|
Trabisnikof posted:I'm rather confused what Huey Long of the 2020s Democratic Party is even supposed to be. Like a southerner? A white democrat? A "chicken in every pot" populist? No, Petr's not the sort of strawman that actually backs up his arguments.
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 08:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 05:09 |
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I'm rather confused what Huey Long of the 2020s Democratic Party is even supposed to be. Like a southerner? A white democrat? A "chicken in every pot" populist? I think Sanders came close at his worst moments, toward the end. The specifics of the policies don't actually matter that much - that's my point. Populism is poo poo no matter whose colors it's flying. This is a direct result of the fact that people are poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 08:25
|
|
|
Petr posted:I think Sanders came close at his worst moments, toward the end. The specifics of the policies don't actually matter that much - that's my point. Populism is poo poo no matter whose colors it's flying. This is a direct result of the fact that people are poo poo. Too bad Bernie lost.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 08:26
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Too bad Bernie lost. I have no idea what argument you're making.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 08:26
|
|
|
Petr posted:I think Sanders came close at his worst moments, toward the end. The specifics of the policies don't actually matter that much - that's my point. Populism is poo poo no matter whose colors it's flying. This is a direct result of the fact that people are poo poo. What would the danger of a more populist version of Bernie be?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 08:28
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:What would the danger of a more populist version of Bernie be? Well, considering that I think almost all "populist" politicians are actually cynical opportunists, the danger would be using language that the left has been yearning to hear for years from their candidates to mask self-interest at the cost of the interests of real leftist causes. If you're asking me to be more specific than that, I can't. That's the general theme of populism, but the details vary each time. No Republican thought the Russian version of the Manchurian Candidate would show up in their party, but here we are.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 08:33
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:A "chicken in every pot" populist? A baby in every pot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 08:42
|
|
|
I think 'welfare for whitey' will hurt the right more than the left when it eventually emerges, and if it does it'll be after the business community has more or less finished migrating to the dems, leaving the republicans or whatever they call themselves as the racist populist party
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 08:47
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:What would the danger of a more populist version of Bernie be?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 08:55
|
|
|
Again I'd look at the Five Star Movement (or M5S), which is a really odd duck. If you look at its politics and organization, its ideology is a blend of (and all these categories are very vague within the party) anti-globalization, environmentalism, sustainability, populism, anti-interventionism, Euroskepticism, and being against "corrupt" politicians in general. They've played coy on immigration. It also embraces "internet voting" (think Redditers) and has a proprietary website where party members can vote up or down on various issues. But it's also totally internally unaccountable (since a handful of people at the top control the e-voting system) and is built around the personality cult of a demagogic comedian name Beppe Grillo who makes racist anti-Muslim jokes. If you took the Trumpstaffel and the Bernie-or-Busters and merged them into one party and added Peter Thiel, you'd get something like M5S. Also M5S is in a coalition in the E.U. parliament with far-right parties including AfD, UKIP, the Swedish Democrats and the Lithuanian Party of Order and Justice. And if it wasn't for the peculiar way the Italian parliament seats parties, M5S would be the second-largest political party in the country. BrutalistMcDonalds fucked around with this message at 09:33 on Aug 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 09:21
|
|
|
prom candy posted:If Donald Trump can get this close to the presidency what's realistically stopping Guy Fieri? More seriously, considering the Trump is looking to get some 40% of the vote, I'm kinda scared for what a less comical and less utterly moronic, but equally fascist, Putin-like strongman figure could do in an US election. It looks like the US is really ready for an actual fascist to take over and really, in that sense, we're kinda lucky that Trump is as incompetent and ignorant about practically everything important as he is. A large percentage of the voters are apparently fine with electing an outright racist, anti-science, 'let's use some nukes', enviro-sceptic, birther, who also think it's fine to make a 'joke' about liquidating political opponents, and literally wants military courts to try civilians. I mean, if such as person had been in the primary instead of Trump, could he also have beaten the assorted religious fanatics and slick ultra-capitalists, or is it actually Trumps stupidity which made him win the nomination? Anyway, considering the actual probable consequences of Donald Trump POTUS, even a 1% or 0.1% probability seems terrifyingly high. Regardless, what I'm mainly Arzy'ing over, is something incredibly embarrassing happening to Hillary 3-4 days before the election, like tripping up the stairs to a debate and making GBS threads herself in confused surprise on live TV or something, her dentures flying across the room in the middle of a debate, an embarrassing sex tape suddenly showing (more realistically some really damning piece of information, or similar, though because of her gender, the most effective would probably be something embarrassing).
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 09:32
|
|
|
The good news is that the general electorate is becoming more resilient to racist strongmen (i.e less white), even while a minority of it (i.e. uneducated whites) is becoming more and more open to it. I wouldn't worry too much about 2020 as long as we dodge the bullet this year. This potential American Putin would need to thread the needle of capturing enough of the majority-minority vote while maintaining a base in the racist white vote. That's not very easy. Once uneducated whites are electorally totally irrelevant in either major party and if the economy keeps getting less and less equal, there might be space for a populist anti-system/anti-political platform that doesn't need to cater to racism and can therefore appeal to poor ethnic minorities. Italy or any other European country is a poor example to use because, well. White people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 09:40
|
|
|
Antti posted:Italy or any other European country is a poor example to use because, well. White people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 09:50
|
|
|
Revelation 2-13 posted:Regardless, what I'm mainly Arzy'ing over, is something incredibly embarrassing happening to Hillary 3-4 days before the election, like tripping up the stairs to a debate and making GBS threads herself in confused surprise on live TV or something, her dentures flying across the room in the middle of a debate, an embarrassing sex tape suddenly showing (more realistically some really damning piece of information, or similar, though because of her gender, the most effective would probably be something embarrassing). I don't think Trump would have been able to get this far without hijacking the institutional support of the Republican party, which prepared the bed for him and has trained a huge swath of the electorate to vote for an R no matter what. This is a project which has taken longer than I have been alive, and I'm not exactly a spring chicken any more. He has probably significantly damaged that project. While I have little good to say about the Republican Party, their overall goal seems to be the Gilded Age, which was notable for its lack of fascist strongmen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 10:23
|
|
|
Wikkheiser posted:True but the populism of the future will take different forms owing to particular national characteristics. Like M5S wants to deregulate the economy, reduce the size of the state and slash taxes ... but also nationalize banks. It's a weird brew that's particular to Italian politics. Though my main sense is that left and right are pretty nebulous categories. One of these days I'll try to wrap my head around European politics as opposed to state/regional/national politics here. I can't even wrap my head around the UK stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 11:14
|
|
|
I know that Mussolini's granddaughter is an active fascist in Italy, and there are other self-described fascists in Italian politics. It's weird, but I guess Europe's parliamentary systems allow for the political fringe to get in.Star Man posted:In 2006, Barbara Cubin (R) won her reelection in Wyoming by just under 1,000 votes. I don't know what magic the DNC pulled off in 2006 was, but I still dream of it finally working in a state that blood red. Wyoming had a Democratic governor from 2003-11. I do remain optimistic that the Dems can retake middle America with the right messaging and base of support. If Arkansas can vote for a minimum wage increase, and if Kansas has had enough of the GOP destroying everything to potentially turn blue, there's definitely room for the Dems to make some headway and evaporate the GOP's systemic Senate advantage. Donkwich fucked around with this message at 12:32 on Aug 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 12:29
|
|
|
Donkwich posted:I do remain optimistic that the Dems can retake middle America with the right messaging and base of support. If Arkansas can vote for a minimum wage increase, and if Kansas has had enough of the GOP destroying everything to potentially turn blue, there's definitely room for the Dems to make some headway and evaporate the GOP's systemic Senate advantage. Uh, what? Systemic House advantage, sure, but you can't gerrymander the Senate. Unless you're talking about Senators being elected in off-years under a Democratic president, which doesn't seem like a systemic advantage so much as a chance alignment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 13:00
|
|
|
citybeatnik posted:One of these days I'll try to wrap my head around European politics as opposed to state/regional/national politics here. I can't even wrap my head around the UK stuff. Don't. You think Trump is bad? At least you guys have a chance to make a better country. Ours is just filled to the brim with dying people who vote tory because "well I don't like immigrants!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 13:03
|
|
|
Grundulum posted:Uh, what? Systemic House advantage, sure, but you can't gerrymander the Senate. Unless you're talking about Senators being elected in off-years under a Democratic president, which doesn't seem like a systemic advantage so much as a chance alignment. I think Donkwich means that there are a ton of small states in the midwest and mountain regions that send a bloc of GOPers to the senate. If the Democrats began to actively campaign there on certain issues, they might be able to break into that solid group.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 13:05
|
|
|
e: ^^ Yeah that The Republican base is spread out over more, smaller-population states, giving them an advantage in the Senate. It's not an advantage that can't be overcome, given that we've had (and still have) Democratic senators from red states before. But I think it's significant enough of an advantage that the DSCC should take into consideration (and they're probably already aware of it).
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 13:15
|
|
|
Welp, I guess this cements me in the "gently caress Jill Stein" camp.Brown Moses posted:Not everyone is happy
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 13:21
|
|
|
Grundulum posted:Uh, what? Systemic House advantage, sure, but you can't gerrymander the Senate. Unless you're talking about Senators being elected in off-years under a Democratic president, which doesn't seem like a systemic advantage so much as a chance alignment. The Senate is inherently gerrymandered in favour of small lovely states that no one cares about. Looking in terms of population, a lot of the small western GOP states should be merged together and a lot of the small northeastern Democrat states should be merged together, because there is no actual reason for the four people who live in Wyoming or Vermont to have equal representation in the Senate as the sixth largest economy in the world, California. It just so happens that the GOP have the support of a few more of these small lovely states (think Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, the Dakotas, Kansas, Nebraska, Alaska, etc.), so they have a built-in advantage in the Senate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 14:08
|
|
|
cargo cult posted:
What's probably going to happen is that the parties will realign on economic lines once the dust settles and things like gay marriage and major social justice issues are settled. Social issues are the only thing really keeping the Dems together right now but as soon as the Republicans jettison the racist wing and the evangelicals go back to staying home on election day, the parties will change. With the foundation of an actual left wing getting some traction, people are going to want actual economic reforms once things like "stop shooting so many black people" and "gay people are human beings" get settled. Remember itt we had people wanting the TPP so they could have cheaper poo poo and their response to "well what about the people who receive the hard end of globalization?" was a combination of "better luck next time", "who cares", and ignoring them entirely.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 14:16
|
|
|
You think the Republicans can just jettison the racists? Really?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 14:26
|
|
|
What's the timeline here on police abuse of black people "getting settled"?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
Donkwich posted:What's the timeline here on police abuse of black people "getting settled"? 30XX A.D.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 14:32
|
|
|
Donkwich posted:What's the timeline here on police abuse of black people "getting settled"? My vote is "not until a complete overhaul of the criminal justice and law enforcement systems and an ousting of all the racist and corrupt policymakers and LE personnel who caused/allowed it" Wait, lemme shorten that one down. "Never. "
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 14:33
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:The Senate is inherently gerrymandered in favour of small lovely states that no one cares about. Why not just get rid of the senate, it's not like an upper chamber is axiomatic to parliamentary governments.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 14:33
|
|
|
Business Gorillas posted:What's probably going to happen is that the parties will realign on economic lines once the dust settles and things like gay marriage and major social justice issues are settled. Social issues are the only thing really keeping the Dems together right now but as soon as the Republicans jettison the racist wing and the evangelicals go back to staying home on election day, the parties will change. The response to no-tpp is that people losing those jobs is inevitable and the solution isn't isolationism. I get it, if we just say gently caress you to everyone who is losing their jobs every time we do something to keep our economy competitive than we all lose in the end, but we also have to understand the whole situation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:Doesn't sound like the DNC was in the tank for Clinton at all. Huh?? Here is an email from a DNC staffer disagreeing with Hillary's team over strategy and messaging to get Democrats elected. This proves that they were treating Bernie unfairly! Somehow! Getting Democrats elected is their job, and that means coordinating messaging strategy with the Clinton and Sanders campaigns. Edit: sorry, I'm an rear end in a top hat who assumed you were being sarcastic, but now I realize you were probably being genuine and we both agree. Jimbozig fucked around with this message at 14:57 on Aug 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 14:40
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:The Senate is inherently gerrymandered in favour of small lovely states that no one cares about. Because tradition of the fact that the States, even the tiny ones, are technically sovereign "nations" who should all have equal representation of their state interests while the House represents the people directly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Antti posted:The good news is that the general electorate is becoming more resilient to racist strongmen (i.e less white), even while a minority of it (i.e. uneducated whites) is becoming more and more open to it. Yeah. We have to remember that the sheer demographic differences between the US and Europe give us a built in resistance to the wave of white supremacy that can lead to Brexit-style votes. Trump is an ominous situation, but his stunning failure should be an encouraging sign that we aren't quite as far gone as we like to think. Raenir Salazar posted:Because tradition of the fact that the States, even the tiny ones, are technically sovereign "nations" who should all have equal representation of their state interests while the House represents the people directly. Which is highly unlikely to change since Republicans depend very heavily on keeping the their stranglehold on the states with mostly old, uneducated white people angry and resentful of "elites" for their power.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
Business Gorillas posted:
Given that "Stop shooting so many black people" has been a recurring issue for over a century, you might be waiting for a while.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 15:01
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:Yeah. We have to remember that the sheer demographic differences between the US and Europe give us a built in resistance to the wave of white supremacy that can lead to Brexit-style votes. Trump is an ominous situation, but his stunning failure should be an encouraging sign that we aren't quite as far gone as we like to think. Were it not for Trump the GOP would have pulled the same numbers among minorities as it usually does and would still have been free to do it while "merely" scapegoating some minorities rather than all of them. Had the republican party stuck to its 2012 post mortem it would likely be dog whistling its way to the white house. And yet this supposedly solid wall of builtin resistance is failing to produce a situation similar to the french runoffs each time Le Pen ends up runner up (i.e. a crushing defeat), instead putting a fascist who is honest about it within 5-10 points of the white house. Clearly there's something dysfunctional.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 15:15
|
|
|
Dr Cheeto posted:30XX A.D.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 15:15
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:Yeah. We have to remember that the sheer demographic differences between the US and Europe give us a built in resistance to the wave of white supremacy that can lead to Brexit-style votes. Trump is an ominous situation, but his stunning failure should be an encouraging sign that we aren't quite as far gone as we like to think. Counterpoint: European democracies have parliamentary systems. Any argument that relies on, "well, America is just structurally more left wing than Europe" has a lot of lifting to do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 15:17
|
|
|
Agnosticnixie posted:Were it not for Trump the GOP would have pulled the same numbers among minorities as it usually does and would still have been free to do it while "merely" scapegoating some minorities rather than all of them. The last time Republicans were competitive over any minorities it was Latinos in 2004, where they still had a minority of votes. The last time they were competitive with Black voters, people still thought Radon was good to put in your food. Hieronymous Alloy posted:Counterpoint: European democracies have parliamentary systems. Parliamentary systems encourage extremism to be a significant presence if not a guiding force in government.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 15:17
|
|
|
That's only because most parliamentary systems select the ruling party with a breakdancing contest.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Counterpoint: European democracies have parliamentary systems. Didn't say more left wing. Just that going full on racist won't get you absolute national support since the white demographic alone just isn't big enough anymore and most minorities aren't up to slitting their own throats.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 15:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 05:09 |
|
|
The Republicans needed to hook into the Latino vote this election, and it warms my cold cold heart that Trump has potentially sabotaged that possibility for generations of voters. The only thing that would solve the police brutality issue permanently is direct federal oversight, which is functionally impossible, so 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 15:24
|
|
