|
Silver2195 posted:I feel like the demographic component makes for a more long-term shift. It's going to take considerable time and some drastic changes for the Republican Party to get many non-white votes again, if it ever happens (and whites are an increasingly shrinking portion of the electorate). I think the most relevant demographic component is actually age (and it'll probably be 10-20 years before that really makes a big difference). Hispanic voters, which are the really fast growing minority group, aren't really as reliable as Democratic voters as, say, black voters are. And IIRC there are signs that younger black voters have less allegiance to establishment Democrats, so it's not something you can just expect to happen on its own. While most of these folks won't switch to Republicans, there's a very real risk of them disengaging if they feel the Democratic Party isn't really doing much to improve their lives.
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 06:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 14:43 |
|
|
Chomskyan posted:k, I don't care what you think is interesting 
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 06:24
|
|
|
LITERALLY MY FETISH posted:Vengeance being part of the justice system is a big reason why the justice system is hosed, and what you want is criminal justice reform unless it impinges upon your right to vengeance. gently caress off. I personally want these guys dead. They’ve never shown remorse nor asked for forgiveness. One of them killed a fellow prisoner. My wanting them dead for the pain they have caused my family is vengeance. That’s not a healthy impulse but it’s how I feel. I’m not getting that vengeance and I don’t think my desire for vengeance should have any say in the law. I’m against the death penalty and life sentences and believe that anyone can potentially be rehabilitated. So I support even these assholes having the chance to rehabilitate and atone. Doesn’t mean I want them out tomorrow. EugeneDebsWasCool fucked around with this message at 06:38 on Jan 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 06:28
|
|
|
LITERALLY MY FETISH posted:Vengeance being part of the justice system is a big reason why the justice system is hosed, and what you want is criminal justice reform unless it impinges upon your right to vengeance. That's really not what he said at all and what he actually said is fairly reasonable. People who commit violent crime still need to be rehabilitated and evaluated in the short term before we can release them, if only for the sake of public safety. Raskolnikov38 posted:kudos dems for owning me and actually shutting down the government. didnt think you had it in you 
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 06:30
|
|
|
hobotrashcanfires posted:Is it really though? Or is it only the reshuffling of the deck for the umpteenth time. Let's not pretend "GWOT" was anything but the disastrous imperialistic idle tinkering of the world's sole superpower during a lull of other international power strength that could counter us. It was only ever our reaction to terrorism, and willful ignorance of the part we played both directly and indirectly in it's genesis as an asymmetric tactic that gave it power. Yes, and the sitting SecDef is basically admitting as much. That is why it’s significant. I think you may have drastically misread my initial post. Boon posted:Not really, it's been in the defense strategic guidance for years and years. The fact that it runs so drastically counter to the foreign policy Trump claims to espouse is what makes it significant. If you read previous NDS', they placed non-state actors as the top threat to national security. The 2018 one, and Mattis' comments, reverse that order. It’s Mattis’ version of Kelly’s “there is no wall, Trump is uninformed," in that it gives us another sign of how drastically uncoordinated this White House's policy is. It may not be surprising to any of us, but it's significant, and it has major implications for how the U.S. carries out its foreign policy. Majorian fucked around with this message at 07:10 on Jan 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 06:50
|
|
EugeneDebsWasCool posted:gently caress off. So in what world does "rehabilitate" mean "rot in hell"? My point is your mouth is saying the right words about how you want criminal justice reform, but when it comes to the hard part, the actually changing the way you think about criminal justice, you balk because of your own wish for vengeance. It takes more than just saying "no death penalty or life sentences" but if your approach is that these people are scumbags it will warp the way you think about criminal justice. Lightning Knight posted:That's really not what he said at all and what he actually said is fairly reasonable. People who commit violent crime still need to be rehabilitated and evaluated in the short term before we can release them, if only for the sake of public safety. What he said isn't reasonable because he's approaching the situation from the perspective of them being scumbag criminals instead of people who commit crimes. It's really loving hard to separate the two, and I don't blame him for feeling that way about them, but even just that notion does not belong in a conversation about criminal justice reform.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:01
|
|
|
lets completely shut down the government, never turn it back on, and replace it with something that would actually guarantee people had their material needs met
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:10
|
|
|
LITERALLY MY FETISH posted:It takes more than just saying "no death penalty or life sentences" but if your approach is that these people are scumbags it will warp the way you think about criminal justice. Uh, dude. I think you're picking the wrong battle here. If they murdered his family member in what sounds like cold blood and then went on to murder someone in prison then they're probaaably beyond any hope of saving. Never mind that he isn't saying what you think he is saying, even now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:11
|
|
|
Kanine posted:lets completely shut down the government, never turn it back on, and replace it with something that would actually guarantee people had their material needs met I think you're much more likely to end up with a(nother) right-wing power grab.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:11
|
|
|
EugeneDebsWasCool posted:gently caress off. You should read the article this poster linked to: Lightning Knight posted:https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/08/can-prison-abolition-ever-be-pragmatic it has a quote you might find interesting: "While there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free.” it was said by someone you think is pretty cool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:12
|
|
|
LITERALLY MY FETISH posted:So in what world does "rehabilitate" mean "rot in hell"? That's really not how people actually think or act. It may be how we ought to think or act, but you can't demand that people harmed directly by something have more empathy for the source and then act like they're the bad people for not doing it. It's why it's asinine to ask racial minorities to have more empathy for Trump voters and Republicans even though in theory they ought to - because at the same time, the Republicans want to kill them. His view on the matter is impressively level headed considering his background. Besides that, rehabilitation has nothing to do with whether or not you want to see someone in Hell. Hell is a metaphysical religious concept, rehabilitation is a concrete ideological premise for government action. They're really not mutually exclusive. Again, I don't agree with his view, insofar as I'm not arguing that the men who did that don't deserve empathy. But acting like he's terrible for having his view is fairly ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:13
|
|
|
I'm starting to think tonight was effectively Grand Bargain 2: Electric Boogaloo. But with more brown people hate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:20
|
|
|
Office Pig posted:I'm starting to think tonight was effectively Grand Bargain 2: Electric Boogaloo. It's possible. We got the shutdown, at least so far, but the question is what happens tomorrow, and what happens when eventually a deal comes out. The Republicans don't need any Democratic votes as well, so in theory they could do an end-run around and end the shutdown on their own. That's unlikely, but possible, and if they did there's not much the Dems could do. Edit: that is to say, the Republicans could do some fuckery to try and kill the filibuster, or call the Dems' bluff and make them actually filibuster. Lightning Knight fucked around with this message at 07:24 on Jan 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:22
|
|
|
Republicans need to overcome a Democratic filibuster to do anything
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:24
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Republicans need to overcome a Democratic filibuster to do anything I suspect if the Republicans actually made the Dems do a real filibuster they could outlast it, if it came to that. I don't think they'll do that though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:25
|
|
|
LITERALLY MY FETISH posted:So in what world does "rehabilitate" mean "rot in hell"? Again gently caress off you holier than thou sanctimoniuos gently caress. I've thought very hard about criminal justice reform and what that means to me and it's put me at odds with members of my family. It means that I can put my own personal feelings of anger and desire for vengance aside to support candidates that advocate for change in our criminal justice system. No mandatory minimums, abolish the death penalty, abolish private prisons, paying working convicts the minimum wage, eliminate life sentences, providing legal and education services with an emphasis on rehabilitation for all inmates, and freeing those convicted of non-violent crimes (and expunging their records) are all policy positions I whole heartily endorse. These guys killed my uncle at random. They robbed a gas station and it went wrong and one of them killed the attendant. After that they kidnapped my uncle and his girlfriend to murder them together so that they couldn't rat each other out. He was a total stranger to them at the wrong place at the wrong time. I would prefer that guys like my uncle's murderers not be lumped in with black kids who got caught with weed and a racist af judicial system that unjustly threw the book at them when we talk about judicial reform. EugeneDebsWasCool fucked around with this message at 07:31 on Jan 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:25
|
|
EugeneDebsWasCool posted:Again gently caress off you holier than thou sanctimoniuos gently caress. Here's a litmus test: http://nordic.businessinsider.com/photos-of-maximum-security-prisons-in-norway-and-the-us-reveal-the-extremes-of-prison-life-2017-2/ Would it make you angry for those exact men to go to the prison in Norway?
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:32
|
|
|
The government shutting down means all crimes are now legal, right? Or is it just federal crimes that are now legal?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:32
|
|
|
If you're a grown rear end man and dont know/care murder-kidnap is wrong, I'm not sure how you rehab that
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:32
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/pdmcleod/status/954602202961674240
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:34
|
|
|
I'm not sure I follow. Is this asserting the Dems were going for the good play and the Republicans shot it down or that the Dems hosed it up? I honestly don't know.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:40
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I'm not sure I follow. Is this asserting the Dems were going for the good play and the Republicans shot it down or that the Dems hosed it up? I honestly don't know. The initial plan was to tie DACA to a must-pass bill, but Paul Ryan wouldn't commit and so kicking the can down the road didn't seem too appealing. Not sure if I can rate it as a fuckup or not.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:47
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Yes, and the sitting SecDef is basically admitting as much. That is why it’s significant. I think you may have drastically misread my initial post. To my mind it's nothing more than shifting the narrative. Russia and China were a focus this entire time, of course we'll still be bombing all over the middle east, we'll still maintain thousands of troops fighting the foreverwars. We never stopped having regional power plays with Russia and China this entire time. Constant showdowns over the South China Sea/Taiwan, surveillance planes poking and prodding, military jets buzzing aircraft/navy vessels/borders. It was never not a main point of policy, even if we didn't bandy it about as the big deal. Terrorism was always a conveniently hyped excuse for things they already wanted to do. There's no admission that it was all a disastrous failure that only served to weaken us on every conceivable front and empower both Russia and China. It's not like any of them with the humility to realize that would dare say as much publicly. Only now they can point Official Military Policy being opposed to Russia for obvious reasons, and opposed to China for economic reasons, just in time for upcoming 2018 non-stop election train heading right into 2020. The only thing changing is the reason they'll say they need more money. I just disagree that it's anything more than self-serving rhetoric. If you think it's significant, fine. I think they only shifted the public-facing bullshit back for the typical cynical reasons, and nothing more. Perpetually bombing and attempting to remake the middle east in any way we see fit will continue just as it would otherwise, just like we never stopped the Russia/China dickwaving while "terrorism" was front and center.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:49
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I'm not sure I follow. Is this asserting the Dems were going for the good play and the Republicans shot it down or that the Dems hosed it up? I honestly don't know. affect it's the former. Republicans don't want to commit to anything because they presumably want to keep as many hostages as possible, Dems have no reason to give them three weeks for no concession.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:53
|
|
|
LITERALLY MY FETISH posted:Here's a litmus test: Jesus gently caress you're a sanctimoniuos piece of poo poo. What do you think you're proving here? That you're going to catch the family member of a murder victim in a semantic trap and prove them a hypocrite through your own brilliance? gently caress off. If US prisons went to a system similar to the Norwegian model as outlined there I would be overjoyed. I think the amenities and opportunities offered to the prisoners in Norway are things that should be available to everyone in a just society. Period. Even if it benefits the fuckers that killed my uncle I'd support that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 07:54
|
|
|
Also, this: https://twitter.com/SabrinaSiddiqui/status/954587787323469824 is sort of what I'm referring to wrt to the Grand Bargain similarities.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 08:04
|
|
|
The idea of prison abolition is more in the sense that the American criminal justice system is utterly broken, designed literally to provide slave labour, and probably the vast majority of prisoners do not need to be in there and are only being harmed and made more dangerous by being cut off from society and branded permanently as a 'criminal' class of person. The Norway model isn't far off; the idea being that prison should be a last resort and based on rehabilitation. Shut down the private prison companies, sack the judges, dismantle the vast majority of facilities, and reform the laws.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 08:11
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I think you're much more likely to end up with a(nother) right-wing power grab. you're much more likely to end up with a second civil war as the country breaks down into a dozen fiefdoms each with their own military vying for power. Eventually, in the confusion, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and Southern California will be taken over by the Blood Alliance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 08:16
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Edit: that is to say, the Republicans could do some fuckery to try and kill the filibuster, or call the Dems' bluff and make them actually filibuster. This is a pet peeve of mine, but this is what an actual filibuster is. You get 60 votes or you get stuck. What you're probably thinking of is that the Republicans could keep the chamber in continuous session. But that doesn't get them closer to breaking a filibuster so long as 1 Dem remains present to object to unanimous consent. No speeches have to be made, any of that. The Senate can't really do anything when stuck like that so people tend to give speeches, but it's not required by any means. The things like Cruz and Bernie giving hours long speeches is basically because they want to be seen as being visibly and vehemently in opposition, not because they have to in order to block anything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 09:35
|
|
|
thefncrow posted:This is a pet peeve of mine, but this is what an actual filibuster is. You get 60 votes or you get stuck. Huh. Well, today I learned.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 09:58
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I think the most relevant demographic component is actually age (and it'll probably be 10-20 years before that really makes a big difference). Hispanic voters, which are the really fast growing minority group, aren't really as reliable as Democratic voters as, say, black voters are. And IIRC there are signs that younger black voters have less allegiance to establishment Democrats, so it's not something you can just expect to happen on its own. While most of these folks won't switch to Republicans, there's a very real risk of them disengaging if they feel the Democratic Party isn't really doing much to improve their lives. If the Republicans were to drop the racism and moderate their social stances a bit they could probably pick up a pretty sizable chunk of the minority population, I think.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 10:03
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:How old are you? I'm asking because those of us who are older recognize what's happening now as a pretty typical backlash when Republicans get into power and remind everyone how bad they are, resulting in temporary Democratic wins for a few years until they gain power and the opposite happens (due to the Democrats not really accomplishing much). If this is your first time seeing this, I can understand how it might give the false impression that this backlash will permanently cripple the Republican Party.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 10:08
|
|
|
Office Pig posted:Also, this: Democrats who enter politics do so for one reason: to give cover to the GOP. What a loving waste. A one-party state would be better than this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 10:14
|
|
|
Grapplejack posted:If the Republicans were to drop the racism and moderate their social stances a bit they could probably pick up a pretty sizable chunk of the minority population, I think. Yeah but then we’d just have Democrats. You know I was amazed when that vox article revealed Trump threw a fit despite getting everything he wanted, but good god the extent to which Democrats go above and beyond is a sick joke. The only reason this country hasn’t completely turned into turbohell already falls upon the perpetual fuckups of everyone in power. It is genuinely sobering to know millions more lives have yet to be ruined thanks to mindless greed and stupidity. Terrified to see what Kelly’s idea of appropriate is if that sweetheart deal was ‘too liberal’. ded redd fucked around with this message at 10:26 on Jan 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 10:16
|
|
|
Grapplejack posted:If the Republicans were to drop the racism and moderate their social stances a bit they could probably pick up a pretty sizable chunk of the minority population, I think. Or just do what white supremacists have done for years and silently expand the definition of 'white',
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 10:45
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Because I think that the thing you're arguing - that people shouldn't support left-leaning candidates who aren't likely to win - is bad. I want the resulting dialogue and increased media presence regarding left-leaning ideology resulting from such campaigns to occur. I don't know for sure whether these things will end up having a positive net outcome, and I don't have the information to argue either way, but that doesn't really matter because it's just my personal opinion and I don't expect to convince anyone based off of that. I don't think there's any particular harm in someone using an unsupported argument in favor of something that I think is either good or not harmful, especially if the argument isn't necessary to support the action in question. If something is obviously wrong or disprovable, I'll point it out, but otherwise I don't see a reason to nitpick over things like "increased leftist dialogue is good." So when someone says they think Manning should be supported because it'll increase dialogue about left-wing ideas, even if they don't support that claim (or are wrong about it) there's no harm from supporting her. In the UK the left wing candidate was heavily attacked by the media and centrists within their own party constantly making a noise about them being unelectable and made a lot of effort to undermine them. About the only reason it failed was due to party supporters (members of the public paying a fee to be a registered member) had been given increased say in leadership elections. Winning an internal leadership vote twice with a majority has moved party policy further to the left so the take home is you need to involve people or you end up with a rote idea of "the only way to win is to do X" and your head buried in the sand. Carecat fucked around with this message at 12:37 on Jan 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 12:18
|
|
|
Good on the dems for finally finding a spine, but on the other hand it seems like this is another of those times when the Dems were saved from themselves by GOP insanity. In conclusion, the Democrats are a land of contrasts. Carecat posted:In the UK the left wing candidate was heavily attacked by the media and centrists within their own party constantly making a noise about them being unelectable and made a lot of effort to undermine them. About the only reason it failed was due to party supporters (members of the public paying a fee to be a registered member) had been given increased say in leadership elections. Winning an internal leadership vote twice with a majority has moved party policy further to the left so the take home is you need to involve people or you end up with a rote idea of "the only way to win is to do X" and your head buried in the sand. Well, if you look at the ultimate cause of Corbyn's rise, it's that the right wing of Labour are really loving stupid. I know that I poo poo a lot on the Dem establishment, but to be fair they don't even come close to the Blairites when it comes to being poo poo at politics. Cerebral Bore fucked around with this message at 13:18 on Jan 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 13:14
|
|
|
the blairites are so dumb, they decided the tories blowing themselves up with brexit was the absolute best time to lodge a knife in the back of their leader and attempt a coup
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 13:24
|
|
|
I have mixed feelings about the shutdown. I'm a federal employee, so it puts me and several of my friends out of work, but it'd be unequivocally worth it if it meant that if the Democrats were finally painting a line in the sand to save hundreds of thousands of people from being deported. But so far all the rhetoric that's coming out of Washington and everything I've read about the deal Schumer tried to strike makes it come across less as a principled stand and more as the sort of "look how reasonable and willing to compromise we were, we even gave them the wall and they still wouldn't budge!" political maneuvering they've been trying over and over for the past several years with generally poor results.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 13:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 14:43 |
|
|
Condiv posted:the blairites are so dumb, they decided the tories blowing themselves up with brexit was the absolute best time to lodge a knife in the back of their leader and attempt a coup The Blairites are so dumb that they pushed to change Labour's leadership elections to a direct membership vote in order to dilute the power of the trade unions and thought that this would cement their hold on the party, because obviously the membership of the major leftwing party would be super eager to vote for some rightwing ghoul as party leader. Atahualpa posted:I have mixed feelings about the shutdown. I'm a federal employee, so it puts me and several of my friends out of work, but it'd be unequivocally worth it if it meant that if the Democrats were finally painting a line in the sand to save hundreds of thousands of people from being deported. But so far all the rhetoric that's coming out of Washington and everything I've read about the deal Schumer tried to strike makes it come across less as a principled stand and more as the sort of "look how reasonable and willing to compromise we were, we even gave them the wall and they still wouldn't budge!" political maneuvering they've been trying over and over for the past several years with generally poor results. Yeah, I think this is a wait and see situation, because sadly enough it's entirely plausible that Schumer & co are shutting down the government in order to pressure the GOP to take the current, by all accounts garbage, deal on the table rather than to pressure them to accept a non-garbage deal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 13:45
|
|