The New American Politics thread

[T@T]

I think Trump will finally spend a lot of $$$ in order to win California in a big way. The anti Trumpers will spend twice as much to stop him.

First week of June might be good for

[2Stonedbirds]

It's going to cost in the area of 6 billion dollars to run this 2016 election.

6 billion.

How can a cluster**** of this magnitude cost 6 billion, and how can there be such poor candidates at such a cost. "Ohhh but the middle class!" **** right off.

Most expensive, useless, and patronizing dog and pony show in history.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Well things change.





http://www.salon.com/2014/11/12/bye_...s_for_america/

This is what I'm talking about with Bernie supporters. A little context here goes a long way. In 2008 the Dems had 257 seats in Congress, a very strong majority. By 2014 they were down to 188. A 69 seat loss didn't happen because they lost a bunch seats in liberal enclaves like the Northeast and West Coast. If you look at the maps they clearly lost tons of seats in red states, which is where a lot of the conservative/Blue Dog Dems come from. Just look at the collapse in the map in the South and Midwest. If they ever expect to retake the House, they're going to need Dems from those states again, and as before they're very likely to be conservative Dems and not progressives like Bernie. If Bernie honestly expects he'll be able to do whatever he wants even if he somehow has a Dem controlled House/Senate, he didn't pay much attention to the early Obama years.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

If Bernie honestly expects he'll be able to do whatever he wants even if he somehow has a Dem controlled House/Senate, he didn't pay much attention to the early Obama years.

Actually, Sanders has specifically talked about how sweeping changes in US politics would be all but impossible, no matter who gets elected.

You might blame some Sanders supporters for being bright eyed idealists, but Sanders himself is a realist. (Which is to be expected from a long time politician. He knows the system and doesn't hide his opinions about it.)

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

This is what I'm talking about with Bernie supporters. A little context here goes a long way. In 2008 the Dems had 257 seats in Congress, a very strong majority. By 2014 they were down to 188. A 69 seat loss didn't happen because they lost a bunch seats in liberal enclaves like the Northeast and West Coast. If you look at the maps they clearly lost tons of seats in red states, which is where a lot of the conservative/Blue Dog Dems come from. Just look at the collapse in the map in the South and Midwest. If they ever expect to retake the House, they're going to need Dems from those states again, and as before they're very likely to be conservative Dems and not progressives like Bernie. If Bernie honestly expects he'll be able to do whatever he wants even if he somehow has a Dem controlled House/Senate, he didn't pay much attention to the early Obama years.

I think the Blue Dog Dems are dead but the majority of the people are more left leaning than you expect as evidence by their Presidential voting. I'm not saying it will happen this election but it will happen soon that the Dems take Congress and Bernie is part of this wake up call. The GOP are in for a rude ride.

[BigBrodieFan]

I went home to Canada this past week for a visit and I was very surprised at the questions I was asked.

'What do you think of this hoopla?' was always on the top of the list.

But then, several people said 'How is it possible that anyone could support Donald Trump, he's ridiculous?' And I wanted to explain that the United States is a country divided by so many different things- racism, educational levels, poverty- etc. But I thought about this a little longer, and I decided that Donald Trump, in all his idiotic, brash, rude East-Coast priggish bs- said it best. 'I love the uneducated.' I mean- doesn't every politician or even religious leader??

It's like this. This country (and Canada too) are run by crooked politicians because they have to be crooked. No one straight has a chance. And, although this is extremely cliche- 'United we Stand, Divided We Fall.' We've been falling for years.

In my opinion- various religions are in the mix of the ignorant and their impetuous and obtuse beliefs which affect political issues- and until the super religious and ultra conservative 'die off'- there will be no progress, regardless who's in the position of POTUS. Hilary is probably the most evil snake to ever run for office, Trump is probably the most pathetic, and poor Bernie- he has a heart of gold but would be better off as a stand up comic. It doesn't matter who gets 'the title' because sh*t will ever get done with the division of house and senate. So- why bother getting upset about it?

The level of ignorance in America continues to become a strong factor in dividing people, and you can choose to live your life without participating in the idiocy, or you can choose to make an appearance on fox news (minus dentures of course), telling the whole world why Trump 'speaks his mind' and therefore, representing what all people think of Americans. *Le Sigh*

[sworkhard]

Originally Posted by BigBrodieFan

I went home to Canada this past week for a visit and I was very surprised at the questions I was asked.

'What do you think of this hoopla?' was always on the top of the list.

But then, several people said 'How is it possible that anyone could support Donald Trump, he's ridiculous?' And I wanted to explain that the United States is a country divided by so many different things- racism, educational levels, poverty- etc. But I thought about this a little longer, and I decided that Donald Trump, in all his idiotic, brash, rude East-Coast priggish bs- said it best. 'I love the uneducated.' I mean- doesn't every politician or even religious leader??

It's like this. This country (and Canada too) are run by crooked politicians because they have to be crooked. No one straight has a chance. And, although this is extremely cliche- 'United we Stand, Divided We Fall.' We've been falling for years.

In my opinion- various religions are in the mix of the ignorant and their impetuous and obtuse beliefs which affect political issues- and until the super religious and ultra conservative 'die off'- there will be no progress, regardless who's in the position of POTUS. Hilary is probably the most evil snake to ever run for office, Trump is probably the most pathetic, and poor Bernie- he has a heart of gold but would be better off as a stand up comic. It doesn't matter who gets 'the title' because sh*t will ever get done with the division of house and senate. So- why bother getting upset about it?

The level of ignorance in America continues to become a strong factor in dividing people, and you can choose to live your life without participating in the idiocy, or you can choose to make an appearance on fox news (minus dentures of course), telling the whole world why Trump 'speaks his mind' and therefore, representing what all people think of Americans. *Le Sigh*

I would suggest that this has a little bit to do with it too:

http://www.vox.com/2016/4/21/1145137...can-liberalism

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by sworkhard

I would suggest that this has a little bit to do with it too:

http://www.vox.com/2016/4/21/1145137...can-liberalism

Yeah sure there is a bit of the, save us from the well meaning smug liberal who knows what's best for us. The thing is though this is an immature way of looking at it as despite the smugness, in most cases the poorly educated would be better off voting with the liberals who may be wrong in some instances, still have their best interests at heart while the cons are out to bamboozle them.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Holy #### that's a good article.

Make no mistake: I am not suggesting that liberals adopt a fuzzy, gentler version of their politics. I am not suggesting they compromise their issues for the sake of playing nice. What I am suggesting is that they consider how the issues they actually fight for have drifted away from their egalitarian intentions.

Yep.

[driveway]

That vox article was terrible. A giant concern troll post implying that comedy shows are some sort of lodestone for political discourse; that Facebook threads and twitter arguments are valuable forums for debate; and utterly ignoring any discussion of policy or actual ideology.

Oh woe, liberals post memes, we must stop the memes if we are to win elections.

It's just 4000 words which should go in the gear grinder thread.

[Red Slinger]

I don't think Liberals have a monopoly on smugness. Fox News and right-wing media was essentially built on the back of it. Who can forget the often stated notion by the right -wing that we need to "let the adults govern again". It doesn't get much more smug than that.

In fact, I think American liberals used to do exactly what the author is suggesting. They were largely polite, soft spoken and willing to listen to other ideas. That is, right up until the Rupublicans galvanized their efforts with:

1) Nixon's Southern Strategy- the liberals were totally caught flat footed and Nixon's political machine rolled over them. The inevitable conclusion was large scale anger, distrust of government, bitterness and after a little soul searching, yes, smugness.

2) Reagan's populism- Jimmy Carter was the antipathy of smugness. He was what we most of us want our leaders to be: authentic, empathetic, working in our best interests. Reagan pounced on this political naivete with ruthless efficiency largely by regularly and consistently lying to the public and, yes, convincing them to vote against their (and their country's) own self-interest with trickle-down economics, which is still being battled today (see: rise of Sanders).

3) The Machiavellianism of the Bush Administration- During the (first) Clinton administration we saw the birth and rise of right-wing radio/TV. Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and others were born. There was no answer on the left. In my opinion, the left had a typically liberal group response: those people are not nice and they're lying about us but if we just ignore them people will see them for what they are. Of course, that didn't work and the result was George W. Bush. I think most people on both sides of the spectrum will agree that the Bush Administration was largely a disaster both economically and internationally. The liberals, after years of "playing nice" and being polite and not engaging in the right-wing tactics such as name-calling clearly saw no other avenue other than ridicule. Stewart, Colbert, Olbermann, MSNBC and others were born as a result.

Can the left be smug? Absolutely. In fact, their smugness is likely what got Obama elected and will likely get Clinton elected. Liberals no longer sit quietly and politely (as the author seems to be suggesting) while the Republicans spew bile and lies. Instead, the left either spew their own bile and lies or ridicule the right when it's obvious to do so with, yes, facts. The left has discovered that the best defense against the tactics of the right is ridicule.

I also agree with driveway that this comes off as a "the cool kids are being jerks and not including me in their jokes" tantrum.

[MissTeeks]

Ted Cruz, John Kasich join forces to stop Donald Trump

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/24/politi...ump/index.html

Ted Cruz and John Kasich issued startling statements Sunday night about their paths ahead, the first sign the two campaigns are coordinating to deny Donald Trump the Republican presidential nomination.

Within minutes of each other, the pair issued statements saying they will divide their efforts in upcoming contests with Cruz focusing on Indiana and Kasich devoting his efforts to Oregon and New Mexico. The strategy is aimed at blocking Trump from gaining the 1,237 delegates necessary to claim to GOP nomination this summer.

Cruz campaign manager Jeff Roe said in a statement the Texas senator will focus on the May 3 Indiana primary while the Ohio governor will have a free hand in the Oregon and New Mexico primaries in the flowing weeks.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

That right there ^ is absolutely going to backfire. Trump gets to further his "the establishment will do anything to stop me, they're ganging up on me, get to the polls and support me" narrative, and it probably just increases his margins.

Red Slinger, I agree with much of that, in that I do think that it's only in recent years - probably the last five or so - that the above article really needs to be taken to heart by the left. Everything in politics is a pendulum; we've let the pendulum swing too far in many respects.

[Vulcan]

In one way I think it's a good thing that Trump is upsetting the apple cart but it's too bad he knows nothing about politics, world affairs and is a wacko.

Now one of the Koch brothers is looking at Hillary as a better option.

Oil tycoon and conservative mega-donor Charles Koch had kind words for both Bill and Hillary Clinton in an interview Sunday, saying there was an outside chance he could support her in November."We would have to believe her actions would be quite different than her rhetoric. Let me put it that way," he said on ABC's "This Week" Sunday. "But on some of the Republican candidates we would -- before we could support them, we'd have to believe their actions will be quite different than the rhetoric we've heard so far."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/24/politi...l_topeditorial

[burn_this_city]

You know the tax code is rigged when the richest, most conservative billionaires say its a joke.

[Looch City]

Just call the entire thing for Hillary and Trump and lets get on with it already.

Jesus Christ so much time, effort, and money is being wasted on this DETERMINED outcome. This is maddening and I truly do not know how American's put up with the insanely long process.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Do you really think it's a certainty that Trump gets nominated if he doesn't get 1237? I don't.

[Senator Clay Davis]

^At this point I do. Cruz is just such a piece of crap, the most unlikable candidate I can ever remember. His voice, his face, his ideas, everything sucks about him. I thought he might make some inroads but he just turns everyone off but his diehards. Taking it from Trump with him likely to be ahead by a good 300+ delegates is really dangerous, figuratively and literally.

[2Stonedbirds]

Does Hillary try to look like chairman Mao or does it just come naturally?

[malcolmk14]

What's the deal with Pennsylvania delegates on the republican side? Doesn't Pennsylvania have more than 17?