The New American Politics thread

[peter12]

Originally Posted by New Era

You can do better than this Peter. This is a very stupid comment. Anyone with a billion dollars to burn on a political campaign is a major player. Anyone who has established the political organs to further their agenda, long after they are gone, is far from a signpost of an extinct species. When you look around American politics and see the number of politicians the Koch brothers own, at both the state and federal level, their influence is obvious. When you look at the influential infrastructure they are leaving behind, their influence in immense. These guys will be influencing elections and policy long after they are in the ground.

They are 20th century industrialists. Rich, sure, influential, yes. They are also part of the cultural sideshow that trades in boomer nostalgia. Everyone knows that the views of the Kochs would be more at home in the cultural milieu of the 1950s.

Meanwhile, you have a Democrat creating global free trade agreements, and opening up public space to LBGQT people to an unprecedented degree.

You tell me who is more libertarian.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by peter12

Yeah, get out of the trenches! Not doing you any favours.

But for once I'm not the one writing novellas on some esoteric point that only I care about... Let me have this!

... Yeah, no, you're right. Silly argument anyway.

[peter12]

Koch interns are the kind of people who tweet Hayekan inspirational quotes on my Twitterfeed.

As Trump would say,"Sad!"

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by peter12

Yeah, get out of the trenches! Not doing you any favours.

You are right to say that it is beyond obvious that libertarianism is basically mainstream now.

How do you think the needle shifted that direction? Was it spontaneous? No, it is the result of people with Libertarian views affecting the political process by working within it. It is a result of massive campaigns that got the fringe engaged and involved in the process. Who do you think created the Tea Party? Who do you think got their message traction in the media? None of this was spontaneous. It was all well orchestrated. From the first postings of Liberty Bell on conservative posting boards to the faux outrage stoked by Americans for Prosperity. All of this was to move the needle and drag the center line further right.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by New Era

How do you think the needle shifted that direction? Was it spontaneous? No, it is the result of people with Libertarian views affecting the political process by working within it. It is a result of massive campaigns that got the fringe engaged and involved in the process. Who do you think created the Tea Party? Who do you think got their message traction in the media? None of this was spontaneous. It was all well orchestrated. From the first postings of Liberty Bell on conservative posting boards to the faux outrage stoked by Americans for Prosperity. All of this was to move the needle and drag the center line further right.

I don't know what you are talking about at all. Obama was influenced by the Tea Party?

Sure, the Kochs are influential, but they aren't the Dark Forces of Mordor either. The culture has moved on. They are remarkably discordant.

You keep capitalizing Libertarian? Are you talking about the party or the body of theory influenced by the work of post-war economists?

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by peter12

I think, moving forward, any attempt to line up the capabilities of the two candidates should be ignored. Clinton is far more qualified than Trump to the point of farce and satire.

This election should simply be a referendum on Clinton's abilities to hold to her promises, and govern with excellence. Voters should place their trust in Mrs. Clinton, observe, and punish her severely during the next cycle if her actions do not meet the standards of rhetoric.

Perfectly said. I couldn't agree more.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by peter12

I don't know what you are talking about at all. Obama was influenced by the Tea Party?

Sure, the Kochs are influential, but they aren't the Dark Forces of Mordor either. The culture has moved on. They are remarkably discordant.

You keep capitalizing Libertarian? Are you talking about the party or the body of theory influenced by the work of post-war economists?

Yes, the Tea Party influenced Obama and his agenda. Have you slept through the past four years and missed all of the crazy obstructionism?

I don't have a clue what you are talking about. The only times I have capitalized libertarian is in the context of the political party. You are sitting there talk I got about classical libertarianism and what an impact it has had on the United States, and I'm telling you what libertarianism actually is in the United States. It is vastly different from the textbook definition. It is a different beast all together. You know, just like conservatism in Canada varies greatly from conservatism in the US. They are different animals, and any Canadian that has moved down here to experience politics first hand will tell you the same thing.

This is what always kills me about these debates. There's a group of people that think they have a clue about American politics because they follow it on CNN or the Internet. Then there is the group of people that actually live in the middle of it, experience it, and even work in it. But those people are the crazy ones. It's the ones from afar that know better and can tell you how the political system works. Or that America doesn't have a racism problem (my personal favorite at the moment). I wish it ran the way you guys see it, but being in the real trenches, having a real vote, and living with the outcomes informs a much different perspective.

Man, I can't wait for our new Silicon Valley overloads to take over from the fossils running the show now, because the suitable we're living through now is a joke.

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

Think for a second what kind of scale voter fraud would need to occur on in order to affect the outcome of an election where 218 million people are eligible to vote.

Voter fraud is one of the great red herring arguments of any election cycle. It's a non issue.

The idea of "election fraud"? What does one even mean with that. The closest we've seen to election fraud is the gerrymandering done by the Republicans to keep their power in down stream elections.

Wow....

You guys have lost your minds in this thread. Unbelievable the extent to which the posters can rationalize absolute nonsense. I'm out, I can't even respond to such dismissive insanity. It's as if you took a course on lawyer BS talk.

[peter12]

I can only refer to my magisterial post (#9309), and state that the Tea Party et al. have a) legitimate political concerns, and b) aren't really libertarian.

BTW, when will the Tea Party stop being used as a bogeyman to scare little children into voting Democrat?

As an aside, are you saying that the Obama administration has had its agenda influenced by the Tea Party?

Are you actually saying that?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by AcGold

Wow....

You guys have lost your minds in this thread. Unbelievable the extent to which the posters can rationalize absolute nonsense. I'm out, I can't even respond to such dismissive insanity. It's as if you took a course on lawyer BS talk.

Why would Hillary need election Fraud. Her polling reflected her results. She never trailed in polls.

The linked article was written by a Cat-Lady Anarchist.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by AcGold

Wow....

You guys have lost your minds in this thread. Unbelievable the extent to which the posters can rationalize absolute nonsense. I'm out, I can't even respond to such dismissive insanity. It's as if you took a course on lawyer BS talk.

This is an overreaction.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by AcGold

Wow....

You guys have lost your minds in this thread. Unbelievable the extent to which the posters can rationalize absolute nonsense. I'm out, I can't even respond to such dismissive insanity. It's as if you took a course on lawyer BS talk.

That's the nicest thing anyone's ever said to me. Dismissive insanity? Buddy if you have something to say then speak up, what type of election fraud are you concerned about? Articulate your thoughts instead of taking your ball and going home. You kinda seem to do that a lot.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by GGG

Why would Hillary need election Fraud. Her polling reflected her results. She never trailed in polls.

Of course, you fool. She rigged the polls as well. Can't you see the obvious truth in front of your face? WAKE UP SHEEPLE.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by AcGold

Wow....

You guys have lost your minds in this thread. Unbelievable the extent to which the posters can rationalize absolute nonsense. I'm out, I can't even respond to such dismissive insanity. It's as if you took a course on lawyer BS talk.

Well to go back to your initial point about dismissing the potential for any sort of voter fraud, well, sure I guess there might be an instance or two. But there has been studies into voter fraud that examined tens of millions of ballots for potential fraud, and found something like 9 examples of it being true fraud. So yeah, sure, I guess it could happen. But Trump is presupposing that there will be millions of fraudulent ballots, for which there is beyond nothing to back that up. He's just setting up the excuses like the loser 5 year old he is.

As to your response to what ResAlien said....I mean I'm sorry but how can you dismiss what he says when it's all true? If you believe there is massive amounts of election fraud, even counter to what all the evidence says, you are basically forced to believe in conspiracy theories and there's nothing that could be said to convince you otherwise. As Res said, is there something specific you are talking about? Otherwise there's nothing to back up voter fraud as a meaningful issue in America.

[ResAlien]

Maybe he's concerned about shadowy machinations behind the scenes that influence votes? I'm at a loss as to what type of election fraud he is concerned about.

Anyway, another top Republican aide, one of Christie's this time, has come out and is saying they'll vote for Hillary because of Trump's lunacy. The election is still far away but this gold star family fight is feeling a lot like his McCarthy moment.

[GGG]

Having skimmed the EJUSA actual study it reads like an anti global warming hockey stick argument or a Discovery documentary where if you can't explain it its Alien's.

I'm pretty sure a statistician could go through that and show that within the margin of error the results were correct. The bulk of it is saying that voter machines were tampered with because exit polling didn't match the results but does not mention once the polling going into the voter booths which did match results within margins of error.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

Maybe he's concerned about shadowy machinations behind the scenes that influence votes? I'm at a loss as to what type of election fraud he is concerned about.

As you say, there is very little voter fraud.

Gerrymandering and voter suppression are real problems.

[the_only_turek_fan]

Originally Posted by peter12

The culture that has lead to Trump's politics is defunct, and I fear that while Canadians can watch safely and smugly from a distance, we are only late to the party.

Even though I am a retired political scientist, I obviously find this election fascinating - not only as gross spectacle, but as yet another warning of the massive changes taking place within the world's largest republic, the ancillary global changes both caused, effecting, and supporting these changes, and most importantly, the utter inability for partisans on both sides to make much sense of anything. Not that I have had any luck there either.

First some reading suggestions: The Rise and Fall of American Growth by Robert Gordon; Average is Over, by Tyler Cowen ; The Fractured Republic, by Yuval Levin; Hillbilly Elegy, by J.D. Vance; Lost in the Cosmos, by Walker Percy; and Aliens in America, by Peter Lawler.

What all of these authors say, in one way or another, is that the ways, means, and ideas that invigorated the last century of economic growth, and cultural stability are losing their power. Technological stagnation, cultural diffusion, aging demographics, income inequality, and the failure of large public/private institutions have brought us all to a crossroads.

These all exacerbate each other in one way or another. Technology now has diminishing returns, even with the explosion of computing power and information technology, you don't see much in the way of economic growth. Aging demographics, and increasingly small families lead to mass immigration, but it turned out that culture actually does matter, and you can't change people's habits overnight. Etc... etc... The large public and private institutions that used to provide a solid job with benefits, and a tight social safety net no longer have the large productive tax base to sustain them. Global competition has also taken most of those manufacturing jobs away. The productive factory worker has become the marginally productive service worker.

What you are probably seeing in sum is the death, or dearth, or final throes of a certain type of liberalism evolved purely out of theory, and maintained mainly by nostalgia. For a small group of people, this is very hard to see. If you have been educated at a good school, came from a good family, and made solid life choices, life is probably getting better and better. Furthermore, you are isolating yourself in communities that are composed of other people pretty much like you. You are fairly conservative (personally), and you want more of the same. Hence, the Democratic Party becoming the party of the rich and sophisticated. Why wouldn't you want 4 more years of Obama, which is basically what Clinton has promised. Sure, Sanders makes some good points, and you are willing to make some accommodations, but not in the direction of major economic redistribution, so you make due with some identity politics, and some personal liberation theology.

Politics is giving you the change you want to see. Blacks, hispanics, LGBQT are natural allies. They have all long suffered from the politics of alienation, and this reinvigorated rhetoric of recognition is actually pretty important.

For a fairly large group of Americans, this is very apparent, and getting worse. If you come from a factory town, you have been told that the jobs would come back. But they haven't, and you work at a vape store, or you don't work at all, and stay at home playing video games. Or maybe you come from a moderately successful middle class background, you had a good life, and are approaching retirement, but you didn't have too many kids, and you only saved around $100,000 to your 401ks. Now there is talk of pension reform, decreasing yields, and your home value never really recovered from 2008. Both groups have always lived in ethnically homogeneous communities. The outside, the future is a giant grey existential threat. The bundle of wealth is getting smaller, and you are starting to think that maybe you are going to have to start fighting for it. Maybe a son fought, and died in Afghanistan or Iraq. You see that sacrifice squandered by increasingly wanton American intervention. You feel America has fought alone for a long time, and has nothing to show for it.

There's your racial tension. There's your nationalism. There's your Trump.

Canada is still on the outside of all this. Internationally, our stakes were never high. Nationally, our elites are broadly dispersed, we have a great deal of cultural unity (probably helped more than hurt by Quebec nationalism), and we have enjoyed the benefits of a strong extraction industry for quite some time. People have underestimated the role that Alberta has played in providing jobs, communities, and accommodation for an entire generation of low and middle skill Canadians. It is probably this, and a still strong culture of statesmanship, that has kept us out of the fray this long.

Amazing Book.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by AcGold

Wow....

You guys have lost your minds in this thread. Unbelievable the extent to which the posters can rationalize absolute nonsense. I'm out, I can't even respond to such dismissive insanity. It's as if you took a course on lawyer BS talk.

LOL,

[peter12]

Originally Posted by the_only_turek_fan

Amazing Book.

Yes, Yuval has done an excellent job at putting all of the disparate pieces of this discussion into an easily accessible form. Out of all of the books I recommended, this is the one that people should read.