View Poll Results: Will Trump win in 2020?
Yes 143 47.19%
No 160 52.81%
Voters: 303. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #251  
Old 07-07-2019, 12:32 PM
Lantern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by you with the face View Post
He doesn’t have to pander hard to the Left. He just needs to avoid inflaming the Left against him.
Yeah I think this is right. Sometimes Biden will have to alienate the left for a good reason, e.g. defending his position on busing when he was attacked. But there is no need to gratuitously inflame the left, e.g. talk about working with segregationists like Eastland. It's a tricky balance to find but that's what being a top politician, particularly in the Democratic party, requires.
  #252  
Old 07-07-2019, 01:18 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,773
That (she's a brilliant bright woman but mainstream is what wins elections across the country) is gratuitously inflammatory?

He was being asked about his approach in contrast to the Go Big popular promises of the side of the party for which AOC is a self-appointed spokesperson for, and widely embraced by the media as poster child, held by them as the example of how that approach wins.

AOC is not in this race but the question is about the conflict between the approach that she exemplifies and is one of the biggest salesperson for, and his take on winning and getting things done.

Sorry but calling that response to that question gratuitously inflammatory is as absurd as saying Harris "yelled" at Biden during the debate.

He needs to defend that has plans (which he then detailed) that can actually deliver the goods to the (disappearing) middle class.
  #253  
Old 07-07-2019, 01:59 PM
Fiveyearlurker is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,817
Amash doesn't rule out running. That gives the "I don't like Trump, but I'm not voting for a Democrat" Republicans an option.
  #254  
Old 07-07-2019, 02:01 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lantern View Post
Yeah I think this is right. Sometimes Biden will have to alienate the left for a good reason, e.g. defending his position on busing when he was attacked. But there is no need to gratuitously inflame the left, e.g. talk about working with segregationists like Eastland. It's a tricky balance to find but that's what being a top politician, particularly in the Democratic party, requires.
Why would that inflame the left? He DID have to work with Eastland. Unless someone is trying to claim that Biden is a closet segregationist, that simply illustrates that he has experience working with people whose views could not be more opposed to his own yet he still accomplishes good (from the Dem point of view) things for the country.

Only in this hypersensitive PC world could anything negative be taken from that comment.
  #255  
Old 07-07-2019, 02:34 PM
you with the face is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
That (she's a brilliant bright woman but mainstream is what wins elections across the country) is gratuitously inflammatory?

He was being asked about his approach in contrast to the Go Big popular promises of the side of the party for which AOC is a self-appointed spokesperson for, and widely embraced by the media as poster child, held by them as the example of how that approach wins.
This would have been a much better response:

“You know, I have tremendous respect for AOC and the energy she carries, despite our differences in opinion on some important key issues. No doubt about it, she and others like her have to be the voice of their district-level constituencies. You can’t extrapolate that to everyone in the country, though. I believe I can be the voice for everyone.”

See how no shots are taken here? No “but” statements that turn a compliment into something patronizing? He should be affirming AOC’s position as a legitimate representative of the people (just a different group of “the people” than the national one), not implying she’s just a small potato aberration who doesn’t matter in the grand scheme.
  #256  
Old 07-07-2019, 02:50 PM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,713
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
...He needs to defend that has plans (which he then detailed) that can actually deliver the goods to the (disappearing) middle class.
The trouble and reality is that no Democrat can "deliver the goods" without a Democratic Congress. If the Senate stays Republican and McConnell lives, it will be deja-Obama all over again.
__________________
"Hope is not the conviction that something will turn out well, but the certainty that something makes sense, regardless of how it turns out." --Václav Havel
  #257  
Old 07-07-2019, 02:54 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
The trouble and reality is that no Democrat can "deliver the goods" without a Democratic Congress. If the Senate stays Republican and McConnell lives, it will be deja-Obama all over again.
Again, that's not true. The Dems hold the House. If we pick up a couple Senate seats, then with someone like Biden in charge, he will be able to get a couple Republicans to roll over.
  #258  
Old 07-07-2019, 03:27 PM
you with the face is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,528
I went back and actually listened to the full context of that Biden quote. My opinion about it has worsened. Biden didn’t even need to bring up AOC’s name, but he did. Just what was he thinking went out of his way single out the young brown woman for his old man finger waving?

She’s not the only person in the party clamoring for universal healthcare and free college for all. She’s not trying to be President. Sanders and Warren check both those boxes, and yet it’s not their names that Biden is calling out. It’s the Puerto Rican “disrupter” who Fox News beats up on all day, every day. So we know exactly who ole Biden is trying to appease and at whose expense.

Last edited by you with the face; 07-07-2019 at 03:28 PM.
  #259  
Old 07-07-2019, 04:04 PM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,713
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Again, that's not true. The Dems hold the House. If we pick up a couple Senate seats, then with someone like Biden in charge, he will be able to get a couple Republicans to roll over.
You think that Biden can pry the balls of enough Pubbies out of McConnell's iron grip to pass Democratic legislation in the Senate? I'm interested in your thinking on this, that is, why you think this is possible.
__________________
"Hope is not the conviction that something will turn out well, but the certainty that something makes sense, regardless of how it turns out." --Václav Havel
  #260  
Old 07-07-2019, 04:18 PM
KarlGauss's Avatar
KarlGauss is online now
Entangled
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Between pole and tropic
Posts: 8,522
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
Amash doesn't rule out running. That gives the "I don't like Trump, but I'm not voting for a Democrat" Republicans an option.
Could Amash have enough traction in (enough) key states to make a difference?
  #261  
Old 07-07-2019, 04:30 PM
Lantern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
Why would that inflame the left? He DID have to work with Eastland. Unless someone is trying to claim that Biden is a closet segregationist, that simply illustrates that he has experience working with people whose views could not be more opposed to his own yet he still accomplishes good (from the Dem point of view) things for the country.

Only in this hypersensitive PC world could anything negative be taken from that comment.
Sure he did work with Eastland and it was probably justified in the context of the time but there was absolutely no point reminding primary voters about this in 2019. A politician isn't obligated to blurt out everything about their history regardless of context.
  #262  
Old 07-07-2019, 05:14 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 26,984
Hey everyone, guess what! Trump is gaining.

Poll: Trump's approval rating hits highest point of presidency
  #263  
Old 07-07-2019, 05:47 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
You think that Biden can pry the balls of enough Pubbies out of McConnell's iron grip to pass Democratic legislation in the Senate? I'm interested in your thinking on this, that is, why you think this is possible.
A sitting president could do so easily. Those guys will want appointments (like a brother in law for ambassador), and pork barrel funding for their districts. With the Dems controlling the House and the White House, they wont get any of that. McConnell had to blink on the last bill Pelosi needed, since several GOP senators signaled their willingness to cross over.


McConnell can only get away with so much due to the fact trump backs him. No trump, and I would not be shocked if the GOP votes McConnell out. Well, actually they will signal as much, and he will retire 'due to health reasons".
  #264  
Old 07-07-2019, 06:09 PM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,713
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
A sitting president could do so easily. Those guys will want appointments (like a brother in law for ambassador), and pork barrel funding for their districts. With the Dems controlling the House and the White House, they wont get any of that. McConnell had to blink on the last bill Pelosi needed, since several GOP senators signaled their willingness to cross over.


McConnell can only get away with so much due to the fact trump backs him.
What about McConnell during the EIGHT Obama years?
Quote:
No trump, and I would not be shocked if the GOP votes McConnell out. Well, actually they will signal as much, and he will retire 'due to health reasons".
By implication, you're saying that Obama could have gotten more done by using the power of the presidency against Mitch?

Not being snarky or challenging... I'd really like to know if you think this would have been possible.
__________________
"Hope is not the conviction that something will turn out well, but the certainty that something makes sense, regardless of how it turns out." --Václav Havel
  #265  
Old 07-07-2019, 06:14 PM
Fiveyearlurker is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by KarlGauss View Post
Could Amash have enough traction in (enough) key states to make a difference?


Amash represents Michigan. A state that Trump carried by around 10k votes. If Amash only registers to run in Michigan he could fuck Trump over.
  #266  
Old 07-07-2019, 06:53 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by you with the face View Post
Takes two to tango. I don’t think AOC et al. are really alienating people; they are actually doing a good job forming alliances with others (like Warren and Sanders) and keeping problems with the status quo on the front burner.
Right, forming "alliances" with like-minded people. Like how hard is that? I mean AOC needs to form alliances with people in her own party who are vulnerable - who, if they lose, lose control of the House, thus rendering AOC completely and totally irrelevant. See, that's how politics works. It's a team sport - you can't just score victories alone.

AOC and her Twitter posse can criticize Pelosi all she wants for passing the border funding bill. What she can't say on Twitter, or anywhere else, is how she, Ilhar Omar, Rashida Talib, and others were going to strong-arm Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump into passing her version of the bill. Like it's great that she knows how to use Twitter, but using Twitter isn't legislating. Might be time for some of the more junior Democrats to start figuring it the fuck out.
  #267  
Old 07-07-2019, 07:21 PM
you with the face is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Right, forming "alliances" with like-minded people. Like how hard is that? I mean AOC needs to form alliances with people in her own party who are vulnerable - who, if they lose, lose control of the House, thus rendering AOC completely and totally irrelevant. See, that's how politics works. It's a team sport - you can't just score victories alone.
This a thread about winning the presidency, no? AOC ain’t gotta do shit for that. The onus is on whomever is going to get the Dem nomination to make friends and lovers within the party.
  #268  
Old 07-07-2019, 07:22 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
AOC and her Twitter posse can criticize Pelosi all she wants for passing the border funding bill. What she can't say on Twitter, or anywhere else, is how she, Ilhar Omar, Rashida Talib, and others were going to strong-arm Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump into passing her version of the bill. Like it's great that she knows how to use Twitter, but using Twitter isn't legislating. Might be time for some of the more junior Democrats to start figuring it the fuck out.
Quote:
REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D-NY): Because you know, Jake, this is an issue not just of the substance of the bill but also the process of how we got here. We passed a House version of this bill which had far more humanitarian provisions and accountability -- and accountability for the facilities that are abusing kids at our border.

And Mitch McConnell immediately smacked it down in order to pass and rammed through a Senate bill that has an enormous amount of funding for military as well as no guardrails and no accountability for facilities that are abusing our kids. So that's the bill that's in front of us here in front of the House.

However, we didn't even bother to negotiate. There our House amendments. We could have negotiated it in. We could have conference, we could have tried to get amendments in to get humanitarian provisions put in, to get consequences for facilities that abuse kids in, and instead what we're doing is that we're immediately going to just saying yes to what got passed out of the Senate.

And these are two completely different dynamics. The Senate, you have a minority Democratic Party there, and here we are the House of Representatives and we are a House majority and we need to act like it.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../27/cg.02.html

...this...doesn't sound like an unreasonable position. A position that has absolutely nothing to do with twitter, and absolutely everything to do with using the tools the House Democrats have to negotiate for a better bill. I don't think its the junior Democrats who need to figure things the fuck out.
  #269  
Old 07-07-2019, 08:11 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../27/cg.02.html

...this...doesn't sound like an unreasonable position. A position that has absolutely nothing to do with twitter, and absolutely everything to do with using the tools the House Democrats have to negotiate for a better bill. I don't think its the junior Democrats who need to figure things the fuck out.
What she leaves out is the fact that the House and Senate were about to go on holiday recess, which meant that the funding would have run out and the very people she is trying to help would have quite likely been hurt even worse than they already were. The House Democrats had absolutely no leverage -- none. You can argue that some Senate Democrats were too quick to agree with McConnell, and maybe there's a kernel of truth, but the real problem is how the Republicans have for the past 8 years used the federal budget to hold the Democrats hostage pretty much every 3-6 months like clockwork.

I have no solutions for that other than voting the mother fuckers out of office, and the only way that can happen is for Democrats to pick and choose the fights the want to have and for reasons that make sense. I'd love to embarrass and shame Republicans as much as the next person, but holding up a bill to fund administrative services that are about to run out of funding is essentially using these migrants as emotional props, which kinda flies in the face of wanting to help them. Pass the damn bill and be done with it -- it's not like the conditions AOC are complaining about are going to go away anytime soon. She can complain about them once there's more money going their way.

Last edited by asahi; 07-07-2019 at 08:11 PM.
  #270  
Old 07-07-2019, 08:13 PM
xenophon41's Avatar
xenophon41 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Somewhere up country.
Posts: 5,041
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../27/cg.02.html

...this...doesn't sound like an unreasonable position. A position that has absolutely nothing to do with twitter, and absolutely everything to do with using the tools the House Democrats have to negotiate for a better bill. I don't think its the junior Democrats who need to figure things the fuck out.
Well... it really is an unreasonable position. There was neither time nor political room to negotiate that Senate bill.

You may not know or remember that the House had sent up a different bill already and that the intractable Senate had stripped out the bits of the bill with higher accountability in them. And that there had already been talk of drastic cuts of recreational activites and other humane provisions at the facilities where children are being held due to "funding." And that Pelosi, who can very well count votes, DID NOT HAVE THE VOTES for any alternate writing of the funding bill.

So yes, those junior Dems need to figure things the fuck out. Sometimes the stinky thing is much better than the unacceptable rotten thing.
__________________
If this is coffee, please bring me some tea; but if this is tea, please bring me some coffee.
~Abraham Lincoln
  #271  
Old 07-07-2019, 08:13 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by you with the face View Post
This a thread about winning the presidency, no? AOC ain’t gotta do shit for that. The onus is on whomever is going to get the Dem nomination to make friends and lovers within the party.
You're really not thinking here. It's the coalition that matters, and people like AOC are absolutely part and parcel of any coalition that Democrats would need in order to drum up support for their candidate.
  #272  
Old 07-07-2019, 08:27 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
What she leaves out is the fact that the House and Senate were about to go on holiday recess, which meant that the funding would have run out and the very people she is trying to help would have quite likely been hurt even worse than they already were.
...ummm, she didn't leave that out. Its in the transcript. They can delay recess.

Quote:
The House Democrats had absolutely no leverage -- none. You can argue that some Senate Democrats were too quick to agree with McConnell, and maybe there's a kernel of truth, but the real problem is how the Republicans have for the past 8 years used the federal budget to hold the Democrats hostage pretty much every 3-6 months like clockwork.
Then lets pack up and go home. Why should the House Democrats attempt to do anything? Just give up. Doing nothing for the next two years and hope for the best at the next election is a terrible strategy.

Quote:
I have no solutions for that other than voting the mother fuckers out of office, and the only way that can happen is for Democrats to pick and choose the fights the want to have and for reasons that make sense.
Except there is every chance that Trump won't get voted out of office, that the Senate will be returned again with a Republican majority, so if that happens what will "make sense" to do then? When do you actually start to fight back? You can't afford to "cross your fingers" and hope that it all come right in 2020.

Quote:
I'd love to embarrass and shame Republicans as much as the next person, but holding up a bill to fund administrative services that are about to run out of funding is essentially using these migrants as emotional props, which kinda flies in the face of wanting to help them.
Who said it was about "embarrassing and shame?" It was about passing a better bill. Using the tools that the House has available to pass a bill with real accountability.


Quote:
Pass the damn bill and be done with it -- it's not like the conditions AOC are complaining about are going to go away anytime soon. She can complain about them once there's more money going their way.
You should be expecting your representatives to do a fuck-ton more than just "complain." People are suffering: people have died. AOC has done more to shine a spotlight on the camps than anything any other Democrat has done. Its incredibly dismissive to characterize that as "complaining."
  #273  
Old 07-07-2019, 08:46 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by xenophon41 View Post
So yes, those junior Dems need to figure things the fuck out. Sometimes the stinky thing is much better than the unacceptable rotten thing.
...nah, I don't think they do. They've been marginalised by their very own leadership so why shouldn't they speak out? They are representing the will of their constituents, they are doing their job. They think more could have been done. They've watched the House leadership capitulate over and over again. They weren't wrong to speak out.

We all have our opinion on what will defeat Trump in 2020. I don't think attacking those Junior Dems will do anything to help the Dems chances. Throwing them under the bus to "improve the centerist brand" throws all their supporters under the bus. You are telling them that "they don't matter as much as those white Trump voters that we really really want."
  #274  
Old 07-07-2019, 08:54 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
What about McConnell during the EIGHT Obama years? By implication, you're saying that Obama could have gotten more done by using the power of the presidency against Mitch?

Not being snarky or challenging... I'd really like to know if you think this would have been possible.
Mitch didnt try to shut down everything Dem during the Obama years. Note also that the dems controlled the senate for the first four of those years.

And yes, Biden knows where the skeletons are buried and many Senators owe him.
  #275  
Old 07-07-2019, 08:58 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../27/cg.02.html

...this...doesn't sound like an unreasonable position. A position that has absolutely nothing to do with twitter, and absolutely everything to do with using the tools the House Democrats have to negotiate for a better bill. I don't think its the junior Democrats who need to figure things the fuck out.
Let's be frank. If Pelosi couldn't negotiate it, AOC would't have had a chance in hell.

Because you see, whatever the House put in the Senate can take out- or simply not pass.

Here, AOC is showing how naive she is.
  #276  
Old 07-07-2019, 09:00 PM
xenophon41's Avatar
xenophon41 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Somewhere up country.
Posts: 5,041
Banquet Bear, your take on recent House history is mistaken. That's not your fault, given news coverage and popular progressive opinion, but it's not correct either. I'll say one more time, a negotiated bill was not going to happen. Conditions in the detention centers would have worsened with no bill passed, and that worsening of conditions, because of the rules of American beltway journalism, would have been blamed on the Democrats.

So the tactic preferred by AOC and others, though absolutely well intentioned, would have led to a lose-lose for the detainees and the Democratic Party. Pelosi did the responsible thing, and where AOC et al fucked up was not in expressing their dissatisfaction but in claiming the leadership were "irresponsible." These juniors are very smart people and should be listened to about policy and innovation, but they are comparative political naifs who need to learn from the professionals.
  #277  
Old 07-07-2019, 09:08 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Let's be frank. If Pelosi couldn't negotiate it, AOC would't have had a chance in hell.
...what did Pelosi try to negotiate?

Quote:
Because you see, whatever the House put in the Senate can take out- or simply not pass.

Here, AOC is showing how naive she is.
Look at the date of the transcript.

Quote:
The vote provoked intense Democratic infighting and came after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi backed down from an effort to make changes to the legislation, saying instead that the House would "reluctantly" take up the Senate bill "to get resources to the children fastest." That announcement marked a reversal from her previous calls to reconcile the Senate bill with a measure passed by the House that progressives argued would have done far more to protect migrant children in government custody.
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/27/p...lls/index.html

Pelosi backed down. There is nothing wrong with calling her out on that.
  #278  
Old 07-07-2019, 09:26 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lantern View Post
Sure he did work with Eastland and it was probably justified in the context of the time but there was absolutely no point reminding primary voters about this in 2019. A politician isn't obligated to blurt out everything about their history regardless of context.
It's not a bad thing. To paraphrase, "I got positive things accomplished when I had to work with avowed segregationists! Trump is a puppy dog compared to those hardcore guys."
  #279  
Old 07-07-2019, 09:34 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by xenophon41 View Post
Banquet Bear, your take on recent House history is mistaken. That's not your fault, given news coverage and popular progressive opinion, but it's not correct either. I'll say one more time, a negotiated bill was not going to happen. Conditions in the detention centers would have worsened with no bill passed, and that worsening of conditions, because of the rules of American beltway journalism, would have been blamed on the Democrats.
...in simpler words: its all about "the narrative." "Don't do the right thing because they will spin it to make it look like we did the wrong thing."

Its this fear of the narrative that is entirely the problem. And that fear shows a complete and utter lack of understanding of how "messaging" works in the 21st century. AOC's use of the word "concentration camp" was declared an utter failure by the pundits immediately after it happened. But it wasn't a failure. It reset the debate. It changed the conversation. It moved the goalposts. You don't have to let them control the narrative.

Quote:
So the tactic preferred by AOC and others, though absolutely well intentioned, would have led to a lose-lose for the detainees and the Democratic Party. Pelosi did the responsible thing, and where AOC et al fucked up was not in expressing their dissatisfaction but in claiming the leadership were "irresponsible." These juniors are very smart people and should be listened to about policy and innovation, but they are comparative political naifs who need to learn from the professionals.
The "professionals" have decided not to impeach, they've decided not to hold anyone to account for refusing subpoena and refusing demands for information. Its all a deliberate strategy by "the professionals" to make as little trouble as possible to appeal to "the centre" and to win in 2020.

The "professionals" have decided to gamble. I think the "professionals" have gotten things very wrong. If it was just this bill in isolation I'd probably look at it differently. But it isn't just this bill. The bill is just another concession in a long line of concessions. And if it all goes wrong in 2020 the Democrats have nowhere to go.
  #280  
Old 07-07-2019, 09:43 PM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 9,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...in simpler words: its all about "the narrative." "Don't do the right thing because they will spin it to make it look like we did the wrong thing."

Its this fear of the narrative that is entirely the problem. And that fear shows a complete and utter lack of understanding of how "messaging" works in the 21st century. AOC's use of the word "concentration camp" was declared an utter failure by the pundits immediately after it happened. But it wasn't a failure. It reset the debate. It changed the conversation. It moved the goalposts. You don't have to let them control the narrative.



The "professionals" have decided not to impeach, they've decided not to hold anyone to account for refusing subpoena and refusing demands for information. Its all a deliberate strategy by "the professionals" to make as little trouble as possible to appeal to "the centre" and to win in 2020.

The "professionals" have decided to gamble. I think the "professionals" have gotten things very wrong. If it was just this bill in isolation I'd probably look at it differently. But it isn't just this bill. The bill is just another concession in a long line of concessions. And if it all goes wrong in 2020 the Democrats have nowhere to go.
You think the moneyed class and the elite that fund both parties truly want the progressive wing to ascend? They need the votes, obviously, but they don’t want the far left empowered.
  #281  
Old 07-07-2019, 09:50 PM
xenophon41's Avatar
xenophon41 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Somewhere up country.
Posts: 5,041
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...in simpler words: its all about "the narrative." "Don't do the right thing because they will spin it to make it look like we did the wrong thing."
No, dammit. Did you miss the part about conditions in the detention centers becoming much worse with no bill, which was the real alternative here? Does this not matter to "real" progressives or something?

I would have been wrong if I'd said of AOC "it's all about how progressives will spin the 'cave in'", but that's probably more fair of an assessment than you're giving Pelosi.

Quote:
The "professionals" have decided not to impeach, they've decided not to hold anyone to account for refusing subpoena and refusing demands for information. Its all a deliberate strategy by "the professionals" to make as little trouble as possible to appeal to "the centre" and to win in 2020.
Pelosi is conducting all the investigations that would be conducted for an actual impeachment inquiry, and meanwhile, public support for impeachment has gone from the low teens earlier in the year to the high 40's. Because she knows how to prep and how to wait for the right time. Apparently that comes with being one of those complacent establishment people.

Quote:
The "professionals" have decided to gamble. I think the "professionals" have gotten things very wrong.
Yeah, I hear the same sort of analysis from pot bellied amateurs after every major sporting event. You're just as persuasive. Congrats.
__________________
If this is coffee, please bring me some tea; but if this is tea, please bring me some coffee.
~Abraham Lincoln
  #282  
Old 07-07-2019, 09:52 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,243
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
<snip>

The "professionals" have decided not to impeach, they've decided not to hold anyone to account for refusing subpoena and refusing demands for information. Its all a deliberate strategy by "the professionals" to make as little trouble as possible to appeal to "the centre" and to win in 2020.

The "professionals" have decided to gamble. I think the "professionals" have gotten things very wrong. If it was just this bill in isolation I'd probably look at it differently. But it isn't just this bill. The bill is just another concession in a long line of concessions. And if it all goes wrong in 2020 the Democrats have nowhere to go.
I think you have completely misread what is happening. The "professionals" have made no such decision re impeachment. They've filed cases in court to compel subpoena compliance and lawful demands for information. And they're winning. Sorry you've missed all that. I guess it doesn't suit your narrative about how old guard Democrats are as much your "enemy" as Republicans.

I admire AOC a lot, and kudos to her for calling concentration camps what they are. People who have spent time in concentration camps refer to the facilities at the border as concentration camps. That's good enough for me.

But I agree wholeheartedly with xenophon41: AOC and the others may be great at messaging, but they are babes in the woods when it comes to understanding the political calculus -- which has never been more crucial.

As for the Dems having "no place to go" if it all goes "wrong" in 2020, consider this: What will Dems have in their back pockets if Trump somehow pulls off a win (no doubt with foreign help), they've already run their impeachment proceeding and failed?
  #283  
Old 07-07-2019, 10:18 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by xenophon41 View Post
No, dammit. Did you miss the part about conditions in the detention centers becoming much worse with no bill, which was the real alternative here? Does this not matter to "real" progressives or something?
...who is arguing for "no bill?"

Quote:
I would have been wrong if I'd said of AOC "it's all about how progressives will spin the 'cave in'", but that's probably more fair of an assessment than you're giving Pelosi.
American beltway journalism absolutely would have blamed the Democrats if no bill had passed. But lets be clear on what AOC's position was here: "Under no circumstances should the House vote for a McConnell only bill with no negotiation with Democrats. Hell no. That's an abdication of power." She argued for negotiation: a position that Pelosi held until she changed her mind.

Quote:
Pelosi is conducting all the investigations that would be conducted for an actual impeachment inquiry, and meanwhile, public support for impeachment has gone from the low teens earlier in the year to the high 40's. Because she knows how to prep and how to wait for the right time. Apparently that comes with being one of those complacent establishment people.
Without resorting to google what investigations are currently going on right now? If nobody knows these inquiries are happening then they are materially different from an actual impeachment. Hearings are not impeachment. Impecachment is the tool that is used by legislative body levels charges against a government official. "Conducting a hearing that would have been conducted during impeachment hearings" is objectively not the same thing.

And the level of public support doesn't matter because we all know that Pelosi has no intention of bringing impeachment anyway. It will never be the "right time".

Quote:
Yeah, I hear the same sort of analysis from pot bellied amateurs after every major sporting event. You're just as persuasive. Congrats.
We are all pot bellied amateurs on the internet. "Just trust the professionals who got us into this mess" sounds the same sort of analysis from pot bellied amateurs after every major sporting event to me. You are just as persuasive. Congrats.
  #284  
Old 07-07-2019, 10:23 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...ummm, she didn't leave that out. Its in the transcript. They can delay recess.
Yes, the House can stay throughout the entire recess if they want -- and get absolutely nothing done while the Senate takes its break. Congress is a bicameral institution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
Then lets pack up and go home. Why should the House Democrats attempt to do anything? Just give up. Doing nothing for the next two years and hope for the best at the next election is a terrible strategy.
Who said they're doing nothing? The ugly reality is that for many people, migrants at the border are people who may as well be on the moon for all people care. It's not an issue that moves the needle. I wish that were not the case, but that's the case. They're lucky to get anything, which is what Pelosi's trying to get across to the progressives. America voted eyes wide open for a racist. The only way they're going to change their minds is to show them on a personal level that backing the racist candidate isn't making their lives easier. It's not the solution to their problems. When they figure it out? I have no idea. But when the moment that it dawns on people that Trump isn't going to make them rich and in fact may make them poorer, it will take a coalition to defeat him and his oligarch class.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
Except there is every chance that Trump won't get voted out of office, that the Senate will be returned again with a Republican majority, so if that happens what will "make sense" to do then? When do you actually start to fight back? You can't afford to "cross your fingers" and hope that it all come right in 2020.
With all due respect, I don't think you understand what fighting back means in the American political context.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
Who said it was about "embarrassing and shame?" It was about passing a better bill. Using the tools that the House has available to pass a bill with real accountability.
The House has no tools to make the Senate come back out of recess, much less even force Donald Trump to sign on to it. Look, I get it: people are outraged. We're committing all kinds of moral sins and our 18th Century governmental systems are perhaps too hobbled to withstand another round racist counter-revolution. I don't know if I or anyone has specific answers on how to put this fractured country on the right path, but it seems to me that pro-democratic coalitions, even imperfect and frustrating ones, are the solution and not the problem. Similarly, compromise is the solution and not the problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
You should be expecting your representatives to do a fuck-ton more than just "complain." People are suffering: people have died. AOC has done more to shine a spotlight on the camps than anything any other Democrat has done. Its incredibly dismissive to characterize that as "complaining."
I don't mean to disrespect AOC - she's obviously done more than I have. But I think she should try to expand her worldview beyond her highly multicultural congressional district and understand that a lot of people come from a different world. They might not appreciate that world and its constituents, but whether they do or don't doesn't matter because it's out in the suburbs and rural America where the power in this country lies.
  #285  
Old 07-07-2019, 10:39 PM
you with the face is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
You're really not thinking here. It's the coalition that matters, and people like AOC are absolutely part and parcel of any coalition that Democrats would need in order to drum up support for their candidate.
Yes, it is the coalition that matters. Very good. So the Dem nominee needs to be sensitive to this if they want the coalition’s support. That means not agitating AOC et al. by talking down to them, treating them like they don’t belong, and trashing their positions. By doing these things, by proxy they are doing that to their voters. Whose votes they are gonna desperately need in the general. If they want to win.

Kinda feel like spelling this out is ridiculous, but the idea that I’m the one not thinking compels me to do so.

Last edited by you with the face; 07-07-2019 at 10:39 PM.
  #286  
Old 07-07-2019, 11:01 PM
xenophon41's Avatar
xenophon41 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Somewhere up country.
Posts: 5,041
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...who is arguing for "no bill?"
Let me ask you a few questions... do you think Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi can count votes? Do you think she has a) a better understanding or b) a worse understanding of US Congressional procedures and the current positioning of the various caucuses in the House of Representatives than a first term Congressperson does? Than an interested foreign observer does?

Also, do you think Pelosi has the authority to compel negotiation outside of her chamber of Congress, which would be required to send a changed bill back to the Senate? (She does not.) Do you think she has the authority to call the Senate back into session? (She does not.)

Pelosi determined that there was insufficient support among Democrats in the House of Representatives to successfully achieve the changes in the Senate bill that would have reattached the conditions and specifics that the House majority had initially desired. Do you have specific information to contradict this assessment? If not, do you think "the right thing to do" was to assure worsening conditions for detainees by stalling passage of that bill until after the scheduled recess? If so, then please justify that moral calculus, because this pot bellied amateur isn't seeing it.
  #287  
Old 07-07-2019, 11:05 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
I think you have completely misread what is happening. The "professionals" have made no such decision re impeachment.
...of course they have. The Mueller report handed everything the Democrats needed to start impeachment proceedings right there and then. If that wasn't enough then nothing Trump and this administration will do will be enough.

Quote:
They've filed cases in court to compel subpoena compliance and lawful demands for information.
That doesn't negate my point.

Quote:
And they're winning.
LOL.

Quote:
Sorry you've missed all that. I guess it doesn't suit your narrative about how old guard Democrats are as much your "enemy" as Republicans.
Strawman. This isn't my narrative.

Quote:
But I agree wholeheartedly with xenophon41: AOC and the others may be great at messaging, but they are babes in the woods when it comes to understanding the political calculus -- which has never been more crucial.
We live in a world where the stupidest man on the planet is president. Where America is locking up kids in cages, holding men and women in cells with standing room only are kept for weeks. We live in a world where Trump nearly started a war with Iran, then changed his mind at the very last minute, and the story has completely dropped out of the news cycle the very next day.

There are literal white supremacists making decisions at the highest of levels on border policy. We are in the middle of a world-wide trend towards authoritarianism.

And you are asking me to simply trust the political calculus of people that have been in power for decades and are part of the reason why we are in this mess. You want to pretend that all of this is normal. Trust them. It will all work out. I'm sorry but I have trust issues.

There are experts on authoritarianism who say quite clearly that in their opinion this approach is wrong. Sarah Kendzior said this today:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarah Kendzior
I don't know of any constitutional scholar who agrees with her. I also don't know any social scientists who specialize in autocracy who agree with her. Everyone I know is deeply alarmed by her appeasement.
https://twitter.com/sarahkendzior/st...94364993576960

Can you name anybody?

Remember back in 2016 where we were all running around saying "we can't normalise this?" Well we've normalised this. The madness of this administration is being treated as "business as usual" here.

But the political calculus has changed. Trump & Co have systematically gutted institutions. They are looting and pillaging in front of your eyes. They are dragging America towards an authoritarianism regime. They aren't their yet. But they are in control of the executive, they are working to take control of the judiciary and have effective control of congress. America is in clear and present danger. Do I trust the experts in authoritarianism, who have been consistently correct in their predictions on what the Trump administration would do, or "the professionals", who have decided to take a completely different course of action?

Quote:
As for the Dems having "no place to go" if it all goes "wrong" in 2020, consider this: What will Dems have in their back pockets if Trump somehow pulls off a win (no doubt with foreign help), they've already run their impeachment proceeding and failed?
Impeachment isn't some sort of a "get out of jail free" card. It isn't something to "be played" for political advantage. Its the appropriate tool to be holding Trump and the administration to account and it would be entirely appropriate to be holding them to account now.
  #288  
Old 07-07-2019, 11:05 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...what did Pelosi try to negotiate?



Look at the date of the transcript.



https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/27/p...lls/index.html

Pelosi backed down. There is nothing wrong with calling her out on that.
Yeah? Better to get something than nothing. There is no possible way AOC could have done better.
  #289  
Old 07-07-2019, 11:06 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by xenophon41 View Post
Let me ask you a few questions... do you think Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi can count votes? Do you think she has a) a better understanding or b) a worse understanding of US Congressional procedures and the current positioning of the various caucuses in the House of Representatives than a first term Congressperson does? Than an interested foreign observer does?

Also, do you think Pelosi has the authority to compel negotiation outside of her chamber of Congress, which would be required to send a changed bill back to the Senate? (She does not.) Do you think she has the authority to call the Senate back into session? (She does not.)

Pelosi determined that there was insufficient support among Democrats in the House of Representatives to successfully achieve the changes in the Senate bill that would have reattached the conditions and specifics that the House majority had initially desired. Do you have specific information to contradict this assessment? If not, do you think "the right thing to do" was to assure worsening conditions for detainees by stalling passage of that bill until after the scheduled recess? If so, then please justify that moral calculus, because this pot bellied amateur isn't seeing it.
...so the answer to my question (that you quoted) is nobody?

Thanks for the clarification.
  #290  
Old 07-07-2019, 11:08 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...who is arguing for "no bill?"



American beltway journalism absolutely would have blamed the Democrats if no bill had passed. But lets be clear on what AOC's position was here: "Under no circumstances should the House vote for a McConnell only bill with no negotiation with Democrats. Hell no. That's an abdication of power." She argued for negotiation: a position that Pelosi held until she changed her mind.



Without resorting to google what investigations are currently going on right now? If nobody knows these inquiries are happening then they are materially different from an actual impeachment. Hearings are not impeachment. Impecachment is the tool that is used by legislative body levels charges against a government official. "Conducting a hearing that would have been conducted during impeachment hearings" is objectively not the same thing. ....
AOC was.

Of course Pelosi negotiated with the GOP- behind the scenes.

And bring charges in the House which cant result in any action by the senate will do nothing but re-elect trump. Eyes on the prize, not short term satisfaction.
  #291  
Old 07-07-2019, 11:13 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
The ugly reality is that for many people, migrants at the border are people who may as well be on the moon for all people care. It's not an issue that moves the needle.
Quote:
But I think she should try to expand her worldview beyond her highly multicultural congressional district and understand that a lot of people come from a different world.
...I think you've got things the wrong way around. AOC doesn't need to "expand her worldview." Its her job to care about migrants on the border. Especially if most people are not. Its her job to move the needle. Its what we should expect from our elected officials, is it not?
  #292  
Old 07-07-2019, 11:16 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,440
This kind of thing is exactly why I dont like AOC. There are two possibilities here:

1. She had no idea what was really going on and what could be accomplished, in which case she was- as usual- running her mouth off due to lack of experience and wisdom.

2. She knew Pelosi was getting the best deal possible, in which case AOC was just trying to score cheap points.

The 3rd? that she knew more about how to wrangle congress than Pelosi? is laughable.
  #293  
Old 07-07-2019, 11:29 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by you with the face View Post
Yes, it is the coalition that matters. Very good. So the Dem nominee needs to be sensitive to this if they want the coalition’s support. That means not agitating AOC et al. by talking down to them, treating them like they don’t belong, and trashing their positions. By doing these things, by proxy they are doing that to their voters. Whose votes they are gonna desperately need in the general. If they want to win.

Kinda feel like spelling this out is ridiculous, but the idea that I’m the one not thinking compels me to do so.
I'll put it bluntly: the progressives need the moderates more than the moderates need the progressives. Simply put, there is probably a lot more on the line for them in the upcoming election.
  #294  
Old 07-08-2019, 03:25 AM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,243
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...of course they have. The Mueller report handed everything the Democrats needed to start impeachment proceedings right there and then. If that wasn't enough then nothing Trump and this administration will do will be enough.
No, it didn't. It did not lift the understanding of a majority of the citizenry to what Trump and his team -- including many Republicans in power -- have actually done.

What Pelosi understands, and that you apparently don't, is that she can respond with the emotion the situation demands, as you have done, or she can respond in a way that is agonizingly, frustratingly slow and painful -- but has the best chance of yielding actual results.

You seem to be laboring under the misapprehension that no one sees the travesties being wrought upon our country by Trump but you. That simply isn't true.

You continue to ignore points made by xenophon41 and asahi about the need to educate the public as to the contents of the Mueller report, and how letting Trump flail around in his dangerous, incoherent attempts to deflect from his own criminality is scaring the hell out of people. Even some Republicans, though they won't say it out loud.

You're obviously not following the growing approval for impeachment, which is one of Pelosi's main goals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
That doesn't negate my point.
I think it kinda does. You said they've "decided to not hold anyone to account." Taking the offenders to court to compel compliance is absolutely holding them to account.

Will they disregard lawful court orders? We'll see. If they do, that pushes the needle much closer to impeachment proceedings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
LOL.

Strawman. This isn't my narrative.
Perhaps not consciously, but it is your narrative. I've followed your posts long enough to notice the pattern. I don't think you realize the extent to which you indulge in confirmation bias. Just asking you to consider it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
We live in a world where the stupidest man on the planet is president. Where America is locking up kids in cages, holding men and women in cells with standing room only are kept for weeks. We live in a world where Trump nearly started a war with Iran, then changed his mind at the very last minute, and the story has completely dropped out of the news cycle the very next day.

There are literal white supremacists making decisions at the highest of levels on border policy. We are in the middle of a world-wide trend towards authoritarianism.

And you are asking me to simply trust the political calculus of people that have been in power for decades and are part of the reason why we are in this mess. You want to pretend that all of this is normal. Trust them. It will all work out. I'm sorry but I have trust issues.
You are far from the only person who is aware of these things, and far from the first person who has raised these points. No one who's paying attention disagrees with you that we are in peril as a nation. And no one is asking you to "trust them," or saying "it will all work out." Please point to where anyone here has admonished you to do those things.

There's a big difference between reacting in a hysterical, emotional, ineffective manner to a threat and making a cold, challenging, calculating analysis of what approach has the best chance of, you know, actually working.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
There are experts on authoritarianism who say quite clearly that in their opinion this approach is wrong. Sarah Kendzior said this today:

https://twitter.com/sarahkendzior/st...94364993576960

Can you name anybody?
Those experts are correct about the threats. Not sure they are in a position to say Pelosi's approach is wrong.

Sarah Kendzior is an extremely bright, well-spoken journalist who has very strong opinions, and I agree with a lot of them. But she is not sitting in the Speaker's seat. She is not trying to maintain a coalition of diverse Democrats who must hold fast together in order to accomplish any of your frantic "do somefink!" entreaties.

Are you aware that only 80 of the Democratic House members have come out in support of an impeachment inquiry? That's not even half of the 235 Democratic seats, let alone all but one former Republican.

Your mistake is in assuming Pelosi is not fully aware of the threats you enumerated. I would submit she is painfully aware of them. Additionally, she has the political experience to understand what is needed to accomplish the goal of actually getting rid of Trump and not giving us 4 more years of him. Will it work? Remains to be seen. Can you guarantee your approach will work better? You've offered nothing that gives me more confidence it will.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
Remember back in 2016 where we were all running around saying "we can't normalise this?" Well we've normalised this. The madness of this administration is being treated as "business as usual" here.

But the political calculus has changed. Trump & Co have systematically gutted institutions. They are looting and pillaging in front of your eyes. They are dragging America towards an authoritarianism regime. They aren't their yet. But they are in control of the executive, they are working to take control of the judiciary and have effective control of congress. America is in clear and present danger. Do I trust the experts in authoritarianism, who have been consistently correct in their predictions on what the Trump administration would do, or "the professionals", who have decided to take a completely different course of action?
Some may have normalized it, but many have not. Been to a protest lately?

And again, you are saying nothing in the above quote of which most of us have been well aware for a very long time, along with sounding the alarms since Trump took office. No revelations in your comments, no need to educate us as if you're the only one who noticed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
Impeachment isn't some sort of a "get out of jail free" card. It isn't something to "be played" for political advantage. Its the appropriate tool to be holding Trump and the administration to account and it would be entirely appropriate to be holding them to account now.
In my opinion, you're charmingly naive. Again, there is the approach that is emotionally satisfying -- and there's the approach that has a better chance of accomplishing the goal. The more people hoving in the direction of impeachment as the correct remedy, the better. It is the people who must demand removal. The House can only ask for the issue to be tried.

The greatest peril is that ~42% of the American population think everything Trump is doing is just dandy.
  #295  
Old 07-08-2019, 06:15 AM
you with the face is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
I'll put it bluntly: the progressives need the moderates more than the moderates need the progressives. Simply put, there is probably a lot more on the line for them in the upcoming election.
The moderate Dems will support whomever is the D nominee because they aren’t subversive enough to do protest votes. That is too radical for them.

The far Left doesn’t have that hangup. They will withhold their votes and then cheer when the establishment loses, relishing the joy of saying “told ya so”. Again, let me remind you of pissed off Bernie supporters. More than 20% did not vote for Hillary in 2016.

Again, I’m not saying we need a far left nominee. If we have a moderate, we need someone who can play nice with more vocal and progressive members of the party. Having an entitled “they need us more than we need them” attitude is a great way for us to relive the upset of 2016.

Last edited by you with the face; 07-08-2019 at 06:15 AM.
  #296  
Old 07-08-2019, 06:17 AM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
No, it didn't. It did not lift the understanding of a majority of the citizenry to what Trump and his team -- including many Republicans in power -- have actually done.
...since when was that a requirement for impeachment? (Hint: it isn't.)

Quote:
What Pelosi understands, and that you apparently don't, is that she can respond with the emotion the situation demands, as you have done, or she can respond in a way that is agonizingly, frustratingly slow and painful -- but has the best chance of yielding actual results.
What I understand, and what you apparently don't, is that I'm not responding in an "emotional way." Impeachment is the process legislative body levels charges against a government official. Thats it. When Elizabeth Warren advocated for impeachment she did that after reading the report. Same with Justin Amash. Pelosi isn't excuting some grand strategy. There is no guarantee that what she is doing will yield "actual results." And it isn't "agonizingly, frustratingly slow and painful" for me. I live on the other side of the world. The people that you should be concerned about are being held in the camps. It is more than agonizingly, frustratingly slow for them.

Quote:
You seem to be laboring under the misapprehension that no one sees the travesties being wrought upon our country by Trump but you. That simply isn't true.
You seem to have completely missed my point.

Quote:
You continue to ignore points made by xenophon41 and asahi about the need to educate the public as to the contents of the Mueller report, and how letting Trump flail around in his dangerous, incoherent attempts to deflect from his own criminality is scaring the hell out of people. Even some Republicans, though they won't say it out loud.
:: looks around ::

There has been zero education coming from the Pelosi camp since the release of the report. What on earth are you talking about?

Quote:
You're obviously not following the growing approval for impeachment, which is one of Pelosi's main goals.
Pelosi has no plans to impeach.

Quote:
I think it kinda does.
It kinda doesn't.

Quote:
You said they've "decided to not hold anyone to account." Taking the offenders to court to compel compliance is absolutely holding them to account.
Just like how the so-called Muslim ban got held up in court, it got tweaked to the point where the Supremes said "okay, thats good enough", and by that stage everyone had forgotten all about it.

Quote:
Will they disregard lawful court orders? We'll see. If they do, that pushes the needle much closer to impeachment proceedings.
Pelosi is not going to impeach.

Quote:
Perhaps not consciously, but it is your narrative.
It fucking well is not.

Quote:
I've followed your posts long enough to notice the pattern. I don't think you realize the extent to which you indulge in confirmation bias. Just asking you to consider it.
I do not believe that the old guard Democrats are as much your "enemy" as the Republicans. I don't know where you got that rediculous idea from. I've hardly posted about the "old guard Democrats" here. Almost a year ago Biden was my number one pick for the nomination. I've praised Pelosi and supported Pelosi, I still support Pelosi but I think she has a big fucking blind spot here. There is nothing wrong with pointing that out. Your accusation is absurd.

Quote:
You are far from the only person who is aware of these things, and far from the first person who has raised these points. No one who's paying attention disagrees with you that we are in peril as a nation. And no one is asking you to "trust them," or saying "it will all work out." Please point to where anyone here has admonished you to do those things.
Before I answer your question...

Quote:
There's a big difference between reacting in a hysterical, emotional, ineffective manner to a threat and making a cold, challenging, calculating analysis of what approach has the best chance of, you know, actually working.
Who are you accusing of responding to the threat in a hysterical, emotional, ineffective manner? It certainly isn't me. It isn't AOC, it isn't Warren or Amash. Where are these hysterical people? Everyone I've read who have advocated for impeachment have offered a cold, challenging, calculating analysis of what they think the best approach is, that offers the best chance of, you know, actually working.

Quote:
Those experts are correct about the threats. Not sure they are in a position to say Pelosi's approach is wrong.
And I don't think you are in the best position to say Pelosi's approach is right.

Quote:
Sarah Kendzior is an extremely bright, well-spoken journalist who has very strong opinions, and I agree with a lot of them. But she is not sitting in the Speaker's seat. She is not trying to maintain a coalition of diverse Democrats who must hold fast together in order to accomplish any of your frantic "do somefink!" entreaties.
Not my "frantic do somefink! entreaties." I simply echo the arguments of the " extremely bright, well-spoken journalist" whom I assume you would also think is being "hysterical and emotional"?

Quote:
Are you aware that only 80 of the Democratic House members have come out in support of an impeachment inquiry? That's not even half of the 235 Democratic seats, let alone all but one former Republican.
And? Pelosi has made it clear she doesn't support impeachment. Pelosi is very good at her job. Of course the numbers would reflect her position.

Quote:
Your mistake is in assuming Pelosi is not fully aware of the threats you enumerated. I would submit she is painfully aware of them.
She doesn't act like it.

Quote:
Additionally, she has the political experience to understand what is needed to accomplish the goal of actually getting rid of Trump and not giving us 4 more years of him. Will it work? Remains to be seen. Can you guarantee your approach will work better? You've offered nothing that gives me more confidence it will.
And you've offered me nothing to give me confidence that it won't.

Quote:
Some may have normalized it, but many have not. Been to a protest lately?
Nope. We elected a centre-left progressive government here, bucking the world-wide trend towards authoritarianism. I don't live in America. I would have thought you would have known that considering how closely you claimed to have followed my posts. I talk about that all the time.

Quote:
And again, you are saying nothing in the above quote of which most of us have been well aware for a very long time, along with sounding the alarms since Trump took office. No revelations in your comments, no need to educate us as if you're the only one who noticed.
But thats how "normalization" works. People have forgotten what Trump has done. Its why the detention camps dropped off the radar for nearly a year. Its why the Iran crisis stopped being a crisis the day after Trump canceled the bombing. There is information overload and people have blocked most of this stuff out. There are people in this thread, who are liberals opposed to Trump, who have said that the people in the camps are "lucky to get anything." That level of normalization should worry you more than anything I've said in this thread.

Quote:
In my opinion, you're charmingly naive. Again, there is the approach that is emotionally satisfying -- and there's the approach that has a better chance of accomplishing the goal.
Ad hominem followed by another accusation of emotion. Just stop that already. Either your arguements stand on their own or they don't. Tone policing is not an argument. I'm not after an "emotionally satisfying moment." I'm simply looking at the same arguments and evidence as you are and coming to a different conclusion.

Quote:
The more people hoving in the direction of impeachment as the correct remedy, the better. It is the people who must demand removal. The House can only ask for the issue to be tried.
I'm not demanding removal.

Quote:
The greatest peril is that ~42% of the American population think everything Trump is doing is just dandy.
That isn't the greatest peril. The greatest peril is that the Democrats will get out-maneuvered. That 42% isn't going to change. You need to be worried about the security of the next elections, voter supression, whatever Data Propria are getting up too.
  #297  
Old 07-08-2019, 07:13 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by you with the face View Post
Again, I’m not saying we need a far left nominee. If we have a moderate, we need someone who can play nice with more vocal and progressive members of the party. Having an entitled “they need us more than we need them” attitude is a great way for us to relive the upset of 2016.
I don't necessarily disagree with you on this part. I think it's important to at least show respect to the progressive wing of the party. My concern is that the progressive wing needs to think a little less emotionally and more strategically. The handful of times that Donald Trump has been absolutely owned it has been because Pelosi used political strategy against him, not because Ocasio Cortez or Ilhan Omar embarrassed him in a Twitter war. And frankly, some members of the progressive caucus (Omar, for instance) have actually been more of a political liability so far. It's okay to be passionate and sometimes I would imagine that, just like in these forums, the passions get the better of people. But we need more than passion. We need a political strategy.
  #298  
Old 07-08-2019, 07:42 AM
xenophon41's Avatar
xenophon41 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Somewhere up country.
Posts: 5,041
Dear Banquet Bear,

Thank you for your recent feedback regarding our country's political processes. "We value your opinion!" and have taken your comments under advisement. If you would like to subscribe to our mailing list, we'll include you on all notifications of Constitutional Amendments and radical restructurings. (No action required to subscribe.)

Please see the attached Discount Coupon good for your choice of three letters to the editor for the price of two or one FREE Hearty® raspberry flavored Raspberry directed at any of our exciting varieties of American official(s).


As always, thank you for shopping America! Fuck yeah!


Best Wishes,


Grateful Citizens of the United States of America
  #299  
Old 07-08-2019, 08:15 AM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by xenophon41 View Post
Dear Banquet Bear,

Thank you for your recent feedback regarding our country's political processes. "We value your opinion!" and have taken your comments under advisement. If you would like to subscribe to our mailing list, we'll include you on all notifications of Constitutional Amendments and radical restructurings. (No action required to subscribe.)

Please see the attached Discount Coupon good for your choice of three letters to the editor for the price of two or one FREE Hearty® raspberry flavored Raspberry directed at any of our exciting varieties of American official(s).


As always, thank you for shopping America! Fuck yeah!


Best Wishes,


Grateful Citizens of the United States of America
...concession accepted.
  #300  
Old 07-08-2019, 08:34 AM
xenophon41's Avatar
xenophon41 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Somewhere up country.
Posts: 5,041
Not so much a concession as a note that I can't and won't argue with the direction of your passion. And I don't quibble even with your opinion on Pelosi, even though I believe that if any US politician has earned a large portion of trust over the best way to move a progressive agenda through Congress it's her.

There's nothing off base about what you want to happen, Banquet Bear. But unless you can specify exactly how Pelosi was going to negotiate with the large contingent of her own party in Congress that were vehemently against changing the Senate bill, including which representatives she was going to work, using what forms of influence, and then how she was going to get that done in time to convince McConnell it would be worthwhile to take back, and then how she was going to get POTUS to sign it, then your complaint seems to be about what should be (on which we agree) instead of what could be which is not actually amenable to my or your opinion.
__________________
If this is coffee, please bring me some tea; but if this is tea, please bring me some coffee.
~Abraham Lincoln
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 05:18 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 © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017