|
Solkanar512 posted:Hey folks, the ACA is just a single act, no big deal, it's totally inconsequential either practically or symbolically. Yeah, that's the stuff right there. No one ran on repealing it, no one used that as their battle cry for multiple elections, no one saw destroying it as their personal vendetta against a black man who had the audacity to become president. Nope, it's just a single act. Yeah, you're trying to frame my wording in a totally disingenuous way. I was not being dismissive of the significance of the ACA. Rather, failing to repeal the ACA was the only rebuttal presented to my post, and so I referred to it in the singular. Because it is one act. That's it.
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 23:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 00:19 |
|
|
evilweasel posted:the gop strategy to take control of the courts was a well-executed long-term strategy, one worth copying It was also a really simple strategy: get conservative judges on the bench by getting Republicans in the White House and Senate. The execution was key though: getting the base to show up like clockwork, pushing the party rightward in the primary where possible, and even where that fails, having them vote just as hard for the lame establishment RINO in November as they would have for the firebrand True Patriot who got sunk in the primary. "no matter who", as it were. Because whether they loved him or not, whether he made them feel enthusiastic to be a Republican or not, he was gonna put conservative judges on the bench that a Democrat wouldn't. Seriously though, the successful strategies for the left and the right simply aren't symmetrical. Right-wingers that want erosion of federal power, especially where it can help people or regulate the powerful, benefit from inaction and gridlock. Left-wingers who want expansion of federal power and active help for the people do not benefit from inaction or gridlock: they cannot learn from or emulate Republican strategies that "succeed" by shooting the hostage, and it's absurd to suggest that Democrats not honing their hostage-shooting skills is a failure on their part. While on the side of what can be done actively, even if you wish Democrats had gotten a lot more done with their incredibly narrow trifecta, in the same time period with a more comfortable majority, the last Republican-led government managed to get one significant law passed and it was unpopular enough to contribute to them immediately losing the House. Getting Americans to resent a tax cut is a special type of failure indeed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 23:31
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:the gop strategy to take control of the courts was a well-executed long-term strategy, one worth copying Packing courts and then making the legislature completely ineffective sounds like an extremely effective plan to legislate from the minority.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 23:48
|
|
|
Xombie posted:Appealing Roe was only useful because two judges happened to die at the very beginning and very end of the short time they had a majority. Scalia could have easily died two years earlier, at 77 years old, and RGB could have held on for another couple months. In those cases you have a liberal majority in SCOTUS and challenges to Roe are DOA. That it was this court that did it and not the next one is irrelevant to the plan. They meticulously stacked every court they could for decades with people they could then call up to a higher court. All with the goal of aiding their various agenda items. Gorsuch and Coney Barret are just the final pieces the fell in place. Before them are all the lower courts and pieces like Thomas, who has been sitting there for over 3 decades. In the time they waited for the actual overturning of Roe, they've been steadily chipping away at it. Killing every boogie man regulation and issue of stare decisis with 1000 cuts was the entire modus operandi of the courts. Wearing things down until they finally built enough power to completely do away with it. Now they don't give a poo poo about stare decisis or slowly killing things, it's slaughtering time. The issue for the GOP now, is that the smart ghouls who laid the plans and ground the wheels for decades are dying off and not being replaced. The machine they built has begun to eat into it's own success. Instead of a new crop of bullshit artists working to a goal via snake oil tactics, the new blood of the party have either become true believers in the snake oil or are simply down for the con. They've become so used to arson as a tool for policy that they've come to simply love watching things burn. It's fitting that the machine they built is beginning to run out of gas just as the full economic results of the wholesale looting of the safety net, protective regulations, and retirement measures are really kicking in. It's always best for the drill to run out of gas just as the mine collapses.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 23:51
|
|
|
The ultimate project since the Nixon era/early Reagan era has been to destroy government as we know it. It's mostly succeeded, in that what's left of the government is primarily just a system to keep government money flowing into the hands of people who don't need it (insurance companies, defense contractors, the rich, etc). The actually useful parts of the government have been slowly decaying since the 1970s and a lot of it is a shell of what it once was. More importantly, they have mostly convinced the public at large that government is bad and that we don't need to expand government services to actually help people. We just had a pandemic that killed well over a million Americans and we are somehow even further away from single-payer healthcare than ever. Climate change continues to ravage the country, and will only get worse over time, and we are further away than ever from real change that can hopefully mitigate or at least slow the decline of our planet. We had an entire summer of people finally waking up to how much power the police have in this country, trying to push back against it, and police budgets are higher now than they were before 2020 (partially thanks to police departments siphoning funds meant to go to Covid relief, somehow). Reproductive rights now are worse for Gen Z than their parents. It's just really not a good situation. I am absolutely willing to say that the conservative project has mostly won, outside of some failures on the social side that they are trying to fix (gay marriage). I don't see how you can objectively look at this another way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 23:59
|
|
|
I don't think "the courts are dominated by liberals who keep striking down conservative laws and can't be overruled, let's spend the next fifty years doing everything we can to appoint conservative justices to those courts to get those liberal rulings overturned" is exactly a stroke of political brilliance. Calling it a "project" or a "strategy" is, I think, rather generous. Taking every opportunity to put loyalists in extremely powerful lifetime appointments is not something that takes a genius. Especially given that those extremely powerful lifetime appointments had been used against them for several straight decades. And the fact that it took more than half a century to accomplish suggests that it wasn't much of a strategy by itself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 00:00
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:the gop strategy to take control of the courts was a well-executed long-term strategy, one worth copying I think you're confusing day to day competence with effectiveness at an overall goal. As has been pointed out, the goal was to cripple any portion of government that isn't funnelling money into private wealthy hands. That's been done. Speaker votes are a sideshow for a few days and then they'll just spend the session making sure nothing useful gets done. When it comes time to fund the MIC, they'll push it through immediately, no problem.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 00:03
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:I don't think "the courts are dominated by liberals who keep striking down conservative laws and can't be overruled, let's spend the next fifty years doing everything we can to appoint conservative justices to those courts to get those liberal rulings overturned" is exactly a stroke of political brilliance. Yeah I think the problem with this argument is that it treats history like a finished story or something. The Republicans recently secured a huge victory they had been working towards for decades. Those decades of failures or setbacks or any other failing agendas or pushes fall secondary to that victory. And the future being unknown that victory feels decisive and since there is no clear counter solution in play that proves the case. I dunno. It’s a weird framing of things. Nothing is that simple. Progress is a forever right. Setbacks are brutal. Interpreting history like the plot of a story feels flawed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 01:13
|
|
|
There has been a ton of writing over the years about the conservative project to get rid of Roe v. Wade. This isn't some hidden conspiracy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 01:30
|
|
|
Never forget that John McCain straight up admitted the GOP Senate was intent on rejecting any nominee a hypothetical president Hillary might have nominated. It wasn't "chance" that favored the GOP, it was a collective conscious choice to let the mask slip forever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 02:05
|
|
|
I'm going to make a bold statement to get to the bottom of this slapfight: both parties are on the same scale of effectiveness/ineffectiveness when it comes to achieving their agenda
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 02:35
|
|
|
Kalit posted:I'm going to make a bold statement to get to the bottom of this slapfight: both parties are on the same scale of effectiveness/ineffectiveness when it comes to achieving their agenda ah, the carefully balanced system works!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 02:45
|
|
|
So what you're saying is this system is invincible?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 02:49
|
|
|
Oxyclean posted:So what you're saying is this system is invincible? Oh, no, no, in fact even a small group of congressmen could -
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 03:06
|
|
|
less vague snarky slapfighting shitposts please
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 03:18
|
|
|
Republicans have had a very poor history getting their policy preferences passed legislatively. They have been very successful in getting them implemented judicially. However, that judicial process took a very long time and required a concerted effort by groups like the Federalist society. Roe was decided in 1973 and it took almost 50 years before they were finally able to repeal it. A few years ago, you could point to that program and say, "It's been almost half a century, multiple Republican majorities on the court, and an extremely organized effort to get those judges on there and they still haven't done it. That is a failure by any definition." Then, all of a sudden, that's not true anymore. But, claiming the conservative movement has not been organized in implementing their policy decisions isn't really correct. Also, many of their policy priorities over the last few decades were just blocking things or tax cuts. The Contract With America and most other major conservative policy movements that wanted to change something ended up failing or being struck down by the Supreme Court too. It's generally easier to not do something and when your agenda lines up with not doing things, you have a larger percentages of success. However, they have been very bad at doing it legislatively and have bungled some major legislation that should have been a slam dunk because of internal disorganization. The only major legislative victories of the entire Trump presidency was the tax cuts. The Republican revolution in the 90's had very few policy victories (and their major ones - term limits for Congress and the line-item veto - were struck down by the Supreme Court). They have been very effective at implementing policy in executive and judicial arenas, though. Social issues are the one area where they have generally lost ground in terms of public support and policy. They usually take a hit from that for about 10 years or so before quietly pretending they never supported it and move on to a more appealing social issue target before repeating the entire process again. In conclusion, the conservative policy projects of the last 50 years are a land of contrasts. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 03:25 on Jan 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 03:20
|
|
|
I do think it's pretty interesting that the republicans have gotten their Slam Dunk Dream goal of repealing Roe at the cost of one of their worst midterms ever and now only twenty congressmen are gridlocking the entire system. Not even their victories are possible without massive, leg-breaking compromises.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 03:23
|
|
|
The Trump tax cuts were also originally supposed to be slightly over $7 trillion dollars and they planned to eliminate the filibuster to do so. But, some Senators balked and they ended up doing it via reconciliation which made it "only" $1.7 trillion and partially expire in 10 years. So, you can look at that as both a huge failure (they caved down to almost 75% less than what they asked for!) or a huge success (one of the top 5 largest tax cuts ever!) depending on your perspective. Same thing with the Roe campaign, which looked like a long drawn out failure to ever reach the finish line for the first 40 years, but then ended up being almost a total success. It really depends on your perspective and what point in time you are analyzing it. Youremother posted:I do think it's pretty interesting that the republicans have gotten their Slam Dunk Dream goal of repealing Roe at the cost of one of their worst midterms ever and now only twenty congressmen are gridlocking the entire system. Not even their victories are possible without massive, leg-breaking compromises. The pro-life movement itself achieved its policy goal, even if the institutional Republican party suffered for it. The huge under-performance in 2022 might prevent them from being able to accomplish some thing if they get a trifecta back in the next 6 years, but we don't really know. The pro-life movement itself is also mad that it took nearly 50 years and now abortion pills are available online and by mail and there is no national abortion ban, so that long delay really did hurt their actual objectives. But, there's no denying that they scored a relatively major policy win that they have been fighting for for nearly half a century.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 03:33
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:However, that judicial process took a very long time and required a concerted effort by groups like the Federalist society. Roe was decided in 1973 and it took almost 50 years before they were finally able to repeal it. A few years ago, you could point to that program and say, "It's been almost half a century, multiple Republican majorities on the court, and an extremely organized effort to get those judges on there and they still haven't done it. That is a failure by any definition." Then, all of a sudden, that's not true anymore. Again, also it 100% relied on tens of millions of devoted voters who treated voting as a literal religious obligation and spent decades tirelessly pushing their party and the judiciary toward the desired goal. Who would push for dramatic change, but never turned their noses up at little incremental ratcheting of the window if that was all that's available. Persistence was infinitely more a part of that victory than planning.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 03:42
|
|
|
So what's that going to mean for the future of the party, now that one of their biggest goals has been achieved? It's clear the sudden emphasis on LGBTQ discrimination is a pivot point to fill in the now-missing culture war slot, but is that even going to hold up in the long term? What do you get for the
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 03:45
|
|
|
Youremother posted:So what's that going to mean for the future of the party, now that one of their biggest goals has been achieved? It's clear the sudden emphasis on LGBTQ discrimination is a pivot point to fill in the now-missing culture war slot, but is that even going to hold up in the long term? What do you get for the The current social hotness among conservative activists is pretending they are mostly cool with gay people and never speaking about gay marriage, but going hard anti-trans (which is unfortunately a majority position when it comes to sports, bathrooms, and some other things) and general "religious liberty" exemptions for most laws with broad exemptions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 03:49
|
|
Youremother posted:So what's that going to mean for the future of the party, now that one of their biggest goals has been achieved? It's clear the sudden emphasis on LGBTQ discrimination is a pivot point to fill in the now-missing culture war slot, but is that even going to hold up in the long term? What do you get for the Immigration is one of the focal messaging points that's being tossed around; I've not seen much else.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 03:50
|
|
|
They are also working really hard to radicalize the younger generations which seems to be pretty successful.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 04:58
|
|
|
slurm posted:They are also working really hard to radicalize the younger generations which seems to be pretty successful. In terms of a visible minority of terminally online weirdos, yes, in terms of actual numbers, no. https://circle.tufts.edu/2022-election-center#youth-prefer-democrats-by-28-point-margin quote:According to this exit poll data, youth ages 18-29 are the only age group in which a strong majority supported Democrats. Voters ages 30-44 split their votes nearly evenly 51%-47% between Democrats and Republicans, while older voters favored the GOP. The youth share of all votes cast is 12%, on par with the 13% youth share from the 2018 midterm election. Vote choice and share data may continue to shift in the coming hours.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 05:09
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:In terms of a visible minority of terminally online weirdos, yes, in terms of actual numbers, no. A 19-year-old now would've had a lot of their childhood before the radicalization machine kicked into high gear. I'm much more worried about the cohort that doesn't remember pre-escalator America and had Andrew Tate as a role model at age say 10.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 06:50
|
|
|
slurm posted:They are also working really hard to radicalize the younger generations which seems to be pretty successful. They're radicalizing the younger generations, but oh boy so not as conservatives.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 07:02
|
|
|
slurm posted:A 19-year-old now would've had a lot of their childhood before the radicalization machine kicked into high gear. I'm much more worried about the cohort that doesn't remember pre-escalator America and had Andrew Tate as a role model at age say 10. Show some data or shut up about this, because you're pulling all of these feelings out of your rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 07:50
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:Show some data or shut up about this, because you're pulling all of these feelings out of your rear end. I'm not sure where I'd even get data on the political preferences of literal children, but they're immersed in a right wing media stew heretofore reserved for boomers and we saw how that worked out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 11:11
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:Show some data or shut up about this, because you're pulling all of these feelings out of your rear end. This count as an example of the kind of children Slurm is talking about? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hdk3a9pI_jA
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 11:18
|
|
|
slurm posted:I'm not sure where I'd even get data on the political preferences of literal children, but they're immersed in a right wing media stew heretofore reserved for boomers and we saw how that worked out. Boomers are a weird example since they actively fought the internet for a decade or so of it's popularity. Then, after yelling about how you couldn't trust anything on it and everyone was going to try and hack them, they just woke up one day and decided they were all in on Facebook. Younger generations have their own issues with the internet. However Boomers are the only cohort to grow up getting random chain letters in the mail, which they threw away and knew where fake, and then spend their later middle age hitting fwd:fwd:fwd on random e-mails.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 11:48
|
|
|
Dull Fork posted:This count as an example of the kind of children Slurm is talking about? I'm not sure this is the great piece of evidence you think it is. The creator of the documentary was in CNN recently and he both-sidesed CNN and FOX in the same brush stroke so you can't trust his mediation of information, clearly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 13:49
|
|
|
Bed, Bath, and Beyond just published a filing with the SEC where they "CONCLUDED THAT THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL DOUBT ABOUT THE COMPANY’S ABILITY TO CONTINUE AS A GOING CONCERN" and said they may go bankrupt. I knew all of those coupons were too good to be true. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/886158/000119312523001983/d443321dnt10q.htm https://twitter.com/kaileyleinz/status/1610988124179505153
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 15:11
|
|
|
Also, the DNC is considering punishing New Hampshire for refusing to cooperate with the new primary schedule by replacing them with Delaware. I know New Hampshire wants to avoid setting a precedent, but again, this is only for 2024 and they are going to review the first 5 states every single primary cycle (but, they aren't obligated to change every year). So, I'm kind of surprised so many states are desperate to be one of the first primaries in a year where there likely won't be a contested primary and they could be gone next year. https://twitter.com/JakeLahut/status/1610945235353223168
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 15:15
|
|
|
Lots of 2024 news dropping today. New open Senate seat. https://twitter.com/marianne_levine/status/1611001803738333186
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 15:22
|
|
|
slurm posted:A 19-year-old now would've had a lot of their childhood before the radicalization machine kicked into high gear. I'm much more worried about the cohort that doesn't remember pre-escalator America and had Andrew Tate as a role model at age say 10. A 19-year-old now was 12 or 13 when Trump took office. They would have been 10 or 11 when Gamergate started.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 15:24
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Also, the DNC is considering punishing New Hampshire for refusing to cooperate with the new primary schedule by replacing them with Delaware. The primaries have always been quite the orgy of grift that the local parties, especially in red states, are going to be very loathe to give up. Especially the ones that put their thumb on the scale at the establishment's behest. There's going to be a lot of indignant protest at the idea of losing out on the gravy train.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 15:36
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Lots of 2024 news dropping today. New open Senate seat. How blue is Michigan?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 15:38
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Bed, Bath, and Beyond just published a filing with the SEC where they "CONCLUDED THAT THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL DOUBT ABOUT THE COMPANY’S ABILITY TO CONTINUE AS A GOING CONCERN" and said they may go bankrupt. They're finally going beyond.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 16:01
|
|
|
More like dead bath and beyond
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 16:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 00:19 |
|
|
Following November's https://twitter.com/ddayen/status/1611016373416898560 https://twitter.com/ddayen/status/1611017064101314560 https://twitter.com/ddayen/status/1611018579541102595 This marks a big step for the FTC in addition to being a tidy policy win on its own merits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 16:24
|
|