (since all budget bills have to start there), but they cannot get anything done unless they get the Senate to go along. That will, necessarily, require compromises.

I am ALL FOR pushing a progressive agenda, where the best ideas currently reside, but at some point in the process compromise will have to occur. Moreover, the ultra-progressive views of some new legislators do not represent the majority of the citizenry any more than the ultra-conservative TEA party caucus does. That reality will require some to make that realization sooner or later. It is the same dynamic that is at work in the fight against Pelosi. The left-left have bought into the BS peddled by the right that she is some kind of impediment to progress or a conservative in liberal clothing. She is not (nor was Clinton, but not fighting that battle here). If the new Congress does not lean on the experience of the current Democratic leadership, they will get NOTHING done.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/15/18 09:43 PM

What I admire about the republicans is that, no matter if there in the majority or the minority, they get s*** done. What you are proposing, NWP, is the tired play of compromise that we must do in order to get things done.
I have a pet theory that it's nothing more than an excuse to get nothing done so as not to upset the donor class.
Were talking about the ultra left and the ultra right now but I would like to bring it back to Overton window. That window of acceptable possibility has been moved to the right and has drifted incrementally more rightward over the decades since the 'New Democrats' have taken over the party. What is far right is what we used to call fascist, whats far left is what we called moderate progressive. Those chains have been moved down the field to the right's end zone, thanks in large part, to the embrace of neoliberal centrists policies of the New Democrats and their rolling over, genital displaying bipartisan fetish.

Your sadly mistaken if you think that the criticism of the progressive left is without merit and simply buying into the fascist fantasy narratives.
My question to you, NWP, is what has the centrist Dems done for anybody that's been worth a damn in the last 35 years?
Let's weigh whatever you come up with against the backdrop of some of the items I my list:

Deregulation of the banking industry
Deregulation of the media industry
Evisceration of food assistance for the poor (women and children here y'all)
The full pursuit of neoliberalism with all it's accompanying acceleration of wealth inequality, economic violence on communities, environmental violence on ecosystems and the destruction of organic culture.


That's off the top of my head. I haven't gotten started with the militarization of the police (wonder what that's for...), expansion of state violence in the middle east, North Africa and Latin America, the purposeful shrinking of the state authority in the face of corporate power, etc, etc...

So yeah, lets have that reality check. What are you putting up on the scales that offset this short list of New Democrat accomplishments with bipartisan support? What's stuck and not being torn down currently?




Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/15/18 10:30 PM

Some of that tasty bipartison action coming as a wrecking ball near you
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/16/18 03:44 AM

And nobody wins elections by making their Party smaller. Reality is that you still need to win before you can have the power to get anything done. If you throw out everybody with non-left ideas, then you lose elections. Much better to come up with positions and proposals that add to Party membership. If people resist your positions, then explain why they are worthy of support. There is a huge independent chunk of the electorate that is recruitable. You don't need to change your positions. You just need to actually talk to these folks.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/16/18 03:54 PM

The Democratic party has to decide wether it wants to be a party of the much larger working class or the party of wealth accumulation and property rights. Triangulation doesn't work and has led us to where we are today.
You want votes? Propose something that has broad popular support and get behind it.
You want donor money, play it safe and triagulate, triangulate, triangulate so that nothing meaningful gets done and you watch your traditional base of support crumble.

They got the upper middle class suburbs this time.

My fear is that it's only a pause in the drift to ultra-right authoritarianism. You can't consistently win by being against something.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/17/18 06:01 PM

Quote:
The Democratic party has to decide wether it wants to be a party of the much larger working class or the party of wealth accumulation and property rights.


So what exactly is wrong with accumulating wealth and owning property?
Most all of the working class folks I know want to accumulate some wealth and own some property.

Quote:
You can't consistently win by being against something.

What exactly are Republicans for?

They are against, taxes, immigration, abortion, fair wages, and equality for all. They are against same sex marriage, government regulation, religious freedom and a free press.

That only scratches the surface...but the funny thing here is that these are all things that Democrats are in favor of....

Triangulate all you want. The Democratic party is still the party of movement and the Republicans the party of order.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/17/18 06:12 PM

Well said! Bow
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/17/18 06:32 PM

Well, aside from the fact wealth accumulation is a death dive under the current system, wealth and income are two separate subjects. You can have wealth while making no income.
Then their's income that people make by trading on their time/labor.
The Neiliberal democrats have been spending most of their time appealing to the wealth accumulation set and not the income accumulation set. You might not see what the problem is, Gregor, when you get your investment dividend checks from Gregor Heavy Holdings Inc. but a heck of a lot of people don't have that benefit as their income doesn't allow them to have excess capitol to invest (can we get a minimum pay raise up in this b1tch y'all?) You can make the argument that the tax laws favor those that have wealth accumulation over those that depend on income.
Property right have been favored over the public spaces. One area under assualt has been the drive towards privatizing public education. Turning the public space into private enterprise and property. The commodifying of the public commons. For profit prisons, for profit hospitals, health care, bridges and infrastructures, air waves etc, etc. Because in neoliberal marketworld theory, it's better to trust in the markets than to have a public trust.

I can go on about how wealth accumulation accelerates the destruction of public space, causes economic violence to communities and inverts the tax structure to have the public underwrite private enterprise but you've probably heard it all by now.
Here's a good read some time ago that talks about this metamorphosis by the author of the term: Inverted Totalitarianism
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/17/18 06:48 PM

The democrats are the party of symbolic opposition and have been for some time as they have decided to become a more market oriented party. The idea of moving right while punching left to bridge a supposedly broader base of support has turned out to have left them in the weakest possible position than they have been in for decades.
What movement the Democratic party has achieved compared to ground the party has given up would be a fun debate and I'm willing to have it with you if you want.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/18/18 12:07 AM

So we agree that too few people have too much of the available money. The hoarded wealth of the bourgeois, passed from generation to generation and all that.

But what have you got against the ability to accumulate it? And why should a party be against a system that lets people gain wealth?
Isn't that pretty much the American Dream?

I'd like to know what you've got against property rights rights too, and why the Democratic party should be against them.

You've got John Locke rolling over in his grave. Life Liberty and the right to own property is pretty much what the good ole usa is founded on.

We need a system that works for everyone...not just a few.
I think Bernie mighta said that a few times. But I've never heard him speak out against property rights.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/18/18 12:17 AM

Quote:
The democrats are the party of symbolic opposition and have been for some time as they have decided to become a more market oriented party.

If we want the Democratic Party to be something other than what it is we need to elect candidates who feel the same as us. They're out there, recently more and more of them. We, the voters, are "The Democrats". Boomers are aging out of the system, not fast enough but things are changing, never fast enough for you, Monsieur Firebrand, but they are changing.

I dunno where we boomers went wrong. We were raised by survivors of The Great Depression and WW2. We were good and decent kids who were raised well. I dunno how we screwed the pooch so bad.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/18/18 04:18 PM

This is America Gregor. They got a system to keep progressive liberals out of the party. It's called a primary system.
A few decent ones will get thru but if you've been paying attention with this elections primaries, it's the party apparatus that most often decides. That apparatus will most often decide with wealth and property.
I have mentioned before that there is at least a financing mechanism now to raise money for progressive candidates and that's important going forward if there's any hope of getting candidates elected outside the corporate boardrooms. The other need is to broaden the idea of what's possible. Voting for what the corporate party offers you is not going to do that.



Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/18/18 06:52 PM

It's official: The Blue Wave was actually The Blue Tsunami. All six districts that make up Orange County, California have gone to Democrats. Some of the races were squeakers but they have all been counted now. Orange County is the seat of modern conservatism, the home of Nixon's Western White House and Reagan's home base.

Quote:
The Democratic sweep may have been foreshadowed by the retirements of longtime Republican stalwarts like Issa and Royce last year, but it took local GOP officials by surprise. Earlier this year, Orange County Republican Party Chair Fred Whitaker laughed off the notion of a blue wave in his backyard.

“They think we’re the new battleground ... It’s a Hail Mary play. It’s desperation,” Whitaker said in an interview in March.

“Let the Democrats spend tens of millions of dollars here,” he added. “Let them die on the hill in Orange County.”


SURPRISE!
Posted by: pdx rick

Re: Election Day - 11/18/18 07:18 PM



Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/19/18 04:29 PM

Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
The other need is to broaden the idea of what's possible.
My friend, if ever there was a moment to take one's own advice, this is it.

I am THRILLED at the diversity of people that won House Districts all over the country. That victory may be a portent of a great change, or merely a reaction to what happened in 2016, only time will tell. Your notion, however, that there is only one brand of progressive and that the Democratic party is just a bunch of corporatist shills is both incredibly naive and rhetorically insulting. A symphony that only has one note is just plain boring, even for John Cage.

What remains important about this election, though, is that many different kinds of Democrats won in many different Districts. That may allow the party to forge some very important coalitions to get progressive notions into legislation. It will be necessary to marshal that diversity behind some specific policies and direct those voices into a chorus. The notion that this could be done without experience of how to do it or how things work in the House is beyond naive. I'm all for new blood, but it needs to be seasoned and molded. Put away the suspicions of your own side and realize we're in this together.
Posted by: rporter314

Re: Election Day - 11/19/18 05:50 PM

Quote:
Orange County is the seat of modern conservatism, the home of Nixon's Western White House and Reagan's home base.

could it mean the modern democrat Party is really conservative wink
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/19/18 06:02 PM

Rubbish NWP.

There has been a good deal of reporting on he DNC and it's history of interrupting primary races, preferring the wealthy and connected. It also invited criticism of itself after it's fiasco in the 2016 election.
I've also experienced first hand the meddling of the DNC in primary race here in upstate NY. Redirect you critique to the party apparatus for a change NWP or at least have the honesty to say you support the party apparatus activities. Attacking me for being critical doesn't really clarify your position. I have defined mine in this way:

You can't have progressive reforms if the ideas are marginal and effect only a small number of people. You can't have real economic redress if you are too financially dependant on centers of capitalism and the corporate state. MY argument is that the democratic party apparatus has been too allied with finance and the corporate state. A simple review of election campaign history backs this up.

What you got?






Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/19/18 07:06 PM

Support bold proposals that have broad popular support to draw distinctions between you and your opponent...........

NOPE!
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Election Day - 11/19/18 07:31 PM

Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Support bold proposals that have broad popular support to draw distinctions between you and your opponent...........

NOPE!



That was last year, specifically August of last year, which if you'll remember, was a moment of chagrin when Republicans left Washington for summer break after they could not muster sufficient votes to finally usher in TrumpCare, and could only barely break the mandate.

They were expecting to ride the wave of Trump's popularity into a full repudiation of the ACA and much more, and they failed.

Pelosi was "opting to preserve the Affordable Care Act" because she thought that there would still be some semblance of the Affordable Care Act to preserve.
She made the "hypocritical claim" earlier this year in which she said, “The comfort level with a broader base of the American people is not there yet. It doesn’t mean it couldn’t be", mostly because she still believed that there was a chance to preserve and save the ACA.

It is now fifteen months later and even the preexisting conditions rule is endangered. I daresay that Pelosi is not only aware of the increasing "comfort level", she is also aware of the new mood in the House.

Pulling up an article from what is, in political terms, "eons ago" isn't impressive.
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Election Day - 11/19/18 07:37 PM

Originally Posted By: Greger


We need a system that works for everyone...not just a few.
I think Bernie mighta said that a few times. But I've never heard him speak out against property rights.


Which is why I've always said that he's really just a good New Deal liberal Democrat, and not a "socialist" and that he clings to that label because (A) he made his bones as a young man under that label and (B) he's partly a sentimental old fool.

I still love him but it's well past time he just doffed that old "socialist" tag and declared himself for what he really is, another FDR.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/19/18 07:56 PM

Hmmmm.....


That's a strange one Jeff. 15 months is too long ago to reference a position of the Democratic leaderships troubling positions but a political consensus of 75 yrs. ago is fine to critique the 'old fool' Sanders political affiliation. Interesting...

I stand by the article as it supports my position of the D party. Sorry if you are temporally offended.

Lets see how they will vote today then. Place bets now?
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/19/18 08:26 PM

Quote:
MY argument is that the democratic party apparatus has been too allied with finance and the corporate state.

Of course it is, I doubt if a soul here would disagree on that.

So what do we do about it?

My argument is that the way to create an egalitarian social democracy lies through the Democratic Party. There's no getting around it and there are certain realities that have to be taken into account.

The fact that our Corporate Overlords control the party apparatus is just one of those realities. Another is that we have to drag the moderates along with us because we need their votes. Most of them will come along willingly and we don't need those who won't.

Time and demograhics are on our side. This whole Trump thing is just a bump in the road and may actually accelerate the leftward slide we all dream of.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/19/18 08:51 PM

Originally Posted By: Greger
Quote:
MY argument is that the democratic party apparatus has been too allied with finance and the corporate state.

Of course it is, I doubt if a soul here would disagree on that.



I don't think you can say that with a high degree of conviction.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/19/18 09:23 PM

Shall we have a poll?

Speak up, chaps, amirite or amirite?

I don't know if there is a Democrat on the planet that is actually satisfied with what the Democratic Party has done in recent years/decades. The only defense I can offer for their consistent failure is that they have been driven to it by a relentless propaganda effort from the Republican side.
We thought that crime didn't pay, that ethics and honesty would win out in the end, that corporate donations would help us win against the authoritarians, that the good guys always win.....

Democrats are getting tougher. We're scarred and battleworn. But we have reinforcements coming from the next generations and big plans for the future.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/19/18 09:30 PM

You had two approaches to politics in 2016 Gregor.
One candidate was closely allied with corporate finance and it's campaign donations.
The other candidate swore off corporate finance and started a grass roots funding mechanism for financing his campaign.

That former candidate is a dark horse stalking 2020.
The latter has been working relentlessly on getting progressive candidates elected to congress.

That's the schism that still exists in the party today. It would be naive to believe otherwise.
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Election Day - 11/19/18 09:55 PM

Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
You had two approaches to politics in 2016 Gregor.
One candidate was closely allied with corporate finance and it's campaign donations.
The other candidate swore off corporate finance and started a grass roots funding mechanism for financing his campaign.

That former candidate is a dark horse stalking 2020.
The latter has been working relentlessly on getting progressive candidates elected to congress.

That's the schism that still exists in the party today. It would be naive to believe otherwise.


Hillary = "dark horse"?
BTW, Bernie refused to join the Democratic Party, still refuses.
Legal or not, like it or not, the DNC "protected their candidate" against a NON-Democrat candidate, which sounds a lot more logical IF you are a DNC official.

What wouldn't sound logical?
"Hey, this guy refuses to join our party, let's toss our candidate and support him instead, even though he's not a Democrat."

Again, that doesn't make what they did 100% legal, or even good, but it does make their actions logical.

The Redskins don't "temporarily" admit a member of the SF 49-ers onto the lineup either. You're either a member of the team and are under contract or you're not.

Again, Hillary a dark horse for 2020? Not a chance.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/19/18 11:25 PM

I refuse to join the Democratic Party too. But I caucus with them...

Clinton is no more a "dark horse" than Bernie. Either of them could throw their ring in the hat again, but I'd rather neither of them did.

Beto Beto Beto...
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Election Day - 11/19/18 11:40 PM

Originally Posted By: Greger
I refuse to join the Democratic Party too. But I caucus with them...

Clinton is no more a "dark horse" than Bernie. Either of them could throw their ring in the hat again, but I'd rather neither of them did.

Beto Beto Beto...



You're not a candidate, you're a voter.
Still wondering about Beto. He sure seems like a good egg but just believing he's a good egg isn't enough.

Hillary isn't running again, guaranteed. If she tries, she will be shut down in short order. Bernie...same thing.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/20/18 08:50 PM

Beto is a tabula rasa. But I think he really is a good egg.

And that's enough.
Have you looked at the growing list of possible candidates? Not a soul among 'em got the chops to excite crowds and bring out the voters. Boring boring f*cking boring.

Beto got the chops.

He even looks a little like Jimmy Stewart. We could have a Mr. Smith Goes To Washington moment in history where a genuinely nice guy takes the reins of government. I'm planning on taking the senate in 2020 too.

Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/20/18 09:04 PM

Beto has been a room temperature cup of tap water. He's average which is awesome for the media. Anything left of Attila the Hun looks exciting for Texas.
What is his actual policy positions that get you excited Gregor?
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/21/18 03:50 AM

Beto's Policy Positions

He looks like a pretty good horse to pick and one who could win the race. We'll see what happens but I'd like to see some fresh blood infused into the system.

Quote:
O’Rourke wouldn’t come into the 2020 campaign with a signature issue that would distinguish himself among the sprawling Democratic pack and define his candidacy. The main argument for a Beto campaign comes down to little more than, well, he’s Beto, and people really like Beto. But a successful presidential campaign needs a lot more than that to survive the presidential primary marathon. While it’s possible O’Rourke has what it takes to be Obama 2.0, the risk remains he could be Edwards 2.0.
More
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/21/18 02:20 PM

I've looked at his web site some time ago and his language hasn't changed much. Mostly centrist ambition with a progressive wrapper.
Frankly, I'm hoping that the Democratic party doesn't fall for that type of posturing again. We had it with Bill Clinton and we see how that's turned out. Beto reminds me of the same dynamics. Democrats loved him because they felt he could possibly beat Ted Cruz like dollar Bill could beat Bush. It was only later that we discovered what we had gotten.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/22/18 12:06 AM

Anti-Pelosi Democrats face their own revolt (Salon). The problem with the objectors is, they are mostly male, older, establishment, and a tiny minority.
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Election Day - 11/22/18 04:36 AM

Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
Anti-Pelosi Democrats face their own revolt (Salon). The problem with the objectors is, they are mostly male, older, establishment, and a tiny minority.


The anti-Pelosi rebellion has begun to crash and burn as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez signals her support for the Speaker.

Quote:
Opponents of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's bid to reclaim the speaker's gavel were dealt a new set of blows Wednesday, as a pair of Democrats — including a longtime critic — publicly backed the California congresswoman.

Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York on Wednesday threw her support behind Pelosi's campaign to be speaker in the next Congress.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/22/18 03:21 PM

It's interesting that Cortez has accumulated so much symbolic clout without having been seated in congress Jeff.
It would imply that there's an acknowledgement of a left wing in the democratic party finally. We can only hope.
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Election Day - 11/22/18 04:08 PM

I see Ocasio-Cortez is advocating a New Green Deal. I like the sound of that, but does she have an actual plan? I'm going to look up her campaign platform...

I am a real fan of the old New Deal - especially the work the CCC did. It is one of the durable inspirations in my life. I think that we have the makings for a New Green Deal that shares many of the objectives of the old New Deal in environmental work and job creation, but it won't have to be subsidized - except maybe as a kick start - and it can remain going sustainably.

The physical objectives will be forest health restoration, CO2 drawdown, soil regeneration, and fossil fuel use avoidance. In case you haven't been tracking on my occasional posts on biochar, that's what I'm talking about.

I am working to start a movement in New Mexico that will get our Congressional delegation behind it, using our pilot projects as demonstrations of its ecological and economic viability. As it happens, our two Senators and three Representatives are now all blue, fairly progressive, and personally known to me and my close colleagues, so I think we can get some traction.

The beauty of our New Green Deal is that it will make money while improving the environment! It will not be subsidy dependent.

New Green Deal! New Green Deal! ThumbsUp
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/22/18 04:58 PM

I agree Logtroll,
A new green deal is a pretty hot topic on the left and it would go a long way to aligning capitol with need.
Problem as I see it is capitalism has a tremendous propoganda advantage. We are so wedded to it as system to define ourselves culturally and politically. The lift will be a heavy one.
Just went to a community 'Project Drawdown' meeting. It was interesting and informative and had a pretty holistic approach. There was a 'hi my name is X and I'm here because...' Introduction and some University students were there as they were involved in soil regeneration and Biochar research.
That imperialism thing...
An interesting article on the political structure of Renewable vs. FF:
Posted by: logtroll

Re: Election Day - 11/22/18 05:41 PM

Yes, the nail that sticks up gets hammered down.

In response to that dynamic, our approach is a widely distributed micro-scale rollout. There are many reasons, but one of the most important is to fly below the radar of the mega-capitalist machine for as long as possible. Instead of giving them an obvious target, they will have to first notice, then try to stamp out, hundreds of thousands of tiny fires. We'll give them a death by 500,000 cuts.

When communities are happily humming along with zero or negative energy bills, resulting from production capacity that they own and control, they will not take kindly to corporate politicians who want to take it away from them.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/22/18 06:35 PM

Nice Thanksgiving Day suggestions from Micheal Moore:

Michael Moore Issues Slice Of Thanksgiving Dinner Advice

His main point is that we should shun racists and misogynists, but reach out to the rest of Republicans, let them sit at the grown-ups table, and explain how everything we (Democrats) want to do will benefit them too. Like Canadian-style health care that costs half as much and lets Canadians live 3-4 years longer than Americans. Or not having their house burn down or get flooded because of climate change.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/23/18 05:02 PM

Thomas Hartmann had an interesting take down of Pelosi rebellion. It seems to be coming from many different progressive media sources as well.
A corporate wing rebellion with Steny Hoyer, Tim ryan etc from the centrist 'Third way' trying to stop the progressive roll. Interesting if accurate
Hartmenn's take
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/23/18 08:41 PM

I haven't gotten through Hartmann's take, yet. What I've seen so far is that resistance to Pelosi seems to be strongest from the right wing of the Democrats, rather than the left. The newly-elected firebrands (like Ocasio-Cortez) are learning she is not the corporatist shill that others have portrayed her to be, nor is she the socialist radical the right likes to portray (although definitely left-left).

The reality is that the two Houses of Congress are controlled by different parties, and compromises will have to be made over legislation. Pelosi is a master tactician, so her experience is needed at this time. 2020 may change the formulation, and may not. She is working to prepare for new leadership and is aware of her age. The transition should be smooth, in my view, or we risk losing our improved position, and potentially the future.
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Election Day - 11/24/18 12:50 AM

The effort to dislodge Pelosi is starting to crumble, specifically because of increasing awareness that this is a right wing effort, and due in part to the fact that progressives like AOC have now endorsed her.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/25/18 06:35 AM

Mississippi newspaper: Hyde-Smith attended segregation academy (politico) It's not really where she went to school, actually - it's that when it was her daughter's turn, she sent her to a segregation school. FYI, a segregation school is not just a segregated school, it was one established to keep white kids from going to school with colored kids. What makes it a devastating revelation is that it is just consistent with her recent behavior.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/25/18 05:08 PM

It's Mississippi. These racist reports about her are considered a plus by her constituents.
She's running against a black man.

What yall think?
I say she's gonna win.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/25/18 05:14 PM

The only thing I haven't seen is a connection to George Wallace.
Quote:
He won 9,901,118 popular votes (out of a total of 73,199,998)—that is, 13.53% of votes cast nationally—carried five Southern states - Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi - won 45 electoral votes plus one vote from a faithless elector, and came fairly close to receiving enough votes to throw the election to the House of Representatives.
Although Hyde-Smith was too young to vote then, Wallace is still in the hearts of his nearly 10 million voters (who included her parents, apparently). There are clearly a lot of them still out there, apparently including Hyde-Smith. Cindy Hyde-Smith Is Pretty Much Who You Thought (TPM)
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/26/18 04:47 AM

These Democrats are working with Republicans to possibly block Pelosi’s House Speaker bid (Think Progress), meanwhile, Another rebel Dem softens on opposing Pelosi for speaker (Politico).
Posted by: rporter314

Re: Election Day - 11/26/18 07:04 PM

Quote:
13.53%

These were the blatant, in your face, I know I am a bigot, bigots.

What Mr Trump has done is emboldened and normalized bigotry for the other 25% of people who are bigots but don't wear a pointy headed white sheet.

Anecdotal but every Trump supporter I know is a bigot.

Cindy Hyde-Smith is a bigot whether she wants to admit it or not and for Trump supporters ... it is a plus.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/26/18 07:42 PM

I'm really not certain if there is anything the Republican Party stands for besides bigotry.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/26/18 07:57 PM

Originally Posted By: Greger
I'm really not certain if there is anything the Republican Party stands for besides bigotry.



Power
Posted by: rporter314

Re: Election Day - 11/26/18 10:19 PM

I believe there is evidence to support the notion there are two distinct factions of current Republicans.

One faction are the Trump supporters otherwise known as the base. Most are bigots. They comprise the majority of Republicans. These are the people most establishment Republicans deny exist. They should be renamed as Trumpites, Trumpians, or some other unappealing name.

Establishment Republicans are the other faction. Many have renounced their affiliation with the Republican Party. Political apostasy is not well received by Mr Trump.

A couple of years ago this forum asked the question of what would become of Republicans who did not pledge fealty to Mr Trump and what we see is many have become conservative Democrats or independents. It was my prediction these folks would have no place to go and expect to have some say in politics unless they became Democrats.

But why have the rest of them continued their allegiance to Mr Trump? Paper tiger comes to mind. Show some integrity!!!!
Posted by: Greger

Re: Election Day - 11/26/18 11:19 PM

Quote:
I believe there is evidence to support the notion there are two distinct factions of current Republicans.


Well, that explains it. one faction made up of bigots, the other dedicated to power. If we made a Venn diagram, greed and corruption would be where they overlap.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 11/27/18 02:10 AM

They are actually a more complex coalition. There are lot of fearful folks who are driven by Fox News and Trump, Bigots, Chamber of Commerce small business owners, Rich folks (including Big Business owners), Evangelicals, and Libertarians. Some of these factions have diametrically opposed ideas, but they find common ground because they dislike something the Democrats like.

For example, consider the Evangelical versus Libertarian positions on abortion or anything relating to sex or gender.
Posted by: pdx rick

Re: Election Day - 11/27/18 12:42 PM


Under Pelosi’s leadership, Democrats blocked President George W. Bush’s efforts to privatize Social Security; she was a key reason the Affordable Care Act, passed; she guided major financial reforms through the chamber; and she helped make the 2009 stimulus bill a reality, which staved off some of the worst effects of the Great Recession.

No wonder ReTHUGliCONs are trying to block her. smile
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/27/18 03:58 PM

Stay frosty Rick...
You can't trust her anymore than a rat in a bath tub. She's a centrist corporate democrat. Not saying she can't be moved to the left with enough pressure but is she really going to produce any progressive legislation taking all that Corporate Mo?
Another thought going froward for y'all:

'Traditionally considered a blue state, no Democrat since 1960 has secured the presidency without first winning its primary. But following a decisive loss to Bernie Sanders in the 2016 contest, Hillary Clinton became the first presidential candidate of either party since Richard Nixon in 1972 to skip the state altogether (not visiting until November of 2017 to promote a book about her loss). At least on a national level, liberal pundits seemed to take it for granted. As MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow put it a few months before the 2016 presidential election: “The Republican Party really, really, really wants Wisconsin to be a swing state — not true…I mean, even Michael Dukakis won Wisconsin, right?” Such thinking would ultimately cost the Democrats Michigan as well.'

The knife fight ahead
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Election Day - 11/27/18 06:37 PM

Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Stay frosty Rick...
You can't trust her anymore than a rat in a bath tub. She's a centrist corporate democrat. Not saying she can't be moved to the left with enough pressure but is she really going to produce any progressive legislation taking all that Corporate Mo?
Another thought going froward for y'all:

'Traditionally considered a blue state, no Democrat since 1960 has secured the presidency without first winning its primary. But following a decisive loss to Bernie Sanders in the 2016 contest, Hillary Clinton became the first presidential candidate of either party since Richard Nixon in 1972 to skip the state altogether (not visiting until November of 2017 to promote a book about her loss). At least on a national level, liberal pundits seemed to take it for granted. As MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow put it a few months before the 2016 presidential election: “The Republican Party really, really, really wants Wisconsin to be a swing state — not true…I mean, even Michael Dukakis won Wisconsin, right?” Such thinking would ultimately cost the Democrats Michigan as well.'

The knife fight ahead



As someone who has cornered MANY mice and rats in bathtubs (only to watch my cats turn out to be totally useless as rodent control!) I assure you a rat in a bathtub CAN be trusted - - to go absolutely nowhere while running around at a feverish pace.
Thankfully we no longer live in Jonesboro Arkansas so our rat cornering episodes have long since ceased.
And if you feed your cats too much, they will not catch mice!
Ours have always been spoiled rotten.

Nancy Pelosi indeed should retire, however since it has been eight years since we had the House, maybe let's transition into solving problems this year and keep an eye on finding and grooming a replacement for the 117th Congress. Ms. Pelosi might even be inspired to cooperate.
Rumor has it there are people whispering in her ear to that effect.

My only concerns are that we went off half-cocked and that the primary group responsible for trying to unseat her were actually further to the Right. That's not a good recipe.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/27/18 07:57 PM

Wether the challenge to Pelosi's anointing was real or a simple head fake, the result is that she seems to have solidified the party behind her. So it would seem she has inversely benefited. Triangulate? Dunno, sure feels like a familiar play from democrats.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/28/18 05:54 AM

I recognize, my friend, that you don't know much about Nancy Pelosi, and neither do most of her detractors. She has probably been the most effective advocate for progressive causes since LBJ. I'm not being hyperbolic here. Nancy Pelosi (Wikipedia). It amazes me, sometimes, how thoroughly propaganda permeates discussions about her, rather than facts or history.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 11/28/18 05:52 PM

She's a mixed bag at best NWP. It's obviously to me that the baseline for 'progressive causes' has moved significantly. That may be the cause of your generalization of her detractors.
On the other hand, viewed from a politician like Pelosi it's been settled. 'Democrats are capitalist'. Any mechanism for finding redress or promoting the general welfare will be coming from Market World, Ideas Division?
It's fair to question her history: Pelosi beyond WIKI


Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 11/29/18 01:20 AM

Here’s How New House Members Can Show Their Clout (Bloomberg Opinion). Subcommittees. I think it is a great idea, and will give them the opportunity to learn the ropes, earn their spurs, and have things to take home to constituents.
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Election Day - 12/01/18 02:00 AM

Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
Here’s How New House Members Can Show Their Clout (Bloomberg Opinion). Subcommittees. I think it is a great idea, and will give them the opportunity to learn the ropes, earn their spurs, and have things to take home to constituents.


ThumbsUp Bow ThumbsUp
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 12/05/18 03:25 AM

After 40 years of decline it looks like progressives aren't interested in incrementalism any longer. One can only hope that Pelosi read the wind correctly and save the party from its corporate wing.

House ways and means chairmanship battle ahead
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 12/05/18 09:55 AM

Quote:
'Democrats are capitalist

Quite true, and it's mostly because of the replacement of pension plans with 401Ks. For many years, people have been getting statements every month showing their various mutual funds values, following the stock markets, listening to Marketplace on NPR, watching Cramer, etc. All the things that capitalists do, even though you think of million dollar portfolios when you hear the term capitalist. All the online brokerages with sub $10 stock trades can also take some credit.

The other thing that made a lot of less wealthy people capitalists is the trend toward being real estate rentiers. Again we think of Trump's father when we hear the word, but a huge number of working class people own a home they rent out as well as their own home. Again, most people who do this are trying to replace a pension with some other form of income generation for their retirement.

If you don't do this, you have to live on Social Security which is not a very secure life at all.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 12/05/18 05:08 PM

So when did americans decide to atomize themselves into individual retirement plans as opposed to a described benefit pension plan PIA?
Granted it was an enormous windfall for the financial services industry but it hardly benefited most working Americans. True the process was started in the 80's and accelerated in the nineties but how did we, as a society, decide on this market mechanism as the only alternative?
I remember the wave of raidership going on in the eighties fueled, to a large extent, by decades of amassed wealth in pension benefit plans that were not legally protected from these white collar criminals. In fact, that is still going on today since the raiders merely changed their name to 'Venture capitalists'.
Now, everyone who is in the market is relying on a big returns to finance their retirement. Mind you, that might not work out so well when the big players take their chips off the table and the market crashes as it is known to do thru grift and corruption. What would have happenned if it were not for Monika Lewinsky blowing up the grand bargain to privatize Social Security?
Then there's the question of how's that neoliberal idea of self funding thru the market world retirement panning out? Well, by any measure, not well. There are more people going into retirement age with no savings to speak of or, as we witnessed from the melt down 10 years ago, in a state of precarity now.
Once again, the Democrats do nothing to address what is a huge growing problem for a very large demographic (looking at you Boomers). Much like health care, they receive a huge amount of campaign cash from the FIRE economy that directly benefits from this state of affairs.
It might be why Sanders has called for an expansion of Social Security instead of euphemisms and hollow market world slogans that make up so much of the Democratic party while more and more people are falling into precarity and despair and looking for a way out. No matter how extreme or contradictory. Fascism anyone?
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 12/06/18 01:29 AM

Yeah, like Fascists would help out retired folks! More likely to round them up for mass euthanasia. This is one of Sanders' positions that I whole-heartedly agree with. (Not that I disagree with many of his positions.) Social security is most people's most conservative part of their retirement portfolio. Privatizing it would be a disaster. You are in deep doo doo if SS is all you have. Better plan a move to Mississippi or Mexico to get by.

We would do a lot better if Social Security was doubled or even tripled. Then people could actually retire on it without going to live in a cardboard box behind Safeway. Because most people are not qualified to make financial decisions. But then again, this ant is going to be laughing at a lot of grasshoppers who spent every cent they made while they were working, on crap that does them no good in later life.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 12/11/18 09:25 PM

Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
So when did americans decide to atomize themselves into individual retirement plans as opposed to a described benefit pension plan PIA?
Granted it was an enormous windfall for the financial services industry but it hardly benefited most working Americans. True the process was started in the 80's and accelerated in the nineties but how did we, as a society, decide on this market mechanism as the only alternative?


Here's my consistent take: Most policymakers divide their constituents into investors or non-investors. Wage earners are, by and large, non-investors. Certainly the poor and minorities are non-investors. There is a nearly perfect correlation between the investor class and the donor class (people with money are usually the ones that donate), so it behooves elected representatives to cater to that class. This neatly corresponds with the biases of economists, who view most economic activity (wrongly) as based upon "investment". That explains the fixation on the stock markets and "housing starts" as gauges of economic activity.

As a result, policymakers (of both parties) tend to skew economic policy priorities toward the investor class - on taxes, on healthcare, on infrastructure, etc., rather than on "the citizenry" in general - but with different justifications. 401(k)s were born of this perceptual framework. A brief history of the 401(k), which changed how Americans retire (CNBC). Social Security is good and all (or bad, if you are conservative), but don't represent "investment" in the economy (which is empirically wrong on so many levels). Democrats saw the 401(k) as a supplement to SS, whereas Republicans saw it as a replacement for Social Security. Corporations saw it as an off-ramp for expensive pension plans, and Hedge Fund Managers saw it as a new source of revenue.

The problem is, 401(k)s, like Social Security, were not intended to be a substitute for retirement plans, but a hedge against penury in old age. 401(k) Basics: When It Was Invented and How It Works (LearnVest)
Quote:
Despite their popularity today, 401(k) plans were created almost by accident. It started when Congress passed the Revenue Act of 1978, which included a provision that was added to the Internal Revenue Code — Section 401(k) — that allowed employees to avoid being taxed on deferred compensation.
In 1980, benefits consultant Ted Benna referred to Section 401(k) while researching ways to design more tax-friendly retirement programs for a client. He came up with the idea to allow employees to save pre-tax money into a retirement plan while receiving an employer match. His client rejected the idea, so Benna’s own company, The Johnson Companies, became the first company to provide a 401(k) plan to its workers.

In 1981, the IRS issued new rules that allowed employees to fund their 401(k) through payroll deductions, which kickstarted the 401(k)’s popularity. Within two years, nearly half of all big companies were offering 401(k)s or were considering it, according to the Employee Benefits Research Institute.
According to the Wall Street Journal, "just 13% of all private-sector workers have a traditional pension, compared with 38% in 1979". That change has been devastating for workers because, as the Economic Policy Institute notes, "401(k)s [are] 'a poor substitute' for the defined benefit pension plans many workers primarily relied on, which provide a fixed payout for employees at retirement".

Many employees (mostly white-collar) are now severely dependent on Stock Market prices in retirement because 401(k) "plans" hold more than $4.8 trillion in employee assets on behalf of nearly 54 million workers. The 2nd Bush administration pushed 401(k)s as a substitute for Social Security, even though most workers don't have access to them. According to data from the U.S. Census Bureau, only 32% of Americans are saving for retirement in a 401(k).

What we need to do is flip the script: instead of skewing policy toward the "investor class" - which accounts for only 20% of the population (and even less of the functional economy) - we need to skew it toward "the citizenry" as a whole. Thus, healthcare security, retirement security, education availability and living wages should be the touchstone for policy. And, those are popular positions for voters (especially on the left, but even amongst Republicans). Little Partisan Agreement on the Pressing Problems Facing the U.S. (Pew Center)
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 12/11/18 10:22 PM

I thought this discussion was in a different thread.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 12/12/18 01:11 AM

Dunno NWP.
When it comes to the financialization of the U.S. Economy it could easily fit into the subject of US elections.
Posted by: chunkstyle

Re: Election Day - 12/12/18 01:13 AM

You sound as though your on board with the universal basic goods idea.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Election Day - 12/12/18 03:42 PM

Yup, I have several firmly progressive positions in my noggin. Our only differences are in how to get there.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Election Day - 12/27/18 07:49 PM

Looking back at the election, my prediction about gerrymandering came true. That was about the strategy of dividing up voters so you have the maximum number of 5% win districts, and most of the other Party packed into a few districts. Normally a great plan, except for when the other side wins by 8.6%. Then all of those "safe" districts go to the other Party and you have a tsunami.

So it's kind of like buying options instead of the underlying stock. You can rig it so you increase your returns, if your predictions prove true. But if they don't, then you are really screwed. The interesting thing is like with options, you can rig things either way: You could pack fewer districts so they had 10% wins, and thus be assured of some presence in the new House. But maybe when your Party platform has a bunch of unpopular positions, you should go for 15%.