|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The point is that voters themselves are saying they are doing "good or excellent," but that the economy overall is not. The voters themselves believe that their wages and job opportunities are going to continue to grow in the next year, but also think the economy is doing bad overall. Yeah, the problem is not inflation, it is fear of inflation - which has been driven by 40 years of conservative media constantly hammering that every Democratic spending bill or tax hike was going to turn us into Zimbabwe and they'd soon need a wheelbarrow full of money to buy a loaf of bread. Also, inflation = Carter = malaise. That's another drum they've been pounding nonstop.
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2021 23:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 02:35 |
|
|
morothar posted:I mean, if one party in a two-party system is fascist, then… yes? You can have democracy, but at best within and through the party that is not openly fascist, all the time. Neither party is outright fascist, and both are moving us closer to fascism through their enabling. A democracy where you can only vote for one party is not worth keeping. The so what is that leftists traditionally have not seen electoralism as a viable strategy to achieving their end-goal. Or is the so what that leftists aren't numerous enough to matter on this issue? If so I agree, but then I have to wonder why you care which way leftists vote.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2021 23:43
|
|
|
selec posted:Can you show me the political ads that do this, or even explain where you think the average voter runs into these ideas? Because I don’t think by and large that had any effect whatsoever Its what those voters in Virginia were saying. Leon quoted it all a page or two ago.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2021 23:46
|
|
|
The idea that gas prices are a big deal because they're displayed in big red letters over the highway is really putting the cart before the horse. The reason that gas prices are so publicized is because it powers everything, so small fluctuations and corrections to the price are happening all the time. Calling gas prices inconsequential is completely detached.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2021 23:50
|
|
|
Discussing "why people voted in X way" is generally very dumb and pointless, because the causes are usually going to be divorced from anything anyone has control over and usually just correspond to media narratives, the party of the current President, and the extent to which a small subset of people are choosing or not choosing to participate in the first place. There's not really any useful information to be gained. The left position is obviously still correct, but only because the things they support are good on their own merits. People arguing against "left messaging" or whatever should be dismissed unless they're accompanying such an argument with opposition to the actual contents of said messaging (and people arguing in favor of it need to stop trying to justify it on the basis of electability, even though I understand why people feel compelled to do that). "How will it affect voting patterns in the short-term" is usually unknowable and is just the bullshit people debate about in discussions like this because it's usually what the media talks about when it comes to US politics (and it's also kind of the only thing you can debate about if people aren't willing or able to discuss disagreements in values/ideology). One could make a strong argument that Democrats actually making peoples' lives good would help them in the longer term, but a large portion of the people who need to be helped are already disengaged from politics (and for good reason). So messaging wouldn't fix that problem, because most people don't have any reason to believe that the government will actually have such a significant positive impact on their life in the first place. The party itself would have to fundamentally change into something completely different for this to happen (something no more likely to happen than the Republicans suddenly become socialist). Also, if people are going to talk about stuff like perceptions of the economy, they need to take into account the fact that the perceptions of anyone outside of uncertain voters - either people who aren't guaranteed to vote at all or who might choose to vote for either major party - are irrelevant. And I'd wager that a bigger factor in Democrats doing poorly currently is simple low motivation + higher Republican motivation due to a Democratic administration. Not them being displeased with the party, but simply not caring due to there no longer being the specter of Trump (or any Republican president - for many people there probably needs to be some clear "threat" that media narratives can revolve around). But it's impossible to really get any reliable information for this stuff (especially if you're trying to predict future events), which is why such a discussion is pointless in the first place. How are u posted:I mean yes? You can have patriotic leftism, it's entirely possible. This is like saying that you can be a leftist while also being proud of the Republican Party or something. It might technically be possible for a person to simultaneously hold those views, but it also means that the person in question is either very stupid or operating on a very strange definition of "leftism."
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2021 23:55
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:
I probably want 90% of the things you want, but I also think that the United States has done some good things in the past and can do good things in the future. I can acknowledge the horrible things we have done, demand we make amends and do better, and be proud of our efforts to get there. Do you really think that hating the USA is a precondition for leftism? That's wild, man, nobody wants to hate their country and be told that it's all poo poo and should be torn down.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:02
|
|
|
It's wild to me that people ITT and elsewhere are talking themselves into the idea that material policy is completely orthogonal to election outcomes when the pro-Democrat cliche for so long has been "I acknowledge this proposal/bill/EO/etc does not go far enough, however," Maybe those things actually aren't going far enough??
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:03
|
|
|
TheIncredulousHulk posted:It's wild to me that people ITT and elsewhere are talking themselves into the idea that material policy is completely orthogonal to election outcomes when the pro-Democrat cliche for so long has been "I acknowledge this proposal/bill/EO/etc does not go far enough, however," People are "talking themselves into it" because it is a verified historical fact. Passing good policies that benefit the nation are rarely rewarded with electoral success. You pass good policies because it's the right thing to do, not because you expect people to be grateful.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:05
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:The idea that gas prices are a big deal because they're displayed in big red letters over the highway is really putting the cart before the horse. The reason that gas prices are so publicized is because it powers everything, so small fluctuations and corrections to the price are happening all the time. Calling gas prices inconsequential is completely detached. Consumer gas prices don't necessarily track 1-to-1 to diesel prices, and the cost of transport is usually a small fraction of the total cost of goods. Gas prices being "the reason for rising costs" is sort of inverting the story too - gas prices go up when demand goes up, there can be other reasons (like material changes to sourcing), but the reason they are going up NOW probably has a lot more to do with prior underutilization - recall that point near the start of the pandemic where oil futures were negative because there was so little demand from processors. This is just the part of "back to normal" that people hate, and yes, the big red numbers matter. Everyone knows the trick with X.99 reading as cheaper than rounding to the next dollar, it doesn't work with gas because: A. Gas stations on the same block will undercut each other by 10-20 cents, so people are trained to check them to find the better one, whereas you usually can't do the same with Doritos and grocery stores B. The "3" out front has been the same for so long that people only look at the other two God help Biden when it starts reading "4" out front, because people will absolutely lose their minds even if it just is the difference from $3.80 to $4.00 over the next year. E: Judakel posted:LBJ was insanely popular with black people because of the things he did for them. FDR got elected to five terms, and it wasn't just WW2. There's a tremendous need for the kind of policy that can't be done anymore. If done, it would still be insanely popular. Lack of reward seems more a product of the kind of the half-assed poo poo that does make it and not the idea that they're rarely rewarded. That's personal popularity for the top of the ticket (not to mention it was pre-realignment), the issue people are rightly pointing out is that the myth of the all-powerful president leads to people voting House, Senate, and State elections based on whatever the hell pointless bullshit because they don't view those positions as relevant to the overall picture. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Par...U.S._Senate.png FDR was rewarded for doing the new deal by having control of the House and Senate stripped from him over the course of his presidency BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 00:17 on Nov 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:08
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:People are "talking themselves into it" because it is a verified historical fact. Passing good policies that benefit the nation are rarely rewarded with electoral success. LBJ was insanely popular with black people because of the things he did for them. FDR got elected to five terms, and it wasn't just WW2. There's a tremendous need for the kind of policy that can't be done anymore. If done, it would still be insanely popular. Lack of reward seems more a product of the kind of the half-assed poo poo that does make it and not the idea that they're rarely rewarded.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:09
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:
But if they're only looking at the last 2 digits it'll seem way cheaper
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:10
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:People are "talking themselves into it" because it is a verified historical fact. Passing good policies that benefit the nation are rarely rewarded with electoral success. Oh word? Verify it for me then e: like I'm legitimately curious what your definition of what a "good policy that benefits the nation" is beyond "some number of people were helped" and seeing that applied to electoral results in a quantitative way like you claim
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:15
|
|
|
How are u posted:Its what those voters in Virginia were saying. Leon quoted it all a page or two ago. But where do you think they’re exposed to those messages? They don’t read C-SPAM, so It’s just right wing bullshit they see on Facebook. There is nothing to be done about it, at least by candidates and campaigns, is there? Here’s a set of factual realities I think that obviate this entire conversation: 1. You can’t stop leftists from making these statements/claims in public, but because of the general marginalization of left voices it’s extremely unlikely your average suburban voter hears it directly from the source. It’s dangerous if they do, anyways, because that voter might end up agreeing with them. 2. The way voters ARE exposed to these ideas is as demonized extractions that find the most inflammatory statements, remove context and spread them. I mean, you’re a Democrat, you’ve seen this done to Ilhan Omar several times the last few years. They don’t want you to watch the whole speech, they just want you to get mad about the little bit they pulled out. The people pulling this poo poo are really good at doing that kind of selective editing and framing. 3. Even if Dems or leftists policed their speech to the Nth degree, it doesn’t take a crypto Muslim Kenyan communist to tell you they’ll make up whatever they want regardless. Deal from strength. Do not police your edges, figure out how to get them to vote for you lol.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:17
|
|
|
It's not the "official" CBO score, but the CRFB analysis shows that the House version of BBB's revenue provisions would cover all of the costs and reduce the deficit, which would trigger the House moderate agreement to pass it immediately. Obviously, the Senate is the big question mark. https://twitter.com/BudgetHawks/status/1457796357868060675
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:17
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:It's not the "official" CBO score, but the CRFB analysis shows that the House version of BBB's revenue provisions would cover all of the costs and reduce the deficit, which would trigger the House moderate agreement to pass it immediately. So until I hear a firm statement of support from Manchin I'm going to be pessimistic that it goes anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:20
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:It's not the "official" CBO score, but the CRFB analysis shows that the House version of BBB's revenue provisions would cover all of the costs and reduce the deficit, which would trigger the House moderate agreement to pass it immediately. I think you're reading this backwards? Seems to read like $2.4T in costs for $2.2T in offsets. e: the table definitely says net deficit increase.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:23
|
|
Glory to Italia!
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:People pay attention to gas prices because they affect the price of anything that requires oil to harvest, refine, manufacture, transport, or power. Which is literally everything. Conservatives and shithead moderates always fixate on gas prices when they go up under Dem presidents. They didn't give a poo poo when they went up under Bush or Trump, and they didn't give any credit to Obama when they went down under him. In my state, people were complaining when gas prices were low under Obama because it was "bad for the energy industry". Gas prices are just a fig leaf for their racial grievances, like pretty much everything else they get mad at.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:23
|
|
|
yeah, i'm sure if gas prices were low they'd be talking about how great biden is. just look at the stock market that they talked up meant so much under trump...
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:29
|
|
|
ILL Machina posted:I think you're reading this backwards? Seems to read like $2.4T in costs for $2.2T in offsets. Yeah, it looks like the CRFB differs in the estimates on how much the increased IRS funding/enforcement and I read it backwards. The other estimates show the IRS provisions raising $400 billion and CRFB estimates $125 billion. Either way, it would still fall within the parameters of the House moderate agreement. If the CBO estimates the IRS provisions closer to the other assessments, then it will lower the deficit. If they hew closer to the CRFB estimate, then it will be a small increase. With dynamic scoring + the likely Senate removal of the paid leave provision, it will be revenue neutral no matter which way they end up. https://twitter.com/ylanmui/status/1457800114525720576 Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 00:33 on Nov 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:29
|
|
|
If policy is divorced from election results and This Has Always Been So then why participate in the system at all? Because anyone who wants to win and can win will not deliver on anything they promise (unless they do somehow it super secretly) or will promise poo poo amd then deliver it. So basically you have to hope almost everyone in the party is lying amd is actually way further to the left than they claim to be. More likely, people are reacting to media narratives as someone else pointed out, and their personal state of being.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:35
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:People are "talking themselves into it" because it is a verified historical fact. Passing good policies that benefit the nation are rarely rewarded with electoral success. TheIncredulousHulk posted:Oh word? Verify it for me then Yeah, that's an incredibly bold claim that I'd also like to hear you explain a bit more, Deteriorata. The New Deal allowed the Democrats to dominate the House for decades after FDR's death.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:39
|
|
|
InsertPotPun posted:yeah, i'm sure if gas prices were low they'd be talking about how great biden is. just look at the stock market that they talked up meant so much under trump... "How's your 401k?  "
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:44
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Yeah, that's an incredibly bold claim that I'd also like to hear you explain a bit more, Deteriorata. The New Deal allowed the Democrats to dominate the House for decades after FDR's death. Decades? You might want to double check that
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:47
|
|
|
How has it been almost 3 days and nobody knows why half a dozen people seemed to have died from heart issues, another several were trampled to death, several dozen were in ICUs, and another 200+ were injured? Some of the families are blaming Scott and suing. Investigators still say they don't know exactly what happened or if the heart issues are related to the cause of the stampede. https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1457812077528166411
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:48
|
|
|
karthun posted:Decades? You might want to double check that Between 1933 and 1995, the Democrats held the majority in the House for all except two sessions - the 80th ('47-49) and the 83rd ('53-'55).
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:51
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:How has it been almost 3 days and nobody knows why half a dozen people seemed to have died from heart issues, another several were trampled to death, several dozen were in ICUs, and another 200+ were injured? People figuring out how to dodge the blame and haven't settled on a story that makes somehow nobody responsible for a disaster. Once they figure out a way to blame the dead/injured there will be a reason that nobody in power has a part in. vvvvvvvvvvvv TheDisreputableDog posted:That “group of suburban whites” included a black woman expressing the fear that saying the wrong thing would get her labeled a bigot. I understand why this woman represents a blind spot for leftists, but her fear is something you collectively have to figure out. It’s not a boogeyman spun out of straw. Do you think black people not being a hive-mind is a blind spot for leftists? Because black people don't share a mind. You know that right? Jaxyon fucked around with this message at 00:58 on Nov 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:54
|
|
|
AmiYumi posted:So this group of suburban whites expresses politically-incoherent views and voted “embarrassed by the Republican in office, came home to roost at the first opportunity”, you say? Gosh, never seen that before. That “group of suburban whites” included a black woman expressing the fear that saying the wrong thing would get her labeled a bigot. I understand why this woman represents a blind spot for leftists, but her fear is something you collectively have to figure out. It’s not a boogeyman spun out of straw.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 00:56
|
|
|
I mean, being a hive mind works well for the republicans. Maybe it’s independent thought that’s the problem. 🤔
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 01:05
|
|
|
is pepsi ok posted:The incredible thing about Huey Long was that he never really understood or gave a poo poo about political theory. The Bible was his guiding light, and the Bible said that you love your neighbors and lift up those in need, and by God that's what he did. And when people tried to stand in the way of him doing that he didn't play the political game, but instead in his words he "dynamited them out of the way." He was so effective at this, that the political machine he built continued on in Louisiana for decades after he was dead. wikipedia posted:Long's assassination turned him into a legendary figure in parts of Louisiana. In 1938, Swedish sociologist Gunnar Myrdal encountered rural children who not only insisted Long was alive, but that he was president. Although no longer governing, Long's policies continued to be enacted in Louisiana by his political machine, which supported Roosevelt's re-election to prevent further investigation into their finances. The machine remained a powerful force in state politics until the 1960 elections. Within the Louisiana Democratic Party, Long set in motion two durable factions—"pro-Long" and "anti-Long"—which diverged meaningfully in terms of policies and voter support. For decades after his death, Long's political style inspired imitation among Louisiana politicians who borrowed his rhetoric and promises of social programs. -Blackadder- fucked around with this message at 01:08 on Nov 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 01:06
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:People figuring out how to dodge the blame and haven't settled on a story that makes somehow nobody responsible for a disaster. Mayor says it could take "weeks or longer" to figure out what happened. Which seems crazy. https://twitter.com/TheLeadCNN/status/1457821519539810305 Seems like multiple simultaneous fatal heart issues in teens and younger people has to be drugs of some kind. And I can't see how it can take weeks to figure out why people started charging the stage.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 01:08
|
|
|
How are u posted:I mean yes? You can have patriotic leftism, it's entirely possible. Not really? The language of patriotism is designed to frame one’s love of the people within a country as the same as the love of a country’s institutions and power structures. That’s the entire reason politicians/hogs talk about it so much. It’s also heavily tied up in American exceptionalism and the idea that everything America does is ~basically~ well intentioned. Meanwhile the entire idea behind most left wing movements is that, no, America kind of sucks actually, is NOT well intentioned, and needs to be changed at it’s core. Which is fundamentally at odds with most people’s concept of patriotism. Saying “abolish the police because they are a psychotic mafia-like cabal of psychopaths” in one breath and then “but this really is the greatest country on earth you guys!” in the next comes across as confusing at best and outright dishonest at worst. Just handwaive the word away imo. If asked just cough up some canned response about how you love the American people and want to build a country they can feel proud to be a part of and move on. Anybody who gets mad that there are potentially aspects of America you aren’t proud of was never going to vote for you anyways. E: OR, just lean into being an rear end in a top hat and say “No I’m not patriotic, gently caress you. I’ll be patriotic when people can afford healthcare how does that sound?”. Which would have the added benefit of making your movement hard for liberals to co-opt. readingatwork fucked around with this message at 01:22 on Nov 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 01:13
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Mayor says it could take "weeks or longer" to figure out what happened. All you have to do is interview some workers and people in the crowd and most likely they already know what the deal was. My suspicion is that somehow it's something that Live Nation could be liable for and they're incredibly rich and powerful.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 01:15
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Between 1933 and 1995, the Democrats held the majority in the House for all except two sessions - the 80th ('47-49) and the 83rd ('53-'55). FDR didn't die in 33, he died in 45 and Republicans swept the 1946 election away from the Conservative Coalition. Republicans and a minority of Democrats ruled the House from 37 to 63 when Johnson finally broke it over his knee. That's what setup Nixon in 68.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 01:17
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Seems like multiple simultaneous fatal heart issues in teens and younger people has to be drugs of some kind. And I can't see how it can take weeks to figure out why people started charging the stage. Sounds more like crushing deaths, doesn't it? It sounds similar to the causes of death at say, Hillsborough, unless I'm missing something (entirely possible).
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 01:18
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Mayor says it could take "weeks or longer" to figure out what happened. Can't being crushed cause heart failure/attack?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 01:18
|
|
|
karthun posted:FDR didn't die in 33, he died in 45 and Republicans swept the 1946 election away from the Conservative Coalition. Republicans and a minority of Democrats ruled the House from 37 to 63 when Johnson finally broke it over his knee. That's what setup Nixon in 68. FDR did die in ‘45, yes, but the point is, the New Deal (or promise thereof in 1933, I suppose) handed the Dems a durable majority that only faltered in two two-year sessions over the next 62 years. Yes, there were divisions in the Democratic Party throughout that period; doesn’t change the fact that voters rewarded the party for passing, and then defending, extremely popular legislation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 01:20
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Which part of the story did I miss that said 2/3 of voters say they're "doing much better economically"? I have no idea what that 2/3rds bit you're asking about is all about, since it's clearly not a response to anything I said. If staples prices go up by 5% and wages go up by 11%, that does indeed say quite a bit about how they're dealing with food prices and gas prices: better than before! You quote polls and statistics in here every loving day, Willa. You believed in averages and medians last week, don't give me that smug poo poo about "lucky duckies" because your argument about the continually worsening economy is faced with actual data saying the economy's doing great. If you think median wage growth is fake bullshit or something, then actually take it down and back it up, instead of just dropping endless snide comments about how the data is just a fake narrative about how great the poor have it. TheIncredulousHulk posted:It's wild to me that people ITT and elsewhere are talking themselves into the idea that material policy is completely orthogonal to election outcomes when the pro-Democrat cliche for so long has been "I acknowledge this proposal/bill/EO/etc does not go far enough, however," Sure, the data shows that voters believe X, but I don't agree with the voters so I'm just going to handwave it away with snide comments without ever engaging with the underlying evidence!
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 01:22
|
|
|
Sir John Falstaff posted:Sounds more like crushing deaths, doesn't it? It sounds similar to the causes of death at say, Hillsborough, unless I'm missing something (entirely possible). The coroner says they won't be able to know the causes of death for a while and the police report distinguishes between people suffering from "cardiac arrest" and "trampling." It could be cardiac arrest related to trampling, but I figured that they must have distinguished them for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 01:24
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Between 1933 and 1995, the Democrats held the majority in the House for all except two sessions - the 80th ('47-49) and the 83rd ('53-'55). It's notable that this ended just around the time of the party realignment being solidified. I just don't see a scenario where Democrats attain that sort of national dominance again, especially with fully legal gerrymandering.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 01:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 02:35 |
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The coroner says they won't be able to know the causes of death for a while and the police report distinguishes between people suffering from "cardiac arrest" and "trampling." It could be cardiac arrest related to trampling, but I figured that they must have distinguished them for some reason. Crushing and trampling are different, though--crushing results in compression asphyxia, trampling usually results in injuries (or at least that's my understanding). I suspect they may be separated because they are in fact different causes. Sir John Falstaff fucked around with this message at 01:36 on Nov 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2021 01:32
|
|