Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 12-03-2018, 04:21 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
It's not just Trumpocracy, as the article labels it; this is a movement that's decades in the making and Trump represents the arrival of that movement's time.

What it will take to get out of this is an abrupt realization among 60-70% of Americans that republicans act against the interests of most Americans. They will have to wake up and realize that voting Republican means voting for oligarchy.
  #52  
Old 12-03-2018, 06:27 PM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 10,809
Quote:
Originally Posted by justrob View Post
Itís probably a good thing that I didnít say it did not affect you at all. I said that it stripped collective bargaining from all the public unions except law enforcement and firefighters. Would still be just as happy with it if your union no longer had the ability to bargain for the group?


Even with bargaining I still have to pay a percentage of my wage into the state retirement fund. Previously I did not have to do that. Doesn't hurt me a bit and it's better for state taxpayers that I/we do.
  #53  
Old 12-04-2018, 06:51 AM
davidm's Avatar
davidm is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Near Philadelphia PA, USA
Posts: 12,326
Dems are considering lawsuits.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/dem...uck-power-grab
__________________
Check out my t-shirt designs in Marketplace. https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...php?p=21131885
  #54  
Old 12-04-2018, 07:54 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,551
A picture of the Wisconsin gerrymander.

Quite frankly, it's a work of art. If I'd set out to create a gerrymander that perpetuated GOP control of the legislature, I doubt I could improve much on it, even if it were my full-time job.

The GOP managed to create 30 districts that were basically 99-100% Democratic (compared with 8 districts that are that solidly GOP) which of course meant that if the state as a whole was 50-50, the GOP would get >2/3 of the vote overall in the remaining 61 legislative districts. So even in a Democratic wave year like 2018, few of those seats would be winnable by Dems.

The result, as we all know, was that Dems got 53% of the vote last month, but only 36 out of 99 seats. Impressive as hell, and also antidemocratic as hell. The trappings of democracy are still there, but the Dems would probably need about a 57% majority of the vote to eke out a bare majority of the legislature.

The GOP has managed to fashion a legislature that is extremely resistant to the will of the people. That's not democracy.

And of course, now they are using that legislative majority that is all but immune to popular opposition, to strip the powers of the statewide offices that they can't gerrymander.

If you believe in democracy, what's happening in Wisconsin is an abomination.
  #55  
Old 12-04-2018, 07:56 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Even with bargaining I still have to pay a percentage of my wage into the state retirement fund. Previously I did not have to do that. Doesn't hurt me a bit and it's better for state taxpayers that I/we do.
All of us pay for each other's benefits. When you buy a car, you're paying for the wages and benefits of the automaker, their suppliers, the miners, the steel mill workers, on and on. When you visit the doctor, you're paying the wages and benefits for the doctor, the staff, the janitors, etc. When you go to the grocery store, you're paying the wages and benefits for the grocery store workers, the farmers, the shippers, etc. Yet somehow it seems that public employees (who pay their share of everyone else's wages and benefits) are to be begrudged what they get from their employer and somehow they are not as entitled to a benefit package as any other worker. Strange logic.
  #56  
Old 12-04-2018, 08:08 AM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
It's not just Trumpocracy, as the article labels it; this is a movement that's decades in the making and Trump represents the arrival of that movement's time.
There's a reaosn I'm seeing more and more conservatives online trotting out the bizarre old "America isn't a democracy, it's a republic" thing; they do not want it to be a democracy.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #57  
Old 12-04-2018, 08:22 AM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 25,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Technically it could have delayed it indefinitely.
So youíre saying that running away and hiding in another state, rather than doing the job you were elected and paid to do is perfectly acceptable to you?

Which proves what I said, both sides will take extreme measures to forward or protect their agenda. You defending what the Dems did is no different than me accepting what the Republicans are trying to do. Do not pretend you are morally superior. You are just on the opposite side of the same coin as I.
If I condemned both the Democratic exit from the state and the Republican power grab, would you quarrel with the notion that I am morally superior to you?
  #58  
Old 12-04-2018, 08:27 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
There's a reaosn I'm seeing more and more conservatives online trotting out the bizarre old "America isn't a democracy, it's a republic" thing; they do not want it to be a democracy.
That's the real truth, of course.

But just to engage them, I would ask them: what do you mean, a republic? How should a republic work differently than a democracy? What are the guiding principles of how a 'republic' should govern itself? What's going on in Wisconsin right now, what does that have to do with our being a 'republic'? Should a republic have a nearly unassailable built-in bias for governance by one party rather than the other, regardless of what the people want?
  #59  
Old 12-04-2018, 09:53 AM
davidm's Avatar
davidm is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Near Philadelphia PA, USA
Posts: 12,326
"Regardless of what the people want" is the key phrase here. They know that what the people want is not what they want so they work to overcome the will of the people, and they currently feel bold enough (or threatened enough) that they're willing to do so quite blatantly.

They give justifications for their acts but everyone knows that they're just justifications and everyone knows that everyone knows it.

So what's the solution? How does the majority assert it's will when a minority has control and is gaming a flawed system in order to maintain that control?
__________________
Check out my t-shirt designs in Marketplace. https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...php?p=21131885
  #60  
Old 12-04-2018, 11:12 AM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm View Post
"Regardless of what the people want" is the key phrase here.
More on this.

This gerrymander is extremely resistant to the will of the people. Similar to the plot in the link posted by RTFirefly a few posts ago I looked at the district by district results found here.

We can calculate the net difference in two party vote share for each district or even all the districts together with the formula (D - R)/(D + R).

For example, statewide there were 1,308,454 D votes and 1,103,521 R votes in assembly races so the net difference on two party vote share is (1308454 - 1103521)/(1308454 + 1103521) = 0.08496... = D + 8.5.

When I did this calculation for all districts the thing that struck me was the sparseness of districts that fell in the even to D + 20 range. There are two.

What does that mean? In an election that went D + 8.5 assembly seats went 36 D to 63 R. Had the electorate flipped and this election went R + 8.5 assembly seats would have gone 34 D to 65 R. It is pretty unlikely that we're going to see an election outside +- 8.5 point range anytime soon so the range of achievable assembly outcomes for the foreseeable future is something like 34 - 36 D versus 63 - 65 R.

The make up of the assembly barely responds at all to massive swings in the electorate that realistically achievable. Also by my analysis, which is far from perfect and limited to exactly one election, Wisconsin voters would have to go about D +21 in assembly voting to put the median seat in play. A two party vote split of 60 - 40 would probably fall just for of Democratic Party control of the assembly.

On the other hand, Democrats did once make people wait two weeks to fuck over teachers eight years ago.
  #61  
Old 12-04-2018, 11:18 AM
DCnDC's Avatar
DCnDC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Dueling Grounds
Posts: 11,852
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm View Post
So what's the solution? How does the majority assert it's will when a minority has control and is gaming a flawed system in order to maintain that control?
Put that way, "revolution" is the word that immediately comes to mind, but I doubt a majority of Americans, liberals in particular, are anywhere near the point where that is a viable option.
  #62  
Old 12-04-2018, 12:19 PM
Ambrosio Spinola is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
More on this.

This gerrymander is extremely resistant to the will of the people. Similar to the plot in the link posted by RTFirefly a few posts ago I looked at the district by district results found here.
There's a good graphic on this that I saw here. It's astonishing how many Democrats are packed into districts where Republicans don't even bother to run.

The whole thing is amazingly corrosive. You simply can't have a democracy where one side has to win huge majorities multiple cycles in a row to even get any of their agenda completed, and the other can enact all their agenda with a minority of the vote because they had one big win in 2010. I'm not sure what you call it, but when elections are just vestigial formalities you're in very dangerous territory.
  #63  
Old 12-04-2018, 12:38 PM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
That's the real truth, of course.

But just to engage them, I would ask them: what do you mean, a republic? How should a republic work differently than a democracy? What are the guiding principles of how a 'republic' should govern itself? What's going on in Wisconsin right now, what does that have to do with our being a 'republic'? Should a republic have a nearly unassailable built-in bias for governance by one party rather than the other, regardless of what the people want?
There isn't really an answer to that in the offing, though. "We are a republic, not a democracy" is a line used by people solely to stress "not a democracy." "Are a republic" isn't the part being thought about except, in some cases, to selectively defend a particular part of the Constitution.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #64  
Old 12-04-2018, 12:39 PM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambrosio Spinola View Post
There's a good graphic on this that I saw here.
That is exactly the plot that RTFirefly linked to earlier that I was referring to, and you can really see the sparseness I mentioned by looking at it.

The narrowest Dem victory was D + 0.4%. That's the blue circle on the 50/50 line.

The second narrowest Dem victory was D +12 in district 74 at about the 3/4 line if you divide the graph horizontally into quarters.

All other Dem wins were by 20 points or more.

Those two seats are essentially what is up for grabs in any assembly election in the realistically achievable range of +-8.5.
  #65  
Old 12-04-2018, 05:23 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,590
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
There isn't really an answer to that in the offing, though. "We are a republic, not a democracy" is a line used by people solely to stress "not a democracy." "Are a republic" isn't the part being thought about except, in some cases, to selectively defend a particular part of the Constitution.
Excellent point. And if most of them did think about the "republic" part they'd probably reject that, too.

What they really want is a good, wise King--one who will protect them from Those People.
  #66  
Old 12-05-2018, 07:27 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,551
From the AP:
Quote:
6 a.m.

The Republican-controlled Wisconsin Senate has passed a sweeping measure taking power away from the incoming Democratic governor and attorney general, and reducing how long early voting can take place.

The measure was approved on a 17-16 vote with all Democrats and one Republican voting against it. The Assembly was expected to give final approval later Wednesday morning and send the measure to Republican Gov. Scott Walker, who has signaled his support.
This is a coup, pure and simple. The fact that it's being executed via the trappings of democracy doesn't change that fact.
  #67  
Old 12-05-2018, 07:54 AM
Red Wiggler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
Excellent point. And if most of them did think about the "republic" part they'd probably reject that, too.

What they really want is a good, wise King--one who will protect them from Those People.
I'm becoming more and more convinced that David Frum is right:

Quote:
If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy.
  #68  
Old 12-05-2018, 08:19 AM
Ambrosio Spinola is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Wiggler View Post
I'm becoming more and more convinced that David Frum is right:
I was thinking of that exact quote - Republican leader Vos more or less said as much in his statements to the press by saying that they donít trust Evers not to change the things theyíve accomplished over the past eight years.

You simply canít have a stable democracy when one group wins when they win and the other side has to play Calvinball when they win until they end up actually losing. I guess the ďbestĒ outcome from the GOP perspective is that the Democrats get demoralized and give up, but I fear thereís a corollary to that Frum quote, which is that if it is impossible to achieve your goals through any peaceful democratic means, you donít change your goals, you change your methods.
  #69  
Old 12-05-2018, 08:28 AM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 10,809
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Wiggler View Post
I'm becoming more and more convinced that David Frum is right:

How many times are people going to post that opinioncentric quote on this thread?
  #70  
Old 12-05-2018, 08:40 AM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 7,812
That quote is a perfect summary of what Republicans in Wisconsin are up to.

Last edited by bobot; 12-05-2018 at 08:41 AM. Reason: Not sure if the original was a real word
  #71  
Old 12-05-2018, 08:49 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
How many times are people going to post that opinioncentric quote on this thread?
I find it funny that you criticize the quote as opinion, and also perfectly embody exactly what he's talking about.
__________________
"I think if Mrs May actually went and said that there will be a no deal Brexit, there will be a hard border in Ireland, troops are already on the way, we will be dynamiting and flooding the Chunnel this evening and the Royal Navy is patrolling the channel that would be 110 times better than what is happening now." -AK84
  #72  
Old 12-05-2018, 09:19 AM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
How many times are people going to post that opinioncentric quote on this thread?
Three times. The thread is not that long. It's been posted three times.

You're welcome.
  #73  
Old 12-05-2018, 10:08 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,189
https://newrepublic.com/article/1525...ries-oligarchy

And it passed. 16-15, with one republican splitting with his party to support the dems. They're about as shy about their antidemocratic goals here as pkbites was in his defense of them.

Quote:
“Most of these items are things that either we never really had to kind of address because, guess what? We trusted Scott Walker and the administration to be able to manage the back-and-forth with the legislature,” Scott Fitzgerald, the Wisconsin Senate’s majority leader, said in an interview with a conservative talk-radio host. “We don’t trust Tony Evers right now in a lot of these areas.”
Without putting too fine a point on it, Scott Fitzgerald is an authoritarian scumbag who deserves to be strung up by his nipples. "If you were on our side we wouldn't need to strip you of the power vested in you by Wisconsin voters." Anyone who believes in governance by consent of the governed should be shaken by his statements.
__________________
"I think if Mrs May actually went and said that there will be a no deal Brexit, there will be a hard border in Ireland, troops are already on the way, we will be dynamiting and flooding the Chunnel this evening and the Royal Navy is patrolling the channel that would be 110 times better than what is happening now." -AK84
  #74  
Old 12-05-2018, 10:17 AM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,054
This measure would or could be undone anytime there is a Democratic legislature + Democratic governor, or Republican legislature + Republican governor in the future, right?
  #75  
Old 12-05-2018, 10:20 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
This measure would or could be undone anytime there is a Democratic legislature + Democratic governor, or Republican legislature + Republican governor in the future, right?
Of course, barring a court order ending the extreme gerrymandering in Wisconsin, Democratic control of the legislature may never happen. And from the Republican POV, that's a feature, not a bug.
  #76  
Old 12-05-2018, 10:23 AM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambrosio Spinola View Post
if it is impossible to achieve your goals through any peaceful democratic means, you donít change your goals, you change your methods.
Oftentimes a cause is so dear to people that it can't be ditched just because the democratic method won't get it through.

Suppose America became a theocracy that banned abortion, LGBT rights, minority rights, etc. and allowed for no "peaceful democratic" means of getting those things back. Are their supporters supposed to ditch those causes just because they can't get them at the ballot box?
  #77  
Old 12-05-2018, 10:30 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
This measure would or could be undone anytime there is a Democratic legislature + Democratic governor, or Republican legislature + Republican governor in the future, right?
Sure. So what? The state legislature will remain in its current composition within an approximately 16-point margin due to an aggressive gerrymander, and the republican majority exists despite the democrats winning far more votes. An antidemocratically elected legislation pushed to strip the winners of races they couldn't gerrymander of significant amounts of political power. The fact that a future legislature could undo this does nothing to change how gross this is. And even then, one of the proposals passed restricts early voting - the goal here being to make it harder to vote, which generally favors Republicans. If you care about democracy, you should be incensed by this. And if you don't care about democracy... Well, go ahead and join most of the rest of the republican party in the "power at all costs" corner.
__________________
"I think if Mrs May actually went and said that there will be a no deal Brexit, there will be a hard border in Ireland, troops are already on the way, we will be dynamiting and flooding the Chunnel this evening and the Royal Navy is patrolling the channel that would be 110 times better than what is happening now." -AK84
  #78  
Old 12-05-2018, 10:34 AM
2ManyTacos is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Oftentimes a cause is so dear to people that it can't be ditched just because the democratic method won't get it through.

Suppose America became a theocracy that banned abortion, LGBT rights, minority rights, etc. and allowed for no "peaceful democratic" means of getting those things back. Are their supporters supposed to ditch those causes just because they can't get them at the ballot box?
Typically, people in those situations turn towards revolutions, and, honestly, we might be heading towards something like that with these GOP coups.

The maneuvers aren't going to cause the Democrats to give up; they're going to turn the Democrats into a more radical anti-system party that may seek revolutionary means to achieve its goals.
  #79  
Old 12-05-2018, 10:41 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Oftentimes a cause is so dear to people that it can't be ditched just because the democratic method won't get it through.

Suppose America became a theocracy that banned abortion, LGBT rights, minority rights, etc. and allowed for no "peaceful democratic" means of getting those things back. Are their supporters supposed to ditch those causes just because they can't get them at the ballot box?
There's a pretty fucking big difference between "we lost an election because our views are unpopular" and "the will of the people is fundamentally unachievable". Indeed, given that what's going on here is a full-on assault on democracy, your example is pretty ironic. Also, ywanna compare basic human rights to (to name one of the many power grabs they just passed) control over a public corporation? Really?
__________________
"I think if Mrs May actually went and said that there will be a no deal Brexit, there will be a hard border in Ireland, troops are already on the way, we will be dynamiting and flooding the Chunnel this evening and the Royal Navy is patrolling the channel that would be 110 times better than what is happening now." -AK84

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 12-05-2018 at 10:42 AM.
  #80  
Old 12-05-2018, 11:00 AM
Red Wiggler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
Three times. The thread is not that long. It's been posted three times.

You're welcome.
My apologies to all for doing that (but not for the sentiments expressed). Blame it on multiple message boards and an increasingly poor memory.
  #81  
Old 12-05-2018, 11:11 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Wiggler View Post
My apologies to all for doing that (but not for the sentiments expressed). Blame it on multiple message boards and an increasingly poor memory.
No apologies needed. The point was important and well worth repeating.
  #82  
Old 12-05-2018, 11:16 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,189
Like, just to make things clear, I could almost understand if it was something like abortion. If the governor had the ability to make abortion legal or illegal, the power grab would make some sense - abortion has always been a big deal for republicans, and throwing democratic norms under the bus to prevent what you see as an ongoing multidecadal holocaust (assuming for the moment that republicans are being honest about how they see abortion) would make some sense. Bad for democracy, but sometimes the ends justify the means, at least in certain people's eyes. Similarly, I could see myself throwing democratic norms under the bus for the sake of upholding basic human rights. It wouldn't be good for democracy, but it is at least conceivable that the ends could justify the means.

But... this ain't that. Here's one thing the bill passed does:
- Give the legislature more power over the boards of certain commissions, like the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC), the state’s jobs-focused agency, which has come under a lot of scrutiny for giving the Taiwanese company Foxconn Technology Group $3 billion in tax breaks in exchange for their $10 billion factory — an investment that even the state’s Legislative Bureau said the state wouldn’t bring returns until after 2043. Evers said he wanted to get rid of WEDC altogether, as it has garnered a reputation for falling short of its jobs promise.
This is not some life-or-death struggle by any stretch of the imagination. The republicans are saying "to hell with democratic norms" to preserve their control over a government institution designed to help pick winners and losers. They are pulling an antidemocratic power grab in defense of crony capitalism. And it's not like the WEDC is some shining example of a well-run agency; it's a huge mess, despite Walker and the republican party having complete control over it.

Here's another item on the agenda:

- Limit Evers’s abilities to change the state’s work requirement laws around food stamps and health care, giving the legislature oversight over any federal waivers the state has received. Walker pushed for Medicaid work requirement waivers and waivers to drug test food stamp recipients.
Oh yeah, that looks like an important human rights issue. Make sure that they can't make it easier to get on your state's welfare programs - this was totally worth an antidemocratic power grab.

What this tells us is that the republicans in Wisconsin either don't understand that this is an assault on democracy or their attachment to democratic norms is virtually nonexistent.

This is the direction the republican party is and has been going for quite some time. Since at least 2010, with REDMAP, winning and power has been more important than the will of the people. This is just the natural next step. This path leads to a very, very dark place.
  #83  
Old 12-05-2018, 12:29 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Oftentimes a cause is so dear to people that it can't be ditched just because the democratic method won't get it through.
Then they should have the guts to admit it. And they should specify just what their cause is that is so important that it demands that democracy itself be overridden in its service.
Quote:
Suppose America became a theocracy that banned abortion, LGBT rights, minority rights, etc. and allowed for no "peaceful democratic" means of getting those things back. Are their supporters supposed to ditch those causes just because they can't get them at the ballot box?
Then we wouldn't be in a democracy anymore, would we now?

I don't know if that was your intent, but you're implicitly comparing (a) the current situation, where change by democratic means is an option, but one party is forgoing that avenue because they don't have sufficient popular support to win democratically, and (b) a hypothetical theocracy in which change by democratic means doesn't exist as an option.

I don't see how one's response to (b) informs what the appropriate response to (a) might be.
  #84  
Old 12-05-2018, 12:42 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,239
They went one step further; they didn't just strip the governor of power, they stripped the attorney general, too, ostensibly to make it harder for Democrats to battle with Republicans in the courts. What Republicans seem to be doing is changing the rules of the game so that Wisconsin is more like a parliamentary form of government and not a legislative/executive government.

Democrats and progressives need to take their little kiddie 3-D sunglasses off and understand how Republicans see the world. They see the world in terms of power. They are not democratically-minded, which is why they don't give a God damn about whether they win or lose something fairly - people need to understand that.

As long as Republicans have any power at all, they will abuse it until they are forced out of power. I've said it before and I'll say it again: there are no - good - republicans - because the "good" ones enable the bad, and even that is something we cannot afford as a country.

If you see an R, you vote against it. No questions asked.
  #85  
Old 12-05-2018, 01:19 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Democrats and progressives need to take their little kiddie 3-D sunglasses off and understand how Republicans see the world.
Your condescension is duly noted.
  #86  
Old 12-05-2018, 01:39 PM
Derleth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Missoula, Montana, USA
Posts: 21,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
I don't know if that was your intent, but you're implicitly comparing (a) the current situation, where change by democratic means is an option, but one party is forgoing that avenue because they don't have sufficient popular support to win democratically, and (b) a hypothetical theocracy in which change by democratic means doesn't exist as an option.

I don't see how one's response to (b) informs what the appropriate response to (a) might be.
It makes sense if you believe in every single conspiracy theory the Republicans spread about the Democrats and, therefore, honestly believe that they're a Satanic pedophile cult who are going to enslave us all the moment they get the chance.

If you believed that, and you saw around you that they could still win elections and that nobody else seemed to agree with you on what is, in your mind, a pretty big fact about reality, you'd conclude that any democracy which allowed the Satanic Pedophilic Baby-Eating Party to gain power wasn't serving the actual human beings in the population. Actual human beings are, pretty much by definition, against pedophilia, hein?

From there it's a pretty short jump to supporting dictatorships or kings, seeing as how democracies have this bad habit of allowing literal pedophiles to gain office.

It's a scary mirror world, created and cultivated quite deliberately by people inside and outside this country.
  #87  
Old 12-05-2018, 04:26 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 3,760
This thread reminds me of a quote by David Frum:

Quote:
“If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy.”
Food for thought, I'd say.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 12-05-2018 at 04:28 PM. Reason: wrong link
  #88  
Old 12-05-2018, 04:28 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,253
C'mon pkbites, you know this is more than "just politics". This isn't remotely comparable to skipping out on a vote. People voted for a specific governor and the governorship had specific powers when they voted. Stripping some of those powers between the election and assumption of office is blatantly undermining democracy. The people voted for a person to be able to do specific things and they are changing the nature of the office before he gets to do them. How can you not see how wrong that is?

Imagine your city had an elected Auditor and a tough as nails guy got elected. Before he is seated the city council strips the office of all oversight capacity. Would you say that is "just politics"?

Last edited by CarnalK; 12-05-2018 at 04:32 PM.
  #89  
Old 12-05-2018, 04:37 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
C'mon pkbites, you know this is more than "just politics".
In support of this, I reiterate:

It isn't the peaceful transfer of power if you don't actually transfer power. Gutting the powers of an office and peacefully transferring its empty shell doesn't count.
  #90  
Old 12-05-2018, 05:14 PM
Covfefe's Avatar
Covfefe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,253
This is partisan payback for the attempted recall of Walker in 2011-2012; it might also partly be business as usual for Republicans now. But I'm more confident saying the recall effort motivated this. Historically the tool of recalling governors has hardly ever been employed or worked. Many people just haven't learned their lesson and think this it made sense to attempt to have the people represented that way, regardless of what it could mean down the line should that tool be used against them by the new standard it first was.

Republicans are worse and have far less moral high ground because of the gerrymandering and also shenanigans like Walker being forced earlier this year by the courts to hold a couple of special elections for vacated seats. Again though, some people need to be taught a lesson. They'd be getting off on it twisting the meaning of words if it was their side doing it.
  #91  
Old 12-05-2018, 05:22 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,749
I think the problem with the recall was that too many people didn't know the difference between a recall and an impeachment. You impeach an officeholder because he's done something actually illegal. You recall him (in places that have recalls) because you just don't think he's the best person for the job.
  #92  
Old 12-05-2018, 05:26 PM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 10,809
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
No apologies needed. The point was important and well worth repeating.
That isn't what happened. What happened is, like in a lot of other threads, people didn't actually read any of the other posts and just posted their own thoughts. It happens a lot on these boards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
If you see an R, you vote against it. No questions asked.
If I see an R I don't necessarily vote for it. Anyone know who the RINO was that voted against this? I haven't seen it published yet. Though I just woke up due to shift work.

Last edited by pkbites; 12-05-2018 at 05:30 PM.
  #93  
Old 12-05-2018, 05:37 PM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Anyone know who the RINO was that voted against this? I haven't seen it published yet. Though I just woke up due to shift work.
From the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel

Quote:
Senators passed the legislation 17-16, with Republican Sen. Rob Cowles of Green Bay joining Democrats in opposing the legislation. The Assembly passed the measure 56-27 along party lines.
You better organize a primary against Cowles! How dare he think for himself? How dare he think that democratic transfer of power could possibly be more important than keeping Democrats from actually running things?

Last edited by BobLibDem; 12-05-2018 at 05:37 PM.
  #94  
Old 12-05-2018, 05:46 PM
Railer13 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
C'mon pkbites, you know this is more than "just politics".
Another post in agreement with this statement. I was trying to think if a lame-duck session of this magnitude has happened before. I'm sure it has, but I cannot remember anything like this happening. And a Google search doesn't yield any specific examples.

If this is 'just politics', it would be happening on a regular basis. It does not.
  #95  
Old 12-05-2018, 06:27 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,253
I can't remember where atm but the Rs did something almost exactly the same within the last couple of years, stripping a governor of powers before inauguration.

pkbites, I am not some radical Liberal, let alone a Democrat. This is crazy. You can't defend this.
  #96  
Old 12-05-2018, 06:36 PM
justrob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
I can't remember where atm but the Rs did something almost exactly the same within the last couple of years, stripping a governor of powers before inauguration.

pkbites, I am not some radical Liberal, let alone a Democrat. This is crazy. You can't defend this.
It was Norh Carolina in almost exactly the same situation.
  #97  
Old 12-05-2018, 06:47 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,239
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Your condescension is duly noted.
Keep wearing the sunglasses, kiddo.
  #98  
Old 12-05-2018, 07:03 PM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 10,809
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
You better organize a primary against Cowles! How dare he think for himself?
No, how dare he not represent the district he is from. They elected him to a Republican agenda, not Tony Evers agenda.

And least you forget, I am the one who said this was a huge political risk. Public opinion could turn savage against the GOP. Weíll find out in 2 and 4 years from now. But with a Republican majority on both sides Evers was going to fail anyway. So this really isnít that big of deal.
  #99  
Old 12-05-2018, 07:08 PM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
No, how dare he not represent the district he is from. They elected him to a Republican agenda, not Tony Evers agenda.

And least you forget, I am the one who said this was a huge political risk. Public opinion could turn savage against the GOP. Weíll find out in 2 and 4 years from now. But with a Republican majority on both sides Evers was going to fail anyway. So this really isnít that big of deal.
People have short memories. That's one of the thing on which they cynically count.
  #100  
Old 12-05-2018, 08:28 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,239
What are you gonna do about it? Sit there and snivel?

Republicans own you. They've taken your country from you. They've taken everything that matters to you from you. What are you gonna do about it?

Probably nothing except talk about how we should find ways to understand them.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:26 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017