Yes, it would be more polite and seemly if they had screwed America into the ground by strictly legal means. But then we would have threads clutching pearls about the delicate and cowardly Dems failing their duty, and the concern thereby provoked.
OK, check. What’s the next step?
Hahahaha. “The adult in the room”? According to whom? Other Democrats? Elected Democrats have been half of the problem in Washington, DC, and state capitals. Currently, it’s the elected Democrats who have been resisting government legislation for the last two years. No compromise. Do it our way, or no way. Now Democrat voters are electing a new generation of haters who have no intention of following the old fashion, business-as-usual, vote-in-lock-step Democrat Party regulars, or their financial backers. The next two years of legislation will be filled with impeachment claims, firearm bans, promises of more free stuff paid for by the taxpayers, and in-fighting between the old and young Democrats in the House. May we live in interesting times.
I think it would be a bad plan for the Democrats. Not just from a moral standpoint but also for political reasons.
The Democrats currently go high while the Republicans go low. As a result, the Democrats pick up one group of voters while the Republicans pick up another.
If the Democrats tried to also go low, they would lose their current supporters. And they would be competing with the Republicans for the other group. And the Republicans are much more experienced at going low than the Democrats would be.
The Democrats shouldn’t try to go low. Instead, they should stick with going high while educating voters on why going high is a better way.
Reality. However much you refuse to acknowledge it.
I will simply dismiss as not grounded in reality any thread that starts with the assertion that Harry Reid, D-NV was acting as the “adult in the room”. Harry Reid was many things, but the level-headed type who won’t stoop to partisan shenanigans as needed to advance an agenda was not one of them. Or has the OP forgotten who started the war on the filibuster (among other things)?
I will also simply dismiss as not grounded in reality the attempt by the OP to cast the Republican Party as a whole as a teeming mass of temper-tantrum-throwing assholes who refuse to be “adult” in their approach to politics. That sort of dismissive “we’re better than you” attitude by “liberals” is a prime example of what is causing the problem in the first place. SOME Republicans are acting that way, but so are SOME Democrats, and that’s always been true.
You can dismiss reality all day long, but it remains real, as confirmed by the scientific method, e.g.:
[ul]
[li]Hypothesis: The Republican Party is not a teeming mass of temper-tantrum-throwing assholes who refuse to be “adult” in their approach to politics[/li][li]Prediction: The Republican Party will act quickly and decisively to bring Donald J. Trump to heel and either make him act like a President instead of a village idiot, or else render him irrelevant.[/li][li]Observation: The Prediction is not borne out.[/li][li]Conclusion: The Hypothesis is false.[/li][/ul]
AIUI what you need is some proof that one or more laws have been broken, and that the entity (person/persons/organization) in question may have been the one who broke said laws. The case goes to a grand jury that decides whether there’s enough evidence to proceed.
Then and only then is the entity prosecuted.
It’s very interesting, the correlation between the Dopers arguing against Democrats having BEEN the adults in the room for the last decade, at least, and the people voting “yes” to the “Hillary should run again” poll in the other thread…apparently, even the “smart” Republicans (i.e., the ones who hang around here) are completely divorced from reality.
I can’t speak to Rashida Tlaib, with whom I am not familiar.
But I think what we’re seeing with AOC is not a “tantrum-throwing toddler” but a serious progressive who exploits social media well. She’s not quite the FDR of our age, but she is someone with very populist politics and a very strong sense of how to use the media. (No tantrums yet!) That’s a good thing.
Steve Bannon, if nothing else an exemplar of trumpist “thinking”, said “They (Dems) go for the pillow fight, we go for the head wound. The head wound beats the pillow fight every time.”
Dems do need to be able to go “bare knuckles” when the occasion calls for it. (Hell, even brass knuckles.) But should try to do so in a fashion that decries the necessity for doing so and expresses the hope for a return to times when such tactics weren’t made necessary.
The assertion that the only possible way for the Republican Party to act if it is not a “teeming mass of tantrum-throwing …” is to “act quickly and decisively to bring …” is simply a false dichotomy. You prove nothing with such sophistry.
Not much point in being the adult in the room when the kid is psycho and can send you to the cornfield.
Yup, that was an incredibly silly argument.
And yet, they cannot act “quickly or decisively” to end a pointless government shutdown over a point of pique of Trump. So, what is your point, exactly?
In praise of Pip…
Stranger
Do you remember why that was a thing? Just curious.
The entire republican party is currently enabling Donald Trump. We’re currently in the midst of a government shutdown that he promises could go on “months or years” if we do not give him the incredibly stupid wall he wants (which he promised mexico would pay for). This is entirely on Trump and McConnell. Which republicans have stood up and said, “this is not okay and needs to stop”? Which republicans have been willing to actually do something about this mess? Oh, fucking nobody? That’s kind of telling.
Your house is not in order.
Last I checked, Velocity is not some bleeding-heart liberal; he is or at least was a republican. This is not a democrat painting the democrats as the adults in the room. This is a republican doing that. And I can’t blame him; all it takes to come to that conclusion is five seconds looking at the Trump administration.
Maybe the democrats aren’t the adults in the room. But since the Trump administration, we’re certainly at least the teenaged babysitter dealing with a screaming, ADHD toddler. Your comparison is absurd, honestly. The current republican party is completely dysfunctional from top to bottom. And the worst part is, it’s only going to get worse. So far, most republicans in congress are at least old enough to where they remember a time before the right wing media sphere existed. But we’re going to be coming up on a generation of republican politicians who have never been outside that bubble. People who aren’t the conmen, but rather the marks in the big Fox News scam. And that’s terrifying, because if partisanship keeps up the way it is, we’re going to end up with a generation of policymakers who don’t just have to swear fealty to the portion of the base that’s utterly disconnected from reality, but who belong to that portion.
The current Republican party consists almost entirely* of people who try to get the screaming ADHD toddler to be quiet for a moment by giving him toys and candy and ice cream and whatnot – in other words, people who refuse to be adult in their approach, to borrow a phrase from my spot-on analysis.
*The exceptions are virtually powerless and are in the process of being completely purged, and are thus irrelevant to the question of assessing the party’s character.
If I found some quotes by bleeding-heart liberals saying that the Democrats were behaving badly, would that convince you it is so?
Seeing as you seem to have read my post, would you care to respond to the substance of it? 
Because if we’re just throwing out fallacies, I’m just going to offer the fallacy fallacy and be on my way. Pointing out that Velocity was not a liberal was a response to this:
That sort of dismissive “we’re better than you” attitude by “liberals” is a prime example of what is causing the problem in the first place.
In case that wasn’t clear in my last post.
What do you see as the “substance” of your post?