- Eliminate virtually all regulations
- Have the bible supplant most laws
- Virtually eliminate all tax on the wealthy
- Crush workers rights
- Crush women's rights
- Crush minorities
- Subvert democracy
Maybe it's me, but asking for their input seems fairly pointless. What from those ideas is she gonna import into her own policies?
Half the country is voting for them. People IMO are misguided as to who is trying to help them and why, but they have legitimate grievances with how government has negatively impacted their lives and the people in both parties are guilty of that. It's why an "outsider" like Trump has become popular. It's also why Bernie is popular. There IS common ground amongst hardcore Republicans and progressive democrats. I can listen to Matt Gaetz, knowing he's a scumbag, but also agreeing that omnibus bills are silly and legislation needs to be more targeted with issues separate from each other. Do I wish Florida sent someone else? Sure. But this guy is here, and I'm not going to disagree with him about absolutely everything just based on party lines. If he says something I agree with, it's worth saying publicly that these people agree with each other on certain things. I can hear John Bolton discuss his warmongering and think it's not the right solution, but that doesn't mean Bolton doesn't have strong insight about the problems and his solution, while extreme, is extreme for a reason and it's worth listening to why.
I'd probably have someone like that in my cabinet just to know that having them disagree with me probably means I'm on the right path.
She has to win the election to be the leader. And when it seems like winning the election is going to hinge on energizing and turning out supporters, watering down your message by making overtures to non-existent Trump voters who are somehow impressed by performative bipartisanship isn't a great strategy.
And it's also completely incongruent with her strongest messaging of the campaign. She came out talking about Project 2025 and how Republicans plan to re-shape American society in their extremist image, and that was effective. She was on the offensive and forcing Republicans to scramble to justify themselves. But now she wants to send out some olive branches and work with those same extremists in setting policy?
You and others are making the mistake of equating all non democrats as these extreme view people who can’t be talked to about solving problems. One of the biggest frustrations in the US is the divide in the government, that it doesn’t work together and nothing gets done. Now we have a leader pledging to work together and it’s a bad thing. I guess we should just hope everyone digs the trenches deeper, I’m sure that’s the answer.
If progressives abandon her because she wants to unite the country a bit to work together then they get what they deserve. That’s my general motto, the electorate gets the government they deserve. At this point I’m not sure the US is showing they deserve anything better than Trump.
The Following User Says Thank You to Whynotnow For This Useful Post:
Half the country is voting for them. People IMO are misguided as to who is trying to help them and why, but they have legitimate grievances with how government has negatively impacted their lives and the people in both parties are guilty of that. It's why an "outsider" like Trump has become popular. It's also why Bernie is popular. There IS common ground amongst hardcore Republicans and progressive democrats. I can listen to Matt Gaetz, knowing he's a scumbag, but also agreeing that omnibus bills are silly and legislation needs to be more targeted with issues separate from each other. Do I wish Florida sent someone else? Sure. But this guy is here, and I'm not going to disagree with him about absolutely everything just based on party lines. If he says something I agree with, it's worth saying publicly that these people agree with each other on certain things. I can hear John Bolton discuss his warmongering and think it's not the right solution, but that doesn't mean Bolton doesn't have strong insight about the problems and his solution, while extreme, is extreme for a reason and it's worth listening to why.
I'd probably have someone like that in my cabinet just to know that having them disagree with me probably means I'm on the right path.
Matt Gaetz will support omnibus bills when Trump wants to pass them lol. Like you seriously think if Trump cobbles together an omnibus bill to eliminate women's right to vote, eliminate taxes on the wealthy, and arm Israel endlessly, that Gaetz somehow won't be passing it I genuinely don't know what to tell you. As to throwing Bolton a cabinet post or some committee seat cause "hey, he's terrible, and if he disagrees with me that tells me I'm right", FOX News will still exist. You don't need to have him anywhere near your sphere to get his "insight", you can get it for free.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
That people are willing to destroy their country rather than vote for a black woman is incredibly depressing. It’s been said before in this thread, but women voters and the 18-35 crowd are likely Harris’ only real shot at winning. If she can get these groups to turn out in big numbers, especially in the swing states, I think she’ll take it. But man, it’s gonna be close.
Okay, so Josh Hawley raised his fist at Jan 6 insurrectionists and is an all around POS. Him and Amy Klobuchar co-sponsor a bill on limiting AI. That's bad?
I don't have the history in front of me, but I would venture to say that nominating cabinet members outside your party probably wasn't all that uncommon until fairly recently. Maybe not cabinet with actual decision making authority for someone as insane as Bolton but I think someone who is smart but vehemently disagrees with you is someone worth listening to. Personally having someone like Adam Kinzinger as a Secretary of Defence or something I don't think is out of line in the current environment.
The point is you HAVE to work with the other side, or nothing will ever move. Especially when it's so polarized where everything is basically 50/50 with stupid tie breakers and filibusters and stuff. How do you ever expect to get to bills being passed with actual full majorities without engaging the whole spectrum of people?
Adam Kinzinger isn't the other side though. He's effectively homeless at this point, and he's voting for Harris anyway. There are lots of GOPers who are effectively homeless, although its more for their disdain for Trump personally and "saving democracy" or whatever. Most of them still support most GOP policies. Right now the other side is MAGA, who don't believe in anything but the ruthless pursuit of power. Thinking you should engage with them at all is just silly.
I'm not suggesting you should never do bipartisanship, even in todays hyper-partisan world there are things we all almost universally agree on (killing puppies = bad!). But broadcasting that you want a committee for bipartisanship when you are actually still trying to win is a remarkably poor strategy, and continues the lackluster campaign she's run.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
The Following User Says Thank You to Senator Clay Davis For This Useful Post:
Adam Kinzinger isn't the other side though. He's effectively homeless at this point, and he's voting for Harris anyway. There are lots of GOPers who are effectively homeless, although its more for their disdain for Trump personally and "saving democracy" or whatever. Most of them still support most GOP policies. Right now the other side is MAGA, who don't believe in anything but the ruthless pursuit of power. Thinking you should engage with them at all is just silly.
I'm not suggesting you should never do bipartisanship, even in todays hyper-partisan world there are things we all almost universally agree on (killing puppies = bad!). But broadcasting that you want a committee for bipartisanship when you are actually still trying to win is a remarkably poor strategy, and continues the lackluster campaign she's run.
This is why the world can’t have nice things. She gets slammed for being too progressive and a leftist maniac, she offers to work across the aisle she gets slammed for that. Uses strong and direct language and she’s the dangerous one.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Whynotnow For This Useful Post:
Adam Kinzinger isn't the other side though. He's effectively homeless at this point, and he's voting for Harris anyway. There are lots of GOPers who are effectively homeless, although its more for their disdain for Trump personally and "saving democracy" or whatever. Most of them still support most GOP policies. Right now the other side is MAGA, who don't believe in anything but the ruthless pursuit of power. Thinking you should engage with them at all is just silly.
I'm not suggesting you should never do bipartisanship, even in todays hyper-partisan world there are things we all almost universally agree on (killing puppies = bad!). But broadcasting that you want a committee for bipartisanship when you are actually still trying to win is a remarkably poor strategy, and continues the lackluster campaign she's run.
This is the Democrat way
The Following User Says Thank You to EldrickOnIce For This Useful Post:
This is why the world can’t have nice things. She gets slammed for being too progressive and a leftist maniac, she offers to work across the aisle she gets slammed for that. Uses strong and direct language and she’s the dangerous one.
In this case it's more of a matter of timing. Make this announcement when you've won? Big whoop, you've won and the votes are in. Make this announcement now? Could cost her enough votes to cost her the election. Even if you agree with the substance, it's hard to agree that the timing is good.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Senator Clay Davis For This Useful Post:
In this case it's more of a matter of timing. Make this announcement when you've won? Big whoop, you've won and the votes are in. Make this announcement now? Could cost her enough votes to cost her the election. Even if you agree with the substance, it's hard to agree that the timing is good.
I don't necessarily disagree with this, we'll have to see how it turns out.
Personally I think there are two factors to something like this:
1) There ARE a contingent of Republican voters who did vote for people like Kinzinger and Cheney and Haley that don't agree with them being voted out or kicked out. Those people are still republican minded from a policy standpoint while not being full Project 25 MAGA. As we've seen in very red states that things like the abortion issue is even unpopular amongst most Republicans. The leaders are disconnected from the people and have sided with a pretty sizeable minority that is being stirred up with hatred and awfulness. But that's really only 25ish% of people max who are true believers in the nonsense. Some people just want corporate taxes cut, and it's sad that's all they care about, but I think those types of republicans can be courted towards Harris if she appears more centrist.
2) I don't think this stops progressive voters from putting Harris on the ballot. I just don't think someone who was going to vote for Harris now won't because she says she'll put a Republican in her cabinet. Anyone like that already isn't voting Harris for Middle East war reasons and frankly, she has very little control over that at the moment and it would be an military intelligence disaster to say she would do anything differently than the current President even if she plans to. (this issue of what she would do differently is probably the biggest reason they should have ran a candidate not part of the current administration, but we're here now.)
It's crazy to me that of all the people in the US and potential candidates the only two parties could have offered up, both figured that their best options were senior citizens who are showing signs of dementia. The Democrats were forced into changing their selection when it was made obvious to them thanks to a disaster of a debate by Biden (that everyone else saw happening from a mile away) and it's too late now for the GOP to make any changes.
I'm not sure Trump even remembers what his point is after the first 10 seconds of the below clip.
One way to undermine the Trumper/Tea Party/Zealots would be to give prominent positions to elected conservative representatives and senators who are more progressive. You would hear a lot of names that you have no idea who they are, and the rabid idiots would have to take a back seat. It's not a bad strategy. It's possibly just a bad strategy to garner votes.
__________________
"By Grabthar's hammer ... what a savings."
One way to undermine the Trumper/Tea Party/Zealots would be to give prominent positions to elected conservative representatives and senators who are more progressive. You would hear a lot of names that you have no idea who they are, and the rabid idiots would have to take a back seat. It's not a bad strategy. It's possibly just a bad strategy to garner votes.
You know that back bencher from Oregon, that doesn't get any media facetime, and just keeps his head down and the leadership of the house refuses to listen to, even on the smallest matter?
Yeah, I don't know that guy either, but I'm pretty sure he exists.
__________________
"By Grabthar's hammer ... what a savings."
"The GOP is weird and crazy, a threat to democracy and your personal freedoms, and if I get elected, I promise to make sure they will be listened to by my administration" is a serious contender for the most confused message by either side in this election, and basically undermines everything the Democrats have been saying.
A large portion of the population sees the GOP as fundamentally unfit to govern right now, and that part of the population is correct.
The way to bring back a functioning two-party system is to keep beating the GOP in elections by having a better, ultimately more popular agenda, pressuring the GOP to adapt or perish.
The conservatives need to re-learn co-operation and the value of appeasing others, but they will never start doing that if the Dems want to meet them halfway regardless of how deep to the far-right the conservatives go. That just encourages conservatives to keep going further to the right.
Last edited by Itse; 10-13-2024 at 07:33 AM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Itse For This Useful Post:
