Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-17-2019, 01:04 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385

President Obama warns of progressive "purity" and "circular firing squads"


I have warned about this many times, but it is always pooh-poohed as "a few people on Twitter" who are said to be irrelevant to the party overall, or even its image. I wonder if people will take it a little more seriously coming from him?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...quad-democrats
Quote:
“One of the things I do worry about sometimes among progressives in the United States,” he said, “maybe it’s true here as well, is a certain kind of rigidity where we say, ‘Uh, I’m sorry, this is how it’s going to be’ and then we start sometimes creating what’s called a ‘circular firing squad’, where you start shooting at your allies because one of them has strayed from purity on the issues.

“And when that happens, typically the overall effort and movement weakens.”
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #2  
Old 04-17-2019, 02:09 AM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 20,525
I don't think he's wrong, but he himself is and always has been a moderate. He may or may not have the ears of the more leftward-inclined.

Meanwhile, in all fairness, I haven't heard a lot of gut-knifing among the potential Democratic candidates yet; so far, it seems to me that the strongly progressive candidates are worrying about being THE strongly progressive candidate in a field of many, and not so much about the moderates, and vice versa.
  #3  
Old 04-17-2019, 02:58 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
Oh, I see plenty of Bernie Sanders followers with their knives out for Beto. They accuse him of being in the pocket of Big Oil, even though he constantly talks about getting off fossil fuels within the next ten years.

And as I understand Obama (certainly as I understand myself), this isn't just about what the candidates say about each other, but about the way "woke" types pile on whenever they see something that fails (or even gets less than a perfect score on) their purity tests.

People here, as I say, like to wave that off and say no one really cares what people on Twitter say. But that's belied by the facts. Take astronaut Scott Kelly, for example. He is the identical twin brother of another astronaut, Mark Kelly, who is married to former Representative Gabby Giffords and is running for Senate in 2020. Scott quoted Churchill's line "in victory, magnanimity" and dared to describe him as "one of the greatest leaders of modern times". Uh oh.

Here's what happened next:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45789819
Quote:
One of the unwritten rules of social media is avoid inspirational quotes.

American astronaut Scott Kelly put that to the test on Sunday when his use of Winston Churchill quotes landed him in hot water with people who oppose the wartime British prime minister's views on empire and race.

But when Kelly tried to apologise for the tweet and offered to educate himself, Churchill fans attacked him for discrediting the politician's record.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 04-17-2019 at 02:59 AM.
  #4  
Old 04-17-2019, 07:27 AM
LoneRhino is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 158
I would imagine that Trump has cured a lot of progressives of needing ideological purity.
  #5  
Old 04-17-2019, 08:51 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,786
SlackerInc, do you have any evidence that those "plenty of Bernie Sanders followers" are progressives, liberals, Democrats, or followers of Bernie Sanders? We should hold politicians responsible for what they say and do, not what is said or done by those who purport to follow them.
  #6  
Old 04-17-2019, 09:27 AM
RTFirefly is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39,436
Bernie Sanders himself attacked ThinkProgress the other day for reasons that seemed pretty trivial to me.
Quote:
This comes after ThinkProgress, a news outfit that is editorially independent of CAP though a project of the think tank, published a video suggesting the Independent from Vermont had altered his language about wealth inequality in the United States after he had become a millionaire himself, due to the success of his recent book. In the video, they showed clips of Sanders at times denouncing just "billionaires" as opposed to "millionaires and billionaires," after his book his published.

“This counterproductive negative campaigning needs to stop,” Sanders wrote in the letter. “The Democratic primary must be a campaign of ideas, not of bad-faith smears.
Seems like a reasonable thing to point out, yet thin-skinned Bernie called it a bad-faith smear.
  #7  
Old 04-17-2019, 09:43 AM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 18,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneRhino View Post
I would imagine that Trump has cured a lot of progressives of needing ideological purity.
I doubt that. As a matter of fact, I think he's doing exactly the opposite- causing a lot of people to double down on their ideological purity as a reaction to his presidency.
  #8  
Old 04-17-2019, 09:50 AM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 5,338
Bernie should tell Obama to take a hike in the same way Trump told Bush etc. to take a hike. At least it will save him from further hypocrisy when Sanders is attacking Trump’s extension of ObamaBush policies.

Of course the Democratic idol worship of Obama would do him in. Or would it?

Last edited by WillFarnaby; 04-17-2019 at 09:52 AM.
  #9  
Old 04-17-2019, 10:12 AM
RTFirefly is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
the Democratic idol worship of Obama
The Boy in the Bubble

Seriously, this is an excellent example of the disconnect between what's actually happening on the center-left part of the spectrum, and what it looks like from inside the right-wing bubble.

I'm sure there are people who idolize Obama, because in a nation of 325 million people, there are going to be some, but by and large the view of Obama on this side of the spectrum is one of critical appreciation of both his strengths and his flaws.

Of course, next to Trump, he looks like the right hand of God Almighty. But hell, Trump almost makes Nixon look good by comparison.
  #10  
Old 04-17-2019, 11:33 AM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 5,338
Yes the right wing view of Obama is that he is the same as Trump. Excellent analysis.

Back in reality, we have Trump continuing policies of Obama and a Democrat claiming that Obama looks like the right-hand man of god.

Last edited by WillFarnaby; 04-17-2019 at 11:34 AM.
  #11  
Old 04-17-2019, 11:44 AM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 5,338
Also, one clue that one is in a bubble is when you make a comment so utterly lacking in self-awareness, such as claiming a hardcore libertarian visitor to a left-liberal website is in a right-wing bubble, and there is no expectation of someone tapping you on your shoulder and saying how dumb it was.
  #12  
Old 04-17-2019, 11:51 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,554
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Bernie Sanders himself attacked ThinkProgress the other day for reasons that seemed pretty trivial to me.
Seems like a reasonable thing to point out, yet thin-skinned Bernie called it a bad-faith smear.
It seems less thin-skinned than smart to me. In this field being the second choice of many will be useful, as others drop out. Playing high road, advocating high road and fighting over ideas, rather than low ball attacks, makes you more likely to be chosen by those who have others as their current first choice when that current first choice no longer seems viable. Same thing tends to happen in ranked voting races.
  #13  
Old 04-17-2019, 11:57 AM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,153
A lot of the reason for circular firing squads is moral certainty or moral conviction. When one faction gets it into their head that they are morally right, they can then brook no contradiction. And when multiple or all factions feel that way, then it's circular firing squad time.

Another cause for it is the belief that the stakes are immensely high and that the consequences of not getting one's way are accordingly immensely dire as well. That also leads to people allowing no compromise.
  #14  
Old 04-17-2019, 01:21 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,786
Which hardcore libertarian visitor was that, WillFarnaby? It looked to me like that was a response to you.
  #15  
Old 04-17-2019, 01:31 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Which hardcore libertarian visitor was that, WillFarnaby? It looked to me like that was a response to you.
Is this a joke? WillFarnaby considers himself a libertarian.
  #16  
Old 04-17-2019, 01:49 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,786
While constantly supporting authoritarian policies and candidates.
  #17  
Old 04-17-2019, 01:54 PM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Oh, I see plenty of Bernie Sanders followers with their knives out for Beto. They accuse him of being in the pocket of Big Oil, even though he constantly talks about getting off fossil fuels within the next ten years.:
To me the biggest turn-off to Bernie Sanders has been his followers. They seem to think that insulting and attacking every other Democrat and their supporters will gain them support. But you're not going to insult me into voting for Bernie.

Before you get your knickers in a twist about Hillary and "deplorables", she wasn't trying to win their support and for the most part, those people chose to identify with the label rather than thinking "well that's not me". It was a one-off, not the constant stream of invective and personal attacks I've seen from the hard-core Bernie Bros.


That being said, I just got off twitter where I repeatedly pointed out that we have a large field of candidates and a solid year before any primaries, so I'm only interested in hearing positions, seeing plans and watching responses to challenges at this point.
  #18  
Old 04-17-2019, 01:58 PM
senoy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
A lot of the reason for circular firing squads is moral certainty or moral conviction. When one faction gets it into their head that they are morally right, they can then brook no contradiction. And when multiple or all factions feel that way, then it's circular firing squad time.

Another cause for it is the belief that the stakes are immensely high and that the consequences of not getting one's way are accordingly immensely dire as well. That also leads to people allowing no compromise.
Humans are evolved to be religious. What has happened as we have secularized is that politics has become the religion of the masses with all of the objective moral certitude that that entails. The danger is that politics is not institutionalized religion which typically has the advantage of centuries of institutional inertia and tradition behind it. It swings on a dime and is allowed to tear down things that were 'gospel' a few short years ago. Rather than an institutionalized religion, the 'religion' that we follow is essentially a series of cults. There is no need for internal consistency or appeal to higher authority. The cult itself is the authority and its only goal is the destruction of the heretic. The ideals themselves are merely tools to be used to advance the cult itself and can be discarded or ignored when convenient. Ideals that were sacred a decade ago can be derided as unvirtuous now. There is no middle, nor any moderation since that denies the fundamentalism of the cult itself. The only aim is to find the next prophet and tear down anyone that stands in his or her way.

Last edited by senoy; 04-17-2019 at 02:00 PM.
  #19  
Old 04-17-2019, 02:06 PM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 18,277
All I know, and what I suspect Obama was getting at, is that the real target of the Democratic party's marketing needs to be moderates- specifically the centrist moderates and ones who are maybe right-leaning a bit, and having a lot of party infighting over questions of ideological purity and the like is a good way to make yourselves look disunited and unorganized relative to the GOP goose-stepping along in lock-step.
  #20  
Old 04-17-2019, 02:08 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,170
Obama is about to learn that if there's anything the left cares about least, it's an ex-president who can no longer change the world. Obama is old news - just another privileged, male middle of the roader compared to the left's new loves like Ilhan Omar, Bernie, AOC, Rashida Tlaib and the rest of the far left wingnut caucus.

These days Nancy Pelosi is starting to look like Reagan as she tries to tamp down the far left in her party and recover some possibility of electoral success in 2020.
  #21  
Old 04-17-2019, 02:25 PM
Shodan is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 39,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
Obama is about to learn that if there's anything the left cares about least, it's an ex-president who can no longer change the world. Obama is old news - just another privileged, male middle of the roader compared to the left's new loves like Ilhan Omar, Bernie, AOC, Rashida Tlaib and the rest of the far left wingnut caucus.
One of the advantages/disadvantages Hilary had was that she and Bill had the Democratic party by the balls - not because Bill was so prestigious, but because he had raised so much money that they couldn't afford to say No to Hilary.

Now Trump has raised $30 million, much of it from small donors. That's something like three times as much as Sanders, and Trump won't have to spend nearly as much in the primaries. Also more than Obama raised in the first quarter of 2007.

Of course, Hilary spent a billion dollars on her campaign and lost. But that was to Trump, and now he is the incumbent.

Regards,
Shodan
  #22  
Old 04-17-2019, 02:25 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Bernie Sanders himself attacked ThinkProgress the other day for reasons that seemed pretty trivial to me.
Seems like a reasonable thing to point out, yet thin-skinned Bernie called it a bad-faith smear.
I haven't been Bernie's biggest supporter (though I'm starting to come around) but I get what he's complaining about. Look, the fact is that he's a political megastar now and I think he's accepted that. His success and wealth don't fundamentally change his message. And I don't think people with simply 1 or 2 million in the bank were really ever his target. It's the billionaire class, the plutocrats, the ones who have disproportionate influence that he's after. And it's not as though he hates them, he just wants them to pay more for things that the rest of us could and should have in a nation that's this wealthy.
  #23  
Old 04-17-2019, 02:28 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,312
I remember making fun of the far-right (I thought at the time) Trump factionists, and his seemingly poor fundraising at times, and his supposedly tiny chances in 2016... I'm amazed that anyone still thinks they have any right to confidence as to which candidates in a large and diverse field are likely to win, and stronger in the general election.

Cheers to your confidence, and I'll treat it in the same way I should have treated my own confidence in 2016!
  #24  
Old 04-17-2019, 02:35 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,170
No, you make a good point, and I just said the same thing in another thread. Alberta just got over its four year nightmare because four years ago the right splintered and split all its votes in the belief that the NDP could never be elected in Alberta. We paid a heavy price for that, to the tune of over 100,000 jobs and 60 billion dollars of debt.

Three years ago, the media gave Trump huge coverage because he looked to be about the worst face of the Republican Party, and it backfired.

In the age of social media, it seems anyone can be elected if the stars align just right.

Last edited by Sam Stone; 04-17-2019 at 02:37 PM.
  #25  
Old 04-17-2019, 03:15 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 41,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
Obama is about to learn that if there's anything the left cares about least, it's an ex-president who can no longer change the world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
Of course the Democratic idol worship of Obama would do him in. Or would it?
We don't care at all about Obama. We idol worship Obama.

Talk amongst yourselves.

Meanwhile, in the real world where we actually live, there is a robust argument among the center-left and the left. Both sides generally credit Obama with intelligence, more honesty than yer average politician, and personal decency. The left criticizes him on issues ranging from immigration policy to drone strikes to timidity on health care reform, while the center-left sees all these positions as pragmatic.

If there's a circular firing squad, people like Nancy Pelosi need to quit firing on the left, need to come together with us to take action. She needs to quit dividing the left by denigrating our policies as unfeasible and denigrating our politicians' wins by saying a glass of water could've won their districts.

But of course I don't expect her to do so, because she holds her beliefs sincerely, and she is of course doing her job by expressing those sincere beliefs. I might think she's wrong, but I don't in any way begrudge her from holding up her end of the debate.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimera View Post
To me the biggest turn-off to Bernie Sanders has been his followers. They seem to think that insulting and attacking every other Democrat and their supporters will gain them support. But you're not going to insult me into voting for Bernie.
#notallBerniesupporters
  #26  
Old 04-17-2019, 04:15 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Oh, I see plenty of Bernie Sanders followers with their knives out for Beto.

Sanders followers are accusing Biden of being a creepy pedophile.

We need to keep this Issue based and Sanders needs to keep a leash on his supporters.

All he needs to do is make a public statement to that effect.
  #27  
Old 04-17-2019, 05:10 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Sanders followers are accusing Biden of being a creepy pedophile.

We need to keep this Issue based and Sanders needs to keep a leash on his supporters.

All he needs to do is make a public statement to that effect.
My opinion of Sanders would certainly go up if he were to do that.

I'd be surprised if he did, though. Doesn't seem to be his style.


(my emphasis)
  #28  
Old 04-17-2019, 06:21 PM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
My opinion of Sanders would certainly go up if he were to do that.

I'd be surprised if he did, though. Doesn't seem to be his style.


(my emphasis)
Something like this?

Quote:
Shortly before he gave speeches launching his 2020 campaign earlier this month, Bernie Sanders emailed his supporters, urging them to “do our very best to engage respectfully with our Democratic opponents—talking about the issues we are fighting for, not about personalities or past grievances. I want to be clear that I condemn bullying and harassment of any kind and in any space.”
  #29  
Old 04-17-2019, 06:38 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
Something like this?
With you I'm never sure but you did read the title of your article, right?
  #30  
Old 04-17-2019, 06:53 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
Obama is about to learn that if there's anything the left cares about least, it's an ex-president who can no longer change the world.
Meh, the declining influence of ex-presidents is in no way specific to "the left". It's not like Republicans these days give any shits about what the ex-Presidents Bush have to say.

In fact, Obama arguably remains far more influential and listened-to among progressives in general---including European progressives, who tend to be considerably to the left of American ones---than either President Bush is among today's conservatives. Look at the rock-star reception he got at the Berlin event mentioned in the OP, for example.
  #31  
Old 04-17-2019, 06:55 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
With you I'm never sure but you did read the title of your article, right?
Seriously. And the attack dog Sanders hired, David Sirota, deserves his nickname:

Quote:
When people have questioned his tactics, Sirota has called them “mentally incapacitated.” Responding in mid-January to those who criticized him online for preemptively railing against the record of O’Rourke, who had not yet entered the race but had been a huge source of concern for Sanders allies since talk of O’Rourke’s potential presidential run picked up last year, Sirota tweeted, “The screaming temper tantrums by Democratic Party operatives whenever reporters scrutinize a lawmaker’s voting record is something to behold. These people quite literally hate democracy.”

At another point, he said his critics “are deranged and/or running a deliberate disinfo campaign.” “Positively unhinged,” he wrote about them a separate time.

...None of those comments can be found online anymore. On Monday night, after being contacted for a second time by The Atlantic with a list of specific questions about his undisclosed work for Sanders, Sirota did not respond to the email but deleted more than 20,000 tweets. He left fewer than 200 online.
(from your link)

Nice that Sanders sent a 'be civil' email one time. But his choice to hire Sirota tells the real story.

I wish Bernie Sanders would reconsider his decision to proceed with his campaign this way. I suspect he loses more adherents than he gains, when he empowers a genuine bully like Sirota.
  #32  
Old 04-17-2019, 06:57 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,170
Republicans have this philosophy (started by Reagan and Bush) that ex-presidents should stay out of politics as a form of noblesse oblige to the next president, who they felt should not be burdened by being second-guessed by ex presidents. The Bush family in particular felt strongly about this. The Democrats have not felt the same way.
  #33  
Old 04-17-2019, 06:59 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
But of course I don't expect her to do so, because she holds her beliefs sincerely, and she is of course doing her job by expressing those sincere beliefs. I might think she's wrong, but I don't in any way begrudge her from holding up her end of the debate.
This. I think it would be a great mistake for Democrats in general to abandon a robust willingness to disagree with and criticize one another. I don't say that some Democrats don't sometimes carry their combativeness too far, but even that is better than trying to impose a rigid ideological conformism where intra-party dissension is viewed as some form of treason.
  #34  
Old 04-17-2019, 07:02 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 35,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
This. I think it would be a great mistake for Democrats in general to abandon a robust willingness to disagree with and criticize one another. I don't say that some Democrats don't sometimes carry their combativeness too far, but even that is better than trying to impose a rigid ideological conformism where intra-party dissension is viewed as some form of treason.
We shall see. I'm just hoping you guys can hold it together for one freaking election before you fly apart into a civil war for control of the establishment. Don't, for the sake of the gods, allow this thing to spin out of control wrt progressives verse the establishment. I don't want to be sitting here after the next election stunned and talking about the Dems, once again snatching defeat from the slavering jaws of victory...
__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!
  #35  
Old 04-17-2019, 07:12 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
Republicans have this philosophy (started by Reagan and Bush) that ex-presidents should stay out of politics as a form of noblesse oblige to the next president
Not really. Reagan, for example, was quite politically active and vocal as an ex-president until the progression of his Alzheimer's made public life impossible:
Quote:
Reagan continued to speak publicly in favor of a line-item veto; the Brady Bill; a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget; and the repeal of the 22nd Amendment, which prohibits anyone from serving more than two terms as president. In 1992 Reagan established the Ronald Reagan Freedom Award with the newly formed Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation.
The elder Bush also remained politically active for years as an ex-president:
Quote:
On September 28, 1994, Bush said he was opposed to sending American troops to Haiti, citing his loss of confidence in President of Haiti Jean-Bertrand Aristide while speaking to business and civic leaders in Houston.

In an October 22, 1994 speech in Cancún, Mexico, Bush said history would vindicate him for not attempting to force Saddam Hussein out of power while in office [...]

In September 1995, Bush met with President of Vietnam Lê Đức Anh and party secretary Đỗ Mười in Vietnam. On September 2, Bush and his son George W. participated in a parade commemorating World War II in Fredericksburg, Texas, where the elder Bush reasoned the United States had become united in the aftermath of the attack on Pearl Harbor and stressed America would have to stay involved in world affairs to continue its unity.

On July 26, 1996, Bush met with Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole and pledged he would do everything in his power to aid in securing a victory for Dole in the upcoming presidential election. [...]

In February 1997, Bush endorsed the chemical weapon banning treaty supported by United States Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, saying the United States would need to approve the treaty ahead of the April deadline.
The younger Bush has stayed pretty quiet since leaving office, but by that time he was pretty universally regarded as an embarrassment to his party, in addition to not having anything very interesting to say anyway.

So nah, the idea that Republican ex-presidents have been "staying out of politics" out of some ideal of decorum is basically conservative spin.
  #36  
Old 04-17-2019, 07:12 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 41,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
We shall see. I'm just hoping you guys can hold it together for one freaking election before you fly apart into a civil war for control of the establishment.
But that's not what's happening. People are having the disagreement, and then when it counts, progressives are giving in to the demands of moderates. We're not flying apart.
  #37  
Old 04-17-2019, 07:15 PM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
Seriously. And the attack dog Sanders hired, David Sirota, deserves his nickname:

(from your link)

Nice that Sanders sent a 'be civil' email one time. But his choice to hire Sirota tells the real story.

I wish Bernie Sanders would reconsider his decision to proceed with his campaign this way. I suspect he loses more adherents than he gains, when he empowers a genuine bully like Sirota.
I didn't think it would change your mind. But since you posted that it would change your opinion, I thought I'd post it.

That whole issue with David Sirota was long and played out elsewhere. It's another instance of Bernie Sanders being unable to control things people do.

Bernie Sanders broadcast to everyone publicly that he'd like people to be civil. If that's all it took for people to behave the way other people want them to, then it was done.
  #38  
Old 04-17-2019, 07:16 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 35,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
But that's not what's happening. People are having the disagreement, and then when it counts, progressives are giving in to the demands of moderates. We're not flying apart.
Well, they can be pretty heated disagreements, but no, you aren't flying apart....yet. I worry that you might, with so crucial an election coming up. I'm not a Democrat, so I have very little to say about it (I can't even vote in the primaries in my state). I don't want progressives to give into the moderates, or moderates to give into the progressives...it's healthy for debate in a political party. I just don't want a civil war for the soul of the Democratic party when we all need you guys to present a united front and take back the presidency.
__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!
  #39  
Old 04-17-2019, 07:29 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
I'm just hoping you guys can hold it together for one freaking election before you fly apart into a civil war for control of the establishment. Don't, for the sake of the gods, allow this thing to spin out of control wrt progressives verse the establishment.
Well, it's not up to me personally. But this attitude is, once again, an example of the massive imbalance in expectations of rationality and integrity applied to the two sides of the political spectrum.

Republicans melt down into a toxic rat-king of cynical greed and cognitive dissonance, deliberately destabilizing the functioning of government as a self-serving power play under the banner of an ignorant malevolent buffoon, and you just shrug. Democrats engage in genuine principle- and policy-based intraparty disagreements that risk impairing liberal voter unity to even the slightest extent, and you scold vigorously about how irresponsible it would be for us not to "hold it together".

It is about time that non-Trumpist non-liberals stopped assuming that it's the unquestioned responsibility of the nation's concerned, rational, reality-based, public-service-minded Democratic "Mom" to protect the family from being destroyed by the delusional rampages of sociopathic looter Republican "Dad". Go straighten out the folks on your own side before you come bleating to us about how badly you need us to save you from the party that you allowed to lapse into such pathological dysfunction.
  #40  
Old 04-17-2019, 07:40 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
That whole issue with David Sirota was long and played out elsewhere. It's another instance of Bernie Sanders being unable to control things people do.
And then hiring them?
  #41  
Old 04-17-2019, 07:55 PM
Peter Morris's Avatar
Peter Morris is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The far canal
Posts: 12,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
SlackerInc, do you have any evidence that those "plenty of Bernie Sanders followers" are progressives, liberals, Democrats, or followers of Bernie Sanders? We should hold politicians responsible for what they say and do, not what is said or done by those who purport to follow them.
I know little of American politics. Bernie Sanders is a name I've heard, but I don't know what he stands for. I really can't tell you if any, some or most of Bernie Sanders followers are progressives, liberals or Democrats. However I can confirm that most Bernie Sanders followers are in fact followers of Bernie Sanders. Why are you doubting this point?
  #42  
Old 04-17-2019, 07:58 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 35,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Well, it's not up to me personally. But this attitude is, once again, an example of the massive imbalance in expectations of rationality and integrity applied to the two sides of the political spectrum.

Republicans melt down into a toxic rat-king of cynical greed and cognitive dissonance, deliberately destabilizing the functioning of government as a self-serving power play under the banner of an ignorant malevolent buffoon, and you just shrug. Democrats engage in genuine principle- and policy-based intraparty disagreements that risk impairing liberal voter unity to even the slightest extent, and you scold vigorously about how irresponsible it would be for us not to "hold it together".

It is about time that non-Trumpist non-liberals stopped assuming that it's the unquestioned responsibility of the nation's concerned, rational, reality-based, public-service-minded Democratic "Mom" to protect the family from being destroyed by the delusional rampages of sociopathic looter Republican "Dad". Go straighten out the folks on your own side before you come bleating to us about how badly you need us to save you from the party that you allowed to lapse into such pathological dysfunction.
See, it's posts like this that are the reason for threads like this, and the thought that 'we are all fucked'. My 'side'?? My 'side' is the weakest fucking part of YOUR FUCKING PARTY AND IS ALMOST NON-EXISTANT IN THE OTHER ONE. Jesus jumped on a cracker. You get all testy because some of us don't want you folks to rip yourselves apart for a crucial election, as you fucking have done in the past? If not for the fucking Bernie bros and all the butt hurt progressives and left wing loonies, WE WOULDN'T HAVE FUCKING TRUMP TO WORRY ABOUT RIGHT FUCKING NOW! Good grief. I did my part...I held my nose and voted for Hillary. So, yeah...we need you to man up and be 'mom' for the rest of us who can't control your continual infighting. If a request to keep it civil amounts to this, then 'we are all fucked' is probably going to be the term we use when Trump gets his second fucking term.
__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!

Last edited by XT; 04-17-2019 at 08:01 PM.
  #43  
Old 04-17-2019, 08:12 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,786
Quote:
Quoth Peter Morris:

However I can confirm that most Bernie Sanders followers are in fact followers of Bernie Sanders. Why are you doubting this point?
Because a large number of people purporting to be followers of Sanders, especially the loudest and most obnoxious ones, are actually in the employ of Vladimir Putin, and Sanders can therefore have no responsibility at all for what they say.
  #44  
Old 04-17-2019, 08:27 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
My 'side' is the weakest fucking part of YOUR FUCKING PARTY AND IS ALMOST NON-EXISTANT IN THE OTHER ONE.
Then it sounds like you have quite a bit more work to do on the "other one" to get it fit for participation in a rational society.

Quote:
Originally Posted by XT
If not for the fucking Bernie bros and all the butt hurt progressives and left wing loonies, WE WOULDN'T HAVE FUCKING TRUMP TO WORRY ABOUT RIGHT FUCKING NOW!
Pfft. You can make up any counterfactual scenarios you like, but the chief reason we have Trump to worry about is that Republicans made him their nominee and conservatives voted for him.

What you've got there is a blame-game equivalent of the old quip about the guy looking for his lost keys under the streetlight, not because that's where he lost them, but because that's where the light is. You're ripping into Democrats/liberals not because Democrats/liberals are actually the ones responsible for the Trump presidency, but because the other side is beyond the reach of rational argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by XT
I did my part...I held my nose and voted for Hillary.
Oh, I see, you get to indulge in a little adversarial "infighting" by making snarky remarks about the candidate you chose to vote for, but Democrats themselves mustn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by XT
So, yeah...we need you to man up and be 'mom'
Wow, you do oscillate pretty adroitly between sneering and begging. If you think the Democratic Party's actions are so desperately crucial, then join the Democratic Party and start doing some of the work (and voting in the primaries), instead of just ostentatiously bestowing the occasional "nose-holding" vote on a Democratic candidate in a general election.

If you're so against anti-Democratic "infighting" and hostile negativity among people more or less united by opposition to Trumpism, then stop engaging in them so much yourself.

Last edited by Kimstu; 04-17-2019 at 08:27 PM.
  #45  
Old 04-17-2019, 08:36 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 35,320
Sigh. I probably stepped over the line there. It's very frustrating and more than a bit scary that I have to rely on the Dems to hold shit together to ensure Trump doesn't get another term.

Anyway, I'm not opposed to the party hashing stuff out for itself and debating, even heatedly, the direction they should go. It's there party. I just don't want to see another repeat of the last election. It's not 'counterfactual' that a lot of voters that voted for Obama didn't vote for Hillary...many didn't vote at all. And many, mainly deluded blue collar types, voted for freaking Trump. And I think a lot of it has to do with this same in-fighting that happened last time. Many on this board basically said that it was Bernie or no one, or that they couldn't stomach Hillary. Many of my own progressive or left leaning friends either didn't vote or voted green. If you think this is 'counterfactual' then I don't know where you were during the lead up to the last election. Sure, the Republicans are to blame for nominating Trump, but nomination doesn't equal getting the presidency...he had to win the election, and, he did. Even if you think it was mainly anyone else but the left wing/progressives, you have to acknowledge it had a non-zero effect or there is no point even talking because we are so far off there is no point.

If I'm engaging in 'negativity' it's because I see this spinning out the same way right now. This is the Dems real moment to move things back to some sanity. And, right now, they do seem to be holding it together. Maybe I'm just being overly pessimistic after the last ice cold shock of an election. Sorry for lashing out...I get a bit hot about this, but it's mainly fear.
__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!
  #46  
Old 04-17-2019, 09:04 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
It's there party. I just don't want to see another repeat of the last election.
Can't blame you for that, but ISTM that you are engaging here in the same type of counterproductive "purity" obsession that you complain of in progressives.

You're saying that the Democrats are the only hope for "holding shit together" to avoid (further) catastrophic consequences of Republican dysfunction, but at the same time you're resolutely keeping aloof and declaring that the Democrats are "not your party". Why is it any more excusable for you to do that than for some left-wing Democratic-Socialist type to do that?

If you think that what we need is more Democratic unity, okay then, how about you join the party and help provide some? You're allowed to leave as soon as you think the crisis is over, you know; we don't require folks to be branded on the forehead with a permanent scarlet "D" or anything.

But if your own ideologically pure political affiliation is by your own admission not providing any realistic path to electoral success, then maybe it's time to stop kibitzing from the sidelines and actually carry a little water for the only affiliation that currently does provide one.
  #47  
Old 04-17-2019, 09:04 PM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 8,774
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
... It's very frustrating and more than a bit scary that I have to rely on the Dems to hold shit together to ensure Trump doesn't get another term.
....
It's a terrible burden that you observe from another perspective. Sounds rough. Condolences, thoughts and prayers, what have you.
  #48  
Old 04-17-2019, 09:13 PM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,764
Without getting too much into my personal history, I will say that I've the mentality up close and personal. Folks that would rather go down in flames than settle for half a loaf. Spoiler alert: They usually go down in flames.
  #49  
Old 04-17-2019, 09:57 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,557
Trivia Question: What do Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin have in common?

Answer: Had the votes for Jill Stein all gone to Hillary, these three states would have gone for Hillary, who would have then become the 45th President of the U.S.A. (OTOH, Trump would have won New Mexico, Colorado, Maine, New Hampshire, Minnesota and Nevada (and PA, MI, WI back again) if he had the Gary Johnson votes.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
With you I'm never sure but you did read the title of your article, right?
Or just the name of the URL! Thanks to CarnalK's post, I clicked to the article. Shameful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
... If I'm engaging in 'negativity' it's because I see this spinning out the same way right now. This is the Dems real moment to move things back to some sanity. And, right now, they do seem to be holding it together. Maybe I'm just being overly pessimistic after the last ice cold shock of an election. Sorry for lashing out...I get a bit hot about this, but it's mainly fear.
I'm also afraid of Trump re-election. You're one of the good ones, XT. It's a shame that the dinbats who voted for Stein and Brnie Brats who didn't bother to vote at all are humored while you, a Hillary voter, are criticized.
  #50  
Old 04-17-2019, 11:35 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
Something like this?

Could be better and needs to be said louder and more often, but the rest of the article isnt good news.

Last edited by DrDeth; 04-17-2019 at 11:36 PM.
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 06:38 AM.

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