American Politics 3.0 - Back to Brunch

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I didn’t say it was bizarre. But if you want to get into the details of what exactly happened and why (the declining influence of labor in the Democratic party, affective polarization vs Republicans, etc.) then give the two articles I linked to a read.

I've posted pretty extensively in here about the Democrats essentially stabbing their labour/working-class voters in the back to pursue aesthetic identity politics, so you're not going to get many arguments from me on that point.

[rubecube]

Lol. Okay, Andrew.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1481323590733774856

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Not sure why you've decided to target Yang specifically for the idea when it wasn't him who suggested it... Comes from a NYT article by Thomas Friedman.

But yeah, no.

EDIT: I read some of the replies to that; it's the first time I've paid attention to the state of discourse in US politics for a while but hilariously, it seems like the establishment Republicans are still doing the "Biden and the Far Left are going to do XYZ" thing, as if they can actually paint him with that brush and have anyone buy it. For all the incompetence the Democrats routinely show, you almost forget how utterly stupid the mainstream GOP are.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Not sure why you've decided to target Yang specifically for the idea when it wasn't him who suggested it.

Because he was the one who tweeted it and that's where I saw it?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

It's not something he just pulled out of nowhere like an insane person. The argument is basically that it's a worthwhile risk to try to get a bunch of moderate conservatives on board and create a coalition government, and it's the lesser evil in comparison to the alternative (which is true). And since the frothing-at-the-mouth left wing of the party already views Biden and anyone like him as "basically just the GOP in disguise", it makes no difference on that end of things, they'll view him as the enemy either way. There were a bunch of other similar suggestions, like Harris/Romney or Biden/Murkowski or what have you.

But it won't work, because the latter assumption undersells what will occur from within. Good God would the left wing of the party revolt. Like if you want to completely destroy the democratic party, there's the quickest way to do it (note: it is actually possible that both Friedman and Yang would like to destroy the democratic party).

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

It's not something he just pulled out of nowhere like an insane person. The argument is basically that it's a worthwhile risk to try to get a bunch of moderate conservatives on board and create a coalition government, and it's the lesser evil in comparison to the alternative (which is true). And since the frothing-at-the-mouth left wing of the party already views Biden and anyone like him as "basically just the GOP in disguise", it makes no difference on that end of things, they'll view him as the enemy either way. There were a bunch of other similar suggestions, like Harris/Romney or Biden/Murkowski or what have you.

But it won't work, because the latter assumption undersells what will occur from within. Good God would the left wing of the party revolt. Like if you want to completely destroy the democratic party, there's the quickest way to do it (note: it is actually possible that both Friedman and Yang would like to destroy the democratic party).

It also ignores the last 3 decades of American politics in which anytime the Democratic party moves right to court "moderate" Republicans, the GOP just shifts further right.

[nik-]

Trying to move left is clearly not helping them win elections.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by nik-

Trying to move left is clearly not helping them win elections.

When have they moved left? If you're talking about the performative wokeness stuff, I completely agree. Policy-wise, where have they moved left?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

The performative wokeness stuff does impact policy, especially environmental policy but also elsewhere. It may not be your brand of left but it's certainly left. They haven't gone populist left.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by rubecube

When have they moved left? If you're talking about the performative wokeness stuff, I completely agree. Policy-wise, where have they moved left?

The performance is all the majority of people pay attention to in politics.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

The performative wokeness stuff does impact policy, especially environmental policy but also elsewhere. It may not be your brand of left but it's certainly left. They haven't gone populist left.

Not really. At the heart of these policies is still a very liberal, individualist foundation.

[GirlySports]

How about Hillary?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn...ion/index.html

[Dion]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1481431466185736192

[direwolf]

And there goes any hope of passing voting rights legislation.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/13/u...ghts-bill.html

President Biden’s drive to push new voting rights protections through Congress hit a major obstacle on Thursday when Senator Kyrsten Sinema, Democrat of Arizona, declared that she would not support undermining the Senate filibuster to enact new laws under any circumstances.

Pre-empting a presidential visit to the Capitol to meet privately with Democrats, Ms. Sinema took to the floor to say that while she backed two new voting rights measures and was alarmed about new voting restrictions in some states, she believed that a unilateral Democratic move to weaken the filibuster would only foster growing political division.

Her comments were a major setback for Mr. Biden, who delivered a speech in Atlanta two days earlier, calling for a change in Senate rules if necessary, and was traveling to Capitol Hill on Thursday to try to persuade Senate Democrats.

Ms. Sinema has been under pressure from her colleagues to drop her opposition to a rules change, but her refusal to reverse course appeared to doom the bills in the Senate.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by direwolf

And there goes any hope of passing voting rights legislation.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/13/u...ghts-bill.html

Just vote in Democrats, guys.

[ResAlien]

There never was any hope of passing voting rights legislation while Dems had a minority in the senate. Maybe in 6 years or so they can give it a shot.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Just vote in Democrats, guys.

Who should they vote in instead if they want this passed?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Who should they vote in instead if they want this passed?

Maybe don't nominate candidates who suck? Or maybe it's time to recognize that this is all theater and there's always going to be rotating villains when there's this much money in politics and it benefits the donor class to make sure nothing gets done.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Maybe don't nominate candidates who suck? Or maybe it's time to recognize that this is all theater and there's always going to be rotating villains when there's this much money in politics and it benefits the donor class to make sure nothing gets done.

The answer is to have more Democrats win. Every move should be about that.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Just vote in Democrats, guys.

I don’t know anyone that thought they just voting in Democratics (instead of Trumpers) would magically solve everything.

If you did or thought that was the message…. Well that’s on you.