The New American Politics thread

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by nik-

I'm sure the Democrats would love it to be either Christie or Cruz.

Destroy Christie as a vengeful politician who uses his power for spite.

Cruz destroys himself by being a right wing nutjob, and if the Dems want they can just remind people of the "shutdown the government, willing to default on debt over Obamacare" nutjob.

Easy win.

Yep. I remember 4 years ago some folks here getting all upset about Michelle Bachman and how she and her craziness "Could be the President". So far, we've avoided letting any nutjobs get anywhere close to the White House.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Great contribution.

So, I'm not getting it then? damn, I thought I was getting whatever it was that you were saying.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

and then there is the Republican primary in Virginia.

Yeah, that's the scary scenario.

Exchanging the status quo (good) for crazies (not so good).

The exchanging part is good...not the status quo!

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

So, I'm not getting it then? damn, I thought I was getting whatever it was that you were saying.

I'm pretty sure you've got it. I'm pretty sure you won't acknowledge it.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Well, it seems like your interpretation of what I'm saying is more in line with what Tinordi thought I was saying.

I just want to see the entire country tone down the rhetoric. It's been insane for the last 14 years and I believe it is perpetually harmful.

Part of that problem is because of the abolition of the Fairness Doctrine by the great uniter Ronald Reagan.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

and then there is the Republican primary in Virginia.

Exactly.

As I mentioned earlier, it actually gives me hope that the Washington fat-cats can be replaced by and uprise of new candidates from different walks of life. It's just too bad that they went the wrong direction.

Although, I have thought before than in order for someone to get to power that can actually make some difference, they would have to outright lie about their political ideals all the way to the White House until actually elected. I can see the speech now.

"You all voted for me on a platform of guns for everyone, mandatory church each Sunday, and letting the poor die hungry.... but I lied. Public healthcare bitches!!!"

[Blaster86]

You know, I think Iowa Flames Fan and Displaced Flames fan are probably two of the better contributors to these threads. They are in the country, they have stake in what is going on and their information and how they converse is usually well done.

I find it funny and a bit shocking that the one time DFF gets a bit opinionated that everyone gets on him. Shocking because he is usually such a solid contributor and funny because I think that this argument that has just popped up is a pretty good example of why what he is saying just isn't possible in the political climate today.

The way he started wording it was confusing, don't get me wrong but as he clarified and elaborated, well, it's not wrong. It's idealistic and naive at best, and he tried to do as he said and ignore the attacks and stay on his point. But the more he tried to make that point, the stronger the counters got. More condescending, more of an attacking or belittling tone. Eventually he cracked and started replying in kind.

Imagine being the guy in charge. Every radio conversation, every pundit, every attack ad all slinging arrows at you. Eventually you crack. You can't not defend yourself. If you could get away with it, attack ads wouldn't work.

[Vulcan]

Yeah, I admit Dis has been ganged up on in this debate but over the years he's had no trouble in ganging up on others either. Sometimes being too close to the situation is a deterrent in seeing what is going on. It's good to have an outsiders opinion which is probably less biased, which is what I think we are trying to do.

[rubecube]

I don't really understand how Dis can expect anyone to unite the country when one party's platform has been designed around dividing, othering, and discriminating against certain segments of the population since the 1960s.

[Displaced Flames fan]

I want to apologize to Tinordi and DuffMan for my rudeness earlier in this thread. While it doesn't change how I feel about their comments toward me, that kind of stuff is not who I am or who I want to be.

I'm sorry.

[jammies]

Recreate the Confederacy, except don't fight to keep them in the Union this time. Problem solved.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

I want to apologize to Tinordi and DuffMan for my rudeness earlier in this thread. While it doesn't change how I feel about their comments toward me, that kind of stuff is not who I am or who I want to be.

I'm sorry.

There's the political apology.

Next post he will be stepping down.

[ernie]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Yep. I remember 4 years ago some folks here getting all upset about Michelle Bachman and how she and her craziness "Could be the President". So far, we've avoided letting any nutjobs get anywhere close to the White House.

As I believe has been stated, the White House doesn't really controllegislation unless that party controls both houses and even then there is nearly always significant intra-party concessions that water it down (see ACA). So really the problem is never really letting the nut job near the whitehouse but rather the fact we are letting these nut jobs into the two houses where they can create and have created real damage to the country and populace.

Honestly it's for that reason why I don't think it matters if the president is divisive or inclusive for these major things such as healthcare, gun control, immigration etc. Ultimately the individuals in the two houses are the ones that need to be inclusive and that is 100% on the populace. And right now the majority of the populace in many GOP voting regions are, ummm, are crazy.

Alternatively you can have some politicians with guts. But John Oliver showed in a wonderfully scary manner why that will not happen when he did his last major bit for the Daily show on gun control. He talks to the Australian PM who ended up knowingly giving up his power to do what was right and on the flip side you have the american politician whose primary motivation is to get re-elected. It has nothing to do with standing up and doing what is right. It's about being popular so the personal gravy train doesn't end. Sure they cover that desire as fighting to get more mony and better things for their constituents but it's about them. They don't give a damn about the other 300 million people as long as they get their pork.

Now when I say it doesn't matter if the president is a nut job I mean mostly in regards to the legislation. When it comes to commander in chief, foreign affairs etc it matters a great deal so it's important that those nut jobs don't get close to the white house for those reasons.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Of course, you don't live here so that could be a reason why you're having trouble understanding such a simple concept.

I do live here and I can't quite grasp the concept, because the problem is that unless Democrats put an intensely far right candidate into office, a candidate who is going to cave to everything the GOP wants, then the GOP is going to continue to try blocking any and all progress, be it Clinton or someone else in office.

And I'd much rather worry about "divisive" than worry about someone who is just going to let the GOP run the show.

Originally Posted by MattyC

But it takes two sides to be divisive.

If Hillary wants to put through a bill that lowers interest for student loans to that of the actual interest rate and not have the government (and banks) making money off of students (which they actually just tried to pass but was defeated because only 3 GOP crossed the floor on it), and it gets blocked, who is really being divisive?

Again: this is the problem. There is not a current Democrat candidate of any kind that the GOP is going to be willing to compromise with, because the GOP does not want compromise in any way. They want their way, exactly their way, and they aren't going to agree to anything less. No matter who is in office.

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

A President could be successful without that quality. I just think it is what this country needs right now.

Obama shouldn't have caved. I don't consider the actions he took in that situation to be divisive. There's a big difference between action and rhetoric. One is important to the process the other is meaningless in the process but can be extremely harmful when digested by the public.

Don't you think guys like Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin etc are harmful? All they do is spew rhetoric every day.

Limbaugh/Hannity/et al are going to exist no matter who is in office, though. And they will always find ways to make that person look bad, if it isn't a conservative Republican. They're going to continue causing rifts between right and left, Democrat and Republican, because they want ratings, and whipping mindless idiots into a frenzy over Obamacare! and Bengazi! and Bergdahl! will always get ratings and attention and feed more ad money into their wallets.

In an ideal world, a unifying leader would be fantastic. But that ideal world would involve a GOP/conservative base that was willing to compromise and see eye-to-eye with the other side. This current group is unwilling to do so.

[CaramonLS]

Dis, would you support Bernie Sanders?

[jayswin]

Yeah, I'm really having trouble understanding what Dis wants as well. It's not realistic. The republicans won't allow what you want in a leader unless they're a republican, and that party has been out of touch and ######ed for so long now, it would make zero sense to elect a Republic candiate, current state.

Also, I find the old "Republicans and Democrats both keep drifting further left and right, both sides need to stop this insanity and become more moderate and stop dividing America", quite ridiculous, and it suspiciously almost always comes from right leaning people.

Anyone watching from the oustide (canadians) can clearly see it isn't an issue of "both sides", it's an issue of one out of touch, borderline ######ed party that has ideas and values that would make an 80 year old, racist white guy blush, and a willingness to destroy their own country until they get their power.

A party who is literally only relevent because the citizens of their country treat politics like sports team allegiance.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Yeah, I'm really having trouble understanding what Dis wants as well. It's not realistic. The republicans won't allow what you want in a leader unless they're a republican, and that party has been out of touch and ######ed for so long now, it would make zero sense to elect a Republic candiate, current state.

Also, I find the old "Republicans and Democrats both keep drifting further left and right, both sides need to stop this insanity and become more moderate and stop dividing America", quite ridiculous, and it suspiciously almost always comes from right leaning people.

Anyone watching from the oustide (canadians) can clearly see it isn't an issue of "both sides", it's an issue of one out of touch, borderline ######ed party that has ideas and values that would make an 80 year old, racist white guy blush, and a willingness to destroy their own country until they get their power.

A party who is literally only relevent because the citizens of their country treat politics like sports team allegiance.

Great post.

[Vulcan]

Also, I find the old "Republicans and Democrats both keep drifting further left and right, both sides need to stop this insanity and become more moderate and stop dividing America", quite ridiculous, and it suspiciously almost always comes from right leaning people.

I don't see that at all. To me both parties are drifting right, it's just that the GOP have drifted into the mad as hatters zone.

sorry missed your quotation marks, but my opinion still stands

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

You know, I think Iowa Flames Fan and Displaced Flames fan are probably two of the better contributors to these threads. They are in the country, they have stake in what is going on and their information and how they converse is usually well done.

I find it funny and a bit shocking that the one time DFF gets a bit opinionated that everyone gets on him.

I appreciate the kind words, and I agree that DFF is a poster who has earned the right to be treated with a little more respect than he was shown in this thread. For clarity, I should add that I lived (past tense) in the US for 11 years, but I'm back in Canada now. I do still keep up with US politics to some extent, partly because (to borrow a metaphor) when you're a mouse sharing a bed with an elephant it pays to pay attention to your surroundings.

The thing is, DFF is right when he bemoans the toxic state of political discourse in the US--that's not naive at all. The "big sort" is in full swing in America, and most people you meet don't even have friends who are in the other party, let alone get challenged regularly about their beliefs. This is a problem, and it is absolutely one cause of the total political gridlock in the states.

It's equally true that no president, by virtue of the limitations of that office, will be able to fix that. Obama's hubris was that he hoped that the language of hope and unity might overcome the rhetoric of cynical politics that had begun to dominate Washington. He was wrong, and I think many people who dared to hope along with him that this was possible now feel all the more demoralized about a political culture that is utterly out of touch.

It's also true that part of what is needed, desperately, is more constructive input from the intellectual right wing. They are the real losers in this brainless tea party populism that has taken over the GOP. The right has an important role to play in political culture, and right now they are being prevented from playing it by forces within their own ranks.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

Edit to add: I would absolutely love to see Elizabeth Warren run. She would never win, but I would support her 100%.

2024 and she might.

Really just depends on how long the Republicans shoot themselves in the foot by pushing away the moderate and Latino vote.