OT: Anonymous NYT op-ed

User Forum Topic
Submitted by zk on September 6, 2018 - 8:56am

The anonymous op-ed that was published yesterday in the New York Times seems to be being taken at face value.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/opini...

Most of the commentary about it centers on who might have written it or whether the person who wrote it is a coward or a hero or whether this person would more effectively help our country by identifying himself and resigning or whether the 25th amendment should be invoked. Or a few other things.

But I have yet to see any reporting or commentary that asks the question, "is the purpose of this commentary really to let us know there are adults in the room and that there is a resistance?"

I don't think that's the purpose of it. At least not with the stated motivation of protecting our country from trump.

I think it's pretty obvious that almost everyone around the president has known for quite some time (probably since before the election) that he is dangerously inadequate for the job. And, being cowardly or selfish or both, they have been pretending he's fine (or even a great leader) so that they could keep him in power (not just actually keep him as president, but keep him in a position of real power). That way they can keep giving their donors tax cuts and get their conservative judges and keep republicans in power in general.

With the blue wave looking bigger and bigger, they can see the end of that road. If democrats take the house, trump won't get anything done the rest of his presidency. Partly because he won't have a congressional majority and partly because of all the investigations that will ensue.

They're also no doubt aware that there's a very good chance that Mueller's report will contain information so damaging that, if it becomes public, at least 2/3 of the senate will be forced to vote to remove trump to avoid going down in history as the most cowardly, partisan, selfish, horrible-for-the-country politicians in the history of this great country (if they aren't going down as such already).

So they're looking for a way to extend their power past this November. Because, as it stands right now, that's the end for them. For a long time. As more and more information about trump's incredible incompetence and ignorance and corruptness and foolishness and childishness and laziness and vindictiveness and selfishness and (oh, I could go on) comes to light, republicans know that they'll be looked at as pathetic, cowardly, ridiculous enablers of this fool. And people won't trust (nor vote for) republicans for a long, long time.

How do they get out of that predicament? Why, they just claim that they knew trump was a dangerous fool all along and only kept him in office because "no one wanted to precipitate a constitutional crisis." (More cowardly and disingenuous words have rarely been written.)

What I think they're really hoping for is to turn back the blue wave in one of two ways: One, to mitigate the concerns about trump held by (semi-) reasonable republican voters and independents and other potential republican voters. Or two, to push congress (or the cabinet) to act on removing trump now.

If the blue wave happens, they're screwed no matter what happens to trump. But if they can convince voters that they're not enabling trump but, rather, heroically protecting our nation, they figure maybe they can prevent the blue wave. And maybe, while they're at it, they can get pence in there. Then they would have at least 2 more years of power and maybe 6 years or even more.

Sure, it's a desperate gamble. But this is a desperate time for them. And the payoff could be massive.

Don't fall for it. Republicans ARE, in fact, dangerous enablers of a dangerous, corrupt, ignorant fool. And voting republican this November will keep this country on this dangerous path.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on September 6, 2018 - 5:05pm.

I wonder how people who enabled Trump have a self respect. They know what they did.
I knew the establishment is trying to protect Trump so we don’t look like a Banana Republic. But the stuff that Trump did maybe so bad that we’ll have to put him on trial after he’s out of office

Submitted by outtamojo on September 6, 2018 - 5:18pm.

My take away is people are fine with making a deal with the devil if the devil is on their side.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on September 6, 2018 - 11:23pm.

i will make devil deals even if he is opposing party. im pretty sure i could do better than spicer or sanders.

Submitted by zk on September 7, 2018 - 9:13am.

Evidence that my theory is correct. Right-wing rag "The Washington Examiner" is praising the anonymous op-ed in just the way you'd expect.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opini...

Submitted by flu on September 7, 2018 - 10:25am.

you really think there is a massive blue wave?

Stats say that when then economy is humming along, incumbent party stays in control. Thus far, it doesn't seem the like the US economy has crashed and burned to the extent that BrianSD was predicting. About two more months until the midterms, it doesn't seem like that is going to happen beforehand.

That's why all the talk from the blue side and blue leaning media avoids talking about the economy. Me thinks for most people , it's good.

I think outside of the blue states like CA, most of the rest of the country only really care about 1 thing. Jobs.

I mean what counter pitch can blue candidates make? We need to increase taxes to pay for more benefits? How would this win if the economy is doing alright and unemployment is at a low and most people are working and we finally have some wage growth now, as reported by the same system that's been used even before this administration?

I don't think Americans on the fence will change their vote simply because someone at the oval office is a dispicable person. And unfortunately, those most affected by this administration can't vote (at least not legally).

The funny part is all this thing about peotective tariffs , curbing H1Bs, making more in US, and punishing businesses that outsource overseas is not typically something that comes out of the GOP. It's something that normally comes out of unions and the Democrats.....the most vocal about foreign competition and anti-"free trade" were all the labor unions and workers losing their manufacturing jobs ..... So from their prospective, I don't think things are worse. and I seriously doubt they care about some migrants plight at the hands of ICE.

That's why I think what most of the democrat party and the left leaning media trying to do is very ineffective. I think the only people that care about this administration's despicableness are the folks in blue states like CA and NY, who generally have had it good economically throughout the past few years who can afford to care more about the social issues, including migrants/immigrants/etc.... For the rest of middle america, most people are more concerned aboutjust putting food on the table.....That's why I think there's a pretty big disconnect with the current Democrat's party leadership. Barking up the wrong tree...imho.

The democrat party probably won't win by a landslide and regain full control if it's trying to make the argument that some immigrant/migrant/foreigner should have the same economic rights/benefits as someone who is a citizen in america in desperate needs of those benefits....It has nothing to do about human decency, and has everything to do with human survival.. There are plenty of people in this country struggling and have been struggling for so long, they don't understand politicians that seem to more concerned about helping people that aren't even americans before helping them... That's a losing campaign... That's why they'll end up putting up with a despicable Trump versus any sort of polite, polished individual from the left championing migrant/immigrant/DACA rights..... Unlike some of us, who are more or less immune to the economic situation in the US........when you are struggling financially in America, you have no choice....
The issue about helping migrants/immigrants/DACA/etc has been positioned/perceived as a zero-sum game in which many americans feel they lose economically if those migrants/immigrants/DACA folks win economically. I don't agree that is really true, but a lot of people think that way. And so, for those people, obviously the care more about their own future than someone else's.... For that reason, I think some democrats still don't get that yet.

Just saying....

Submitted by zk on September 7, 2018 - 11:40am.

flu wrote:

you really think there is a massive blue wave?


Yes, I do. Well, maybe not massive, but big. Am I certain? Far from it.
flu wrote:

Stats say that when then economy is humming along, incumbent party stays in control.

Normally, maybe. This isn’t normal. I think you underestimate the energy on the left right now.

flu wrote:

That's why all the talk from the blue side and blue leaning media avoids talking about the economy. Me thinks for most people , it's good.

I think outside of the blue states like CA, most of the rest of the country only really care about 1 thing. Jobs.


I think you underestimate the voters. Progressives actually do care about other people. And about our society. And about the rule of law in this country.

flu wrote:

I mean what counter pitch can blue candidates make? We need to increase taxes to pay for more benefits? How would this win if the economy is doing alright and unemployment is at a low and most people are working and we finally have some wage growth now, as reported by the same system that's been used even before this administration?

I don't think Americans on the fence will change their vote simply because someone at the oval office is a dispicable person. And unfortunately, those most affected by this administration can't vote (at least not legally).


First off, it’s more than just trump being a despicable person. It’s the damage he’s causing to our society. It’s the feeling that we’re turning into a deplorable country with deplorable people led by a man not fit to pump gas. I think that’s more important to people than you think it is to them.

It's also about the rule of law in this country. Trump keeps trying to weaken the Department of Justice. Trying to weaken it and fill it with sycophants who will do his bidding instead of administering the rule of law.

And it’s not just fence-sitters who will be the change in this election. It will be the millions of people who sat on their ass last election but are now energized to vote to change the direction we’re going in.

I’d like to think people are smart enough to know that trump deserves almost no credit for the current state of the economy. And smart enough to realize that much of the money their grandchildren will earn in their lifetimes has already been given to rich people by trump. But that would be wishful thinking. In any case, I think there’s more energy out there on the left about congressional republican cowardice in the face of trump’s damaging ways than you seem to think there is.

flu wrote:

The funny part is all this thing about peotective tariffs , curbing H1Bs, making more in US, and punishing businesses that outsource overseas is not typically something that comes out of the GOP. It's something that normally comes out of unions and the Democrats.....the most vocal about foreign competition and anti-"free trade" were all the labor unions and workers losing their manufacturing jobs ..... So from their prospective, I don't think things are worse. and I seriously doubt they care about some migrants plight at the hands of ICE.

If tariffs usually come from the left, that does not mean that liberals would agree with the tariffs employed by trump. That would be like saying every hawk would want to nuke North Korea at the slightest provocation. There are tariffs and then there are tariffs which are just slapped on willy nilly to appeal to one’s base and which haven’t been thought through and which make no sense. Trump's tariffs are costing jobs in the long run.

flu wrote:

I seriously doubt they care about some migrants plight at the hands of ICE.


Why do you doubt that?

flu wrote:

That's why I think what most of the democrat party and the left leaning media trying to do is very ineffective. I think the only people that care about this administration's despicableness are the folks in blue states like CA and NY, who generally have had it good economically throughout the past few years who can afford to care more about the social issues, including migrants/immigrants/etc.... For the rest of middle america, most people are more concerned aboutjust putting food on the table.....That's why I think there's a pretty big disconnect with the current Democrat's party leadership. Barking up the wrong tree...imho.


The “left leaning media” are reporting the news.

The democratic party is a bunch of ineffectual fools.

The democratic voters see what’s happening to our country, and they don’t like it.

flu wrote:

The democrat party probably won't win by a landslide and regain full control if it's trying to make the argument that some immigrant/migrant/foreigner should have the same economic rights/benefits as someone who is a citizen in america in desperate needs of those benefits....It has nothing to do about human decency, and has everything to do with human survival..


That’s not the chief argument liberals are making. That might be what fox propaganda tells you is the chief argument that liberals are making. But it’s not.

flu wrote:

There are plenty of people in this country struggling and have been struggling for so long, they don't understand politicians that seem to more concerned about helping people that aren't even americans before helping them... That's a losing campaign... That's why they'll end up putting up with a despicable Trump versus any sort of polite, polished individual from the left championing migrant/immigrant/DACA rights..... Unlike some of us, who are more or less immune to the economic situation in the US........when you are struggling financially in America, you have no choice....
The issue about helping migrants/immigrants/DACA/etc has been positioned/perceived as a zero-sum game in which many americans feel they lose economically if those migrants/immigrants/DACA folks win economically. I don't agree that is really true, but a lot of people think that way. And so, for those people, obviously the care more about their own future than someone else's.... For that reason, I think some democrats still don't get that yet.

Again, you seem to have gotten the idea that the chief argument being made for voting democratic is immigration. Immigration is way, way down on the list. The chief reasons for voting democratic are to keep trump from destroying our society and our country. To prevent him from destroying the rule of law in this country and turning it into a fascist banana republic. To keep a dangerous, unstable fool from having his way.

You may think the economy matters to people above all, regardless of who should get credit for it. I disagree. I guess we'll see in two months.

Submitted by flu on September 7, 2018 - 12:10pm.

I didn't say every democrat is a fool, that was your choice of words interjected into my thoughts which couldn't be further from the truth.

and that's what exactly is happening . extreme view points. Many democrats and republicans are falling for it. no I don't watch fox news or breibart , and yet I disagree with your viewpoint you probably immediate think I do. I think many people in this country are just sick and tired about extremism from both parties. And me thinks a lot of democrats, have been pushed to the other side in as much as several republicans have been.

Plenty of moderates republicans still are left that don't agree with the rest of our party, but here you are labeling everyone the same.

we haven't learned anything for the past 12 years .

Anyway, I am just pointing out the polarization of our country that both parties have been responsible for something people can choose to understand and fix next time, or we can keep violently swinging back and forth like between one sided perspectives for a long long time.

there is a reason why everything happens. trump didn't win on a fluke. and no I didn't vote for him

just one tiny issue. I find it hard to believe that every democrat agree with affirmative action. I suspect many of them strongly disagree with it... However , how come the idea of AA reform has never been brought up by democrats? Could it be that every democrat is just going with the party flow, irrespective of how bad things have gotten for some? If so, how is that any different from a bunch of republicans just running off the cliff with Donald trump?

That's the problem with our political parties ... members often are so extreme same thing rehashed by s different party brand is viewed good bit from a different party is bad.

Just a few years ago, a lot of democrats were pushing Obama for protective tariffs. now that we have them, some of the same leaders are saying how horrible it is...

I am pretty much done on this subject . I don't want to get into a argument here. basically I have a feeling that trying to discuss this will you will end up on you calling me a dumb trumptard, despite me not liking him and not really supporting most of his policies except one.

It's usually how it goes when we get hell bent on party affiliation. Me? I couldnt give a shit about either party affiliation.

Peace.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on September 7, 2018 - 12:23pm.

I am a Democrat and I believe the new divide is nationalism vs globalism.
I’m for an society built on knowledge and open to the world.
Republican nationalists are just retrograde. Trump is damaging our standing and influence around the world.

Yuval Harari had a nice talk about this.
https://youtu.be/szt7f5NmE9E

Submitted by zk on September 7, 2018 - 12:43pm.

flu wrote:

I didn't say every democrat is a fool, that was your choice of words interjected into my thoughts which couldn't be further from the truth.

I didn’t say those were your words. (Nor did I think I implied that they were.) Those were my words. And I should have been more specific. I didn’t mean every democrat. I meant the democratic party (not every single one of them, but most in general) – the DNC and the senators and the congressmen, etc.

flu wrote:

and that's what exactly is happening . extreme view points. Many democrats and republicans are falling for it. no I don't watch fox news or breibart , and yet I disagree with your viewpoint you probably immediate think I do.

I didn’t guess that you watch fox because you disagree with me. In fact, all we’ve disagreed on so far is whether there will be a blue wave and why.

I guessed you watch fox because you seem to think that immigration is progressives’ chief concern. Fox (and a lot of right-wing media) seems to think that, and really no one else does.

flu wrote:

I think many people in this country are just sick and tired about extremism from both parties. And me thinks a lot of democrats, have been pushed to the other side in as much as several republicans have been.

Plenty of moderates republicans still are left that don't agree with the rest of our party, but here you are labeling everyone the same.

we haven't learned anything for the past 12 years .


What? Where am I labelling everyone the same?
flu wrote:

Anyway, I am just pointing out the polarization of our country that both parties have been responsible for something people can choose to understand and fix next time, or we can keep violently swinging back and forth like between one sided perspectives for a long long time.


I don’t think that’s happening right now is a polarization of conservative vs. progressive views. I think what’s happening right now is polarization about an unfit leader. Most of the energy among progressives right now isn’t about conservative issues (except maybe the tax cuts for the rich). Most of it is about trump.

flu wrote:

just one tiny issue. I find it hard to believe that every democrat agree with affirmative action. I suspect many of them strongly disagree with it... However , how come the idea of AA reform has never been brought up by democrats? Could it be that every democrat is just going with the party flow, irrespective of how bad things have gotten for some? If so, how is that any different from a bunch of republicans just running off the cliff with Donald trump?


Come on, flu. You’re really comparing going with the flow on AA vs. going with the flow on trump? AA is an important issue. (I’m against AA, as I’ve said on these pages before). But to compare it with the national emergency that is Donald trump is absurd.

flu wrote:

That's the problem with our political parties ... members often are so extreme same thing rehashed by s different party brand is viewed good bit from a different party is bad.

And on an issue like affirmative action, or something equally important (which is to say, relative to the issue of trump, not that important), one can expect that to happen. It’s unfortunate, but it’s not the end of the world. Trump, on the other hand, could be.

flu wrote:

Just a few years ago, a lot of democrats were pushing Obama for protective tariffs. now that we have them, some of the same leaders are saying how horrible it is...


Again, just because you’re for one tariff doesn’t mean you’re for all of them. A poorly-thought out tariff which exists solely for political purposes and which actually costs Americans jobs is not the same as a well-designed one which is designed for (and serves) an economic purpose.
flu wrote:

I am pretty much done on this subject . I don't want to get into a argument here. basically I have a feeling that trying to discuss this will you will end up on you calling me a dumb trumptard, despite me not liking him and not really supporting most of his policies except one.

Wow. Not sure where that came from. If you show yourself to be a dumb trumptard, I will call you one. If you don’t, I won’t. I defy you to find a single instance of me calling anyone a name in all of my history on this forum who I can’t show you exactly where they earned it with their own writing.

flu wrote:

It's usually how it goes when we get hell bent on party affiliation. Me? I couldnt give a shit about either party affiliation.

I don’t care about either party, either. I care about our country. I’ll be voting democrat this November because I care about our country and I think trump needs to be corralled. Not because I have any affection for democrats, but because they’re the ones who will corral trump.

Submitted by bubba99 on September 7, 2018 - 12:54pm.

Implied in the blue wave arguments is that the democratic party is a cohesive group with shared ideals. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Kavanaugh confirmation may illustrate that point. Many democrats are pro abortion, but many will vote to confirm pro life Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh is very pro business, while the democrats are supposed to be pro worker - but many will vote for confirmation because it is good for their election, not the party. We see the same in immigration, banking, et. al. Even if the democrats get the house, my guess is that they will squander the majority with infighting.

Submitted by flu on September 7, 2018 - 2:57pm.

actually, the reason I thought a lot of democrats care about immigration is because I read CNN.com and just about every day there are tons of "analysis" on page one about immigration, DACA, trump, russia....and how this administration is racist against minorities, black and Latinos....

opinion pieces like Obama is just what Democrats need. Or Democrats need to redefine what progressive means...
Or Opinion: anonymous is a hero.

or how California needs rent control. or how California needs legislation to restrict kids meals to not include any drinks other than water or milk.

Somewhere between the lines, I still can find news articles that report on current events like the cnn I use to know beyond just everything wrong with the trump administration, which we all know about.....factual only articles like how the justice dept sided with the Asian American lawsuit against Harvard buried on page 3.

just saying....

Submitted by FlyerInHi on September 7, 2018 - 3:43pm.

Flu, so on the one hand people like Republicans/incumbents because the economy is good; and on the other hand, they are economically suffering? Which is it?

Also, refugees are perfectly legal. The way you dismiss the struggles of poor immigrants shows the moral bankruptcy of the right. Where are the kindness, the compassion?

You should read the New York Times and the Washington Post. They are the Harvard and Princeton of newspapers.

Submitted by flu on September 7, 2018 - 4:48pm.

Look at this way.

In elections there are 3 groups of people...

There are the people that are solid right that will always vote Republican, no matter what.

There are the people that are solid blue that will always vote democrat no matter what.

Neither of them will really decide the outcome of an election.

The only votes that really matter are the swing votes that could go either way....

Lets consider Trump's win... How did the trump administration convince so many people in this country to vote for Trump, despite Obama being a decent person , the Obama administration not being terrible, the country not be that bad off as a whole, and Hillary not really being that bad either?

The administration capitalized on a lot of people that were ecobomically left behind, and painted a picture that the previous administration did nothing about it, and it was far more interested in helping other people out then them. I I suspect many people think Trump is a horrible person, and don't completely agree with most of what he says and does...But they still voted for him...because they promised to make their situation better. Make America Great Again....

And everything that had been happening, to a layman who doesn't understand the global economy, doesn't understand how trade works etc, bought into all this that this administration so far has delivered on...

*curb immigration and illegals because doing so, you will do better economically

*tariffs, because they will protect your job

*repeal Obamacare because it's costing you afortune and doesn't help you

*tax reform, becuase you will benefit more from a standard deduction

Now, add a relatively decent performing stock market, good employment numbers and wage growth as reported today, add a few stories about US companies hiring more, and a president that goes on record telling people to boycott Harley Davidson because they are sending jobs overseas....this id the perfect narrative that a person in middle America wants to hear. yes they think their financial situation will get better because of this... And these are mostly all the swing voters that decided the presidential election.

What sort of story can the democratic party put into these voters mind to convince them otherwise than stay the course? Care about DACA, immigrants, and I dare say Russia meddling? I don't think so.... In fact some people might even think russian meddling was good if it put trump in office which ended up helping them financially.... I know it's crazy, but it is what it is....

You see ZK...you and I are probably in a completely different world from a lot of these middle Americans.... you retired early...Im close to retiring.

neither of us will be drastically affected economically no matter who is in charge. we don't need to worry about how to put food on the table, or paying medical bills, etc. the majority of other middle Americans aren't so lucky....they have no choice. and so they will gladly trade off anything else if it means their survival is at stake. If you were in this situation and had a choice between letting your family starve or supporting and adminstration that promises to make you whole by taking away benefits from someone else, most of us would do the exact same thing.

The democratic party ,I am afraid, had not offered a compelling alternative yet to these swing voters, as disgusting as some of the things trump administration had done or proposed to do... And the current economy had not gone worse significantly to convince this swing voters that an alternative path is necessary....and part of this is just due to sheer luck that our economy has not fallen apart yet and probably won't all the way to the mid term elections.

If the economy did fall apart before the midterm, there would be a point of blame, there could be a story about the reason why things are bad is because of this administration, and the democrats would have the opportunity to propose an alternative path that swing voters could be convinced might be helpful versus the current one, that has failed ... Unfortunately, that opportunity just doesn't exist yet imho

Submitted by FlyerInHi on September 7, 2018 - 9:17pm.

Actually it was about 70000 voters in 3 states that won Trump the elections.

There are no wild swings to both extremes as some like to put it.

Look at is this way. Several salient points:
1. Liberals vote less to begin with.
2. But notwithstanding voting proportionately less, liberals always get more total votes but proportionally less total representation.
3. The political system is structurally rigged in favor of rural areas and less populated states.
4. even though liberals have the majority, they are structurally disadvantaged and frequently end up in the political minority.
5. So the divisions in society are because the right has assymetrical power and feels arrogantly forever entitled to it.
6. The political system is structurally flawed and subverts democracy. If we want a real democracy, we would reform the system to really provide one man/woman, one vote. And we would make voting mandatory, or increase turnout to 90% or more.

The above points are objective and factual. We are not as democratic as we may like to think. And in addition to structural problems, we have rigged campaign finance laws, voter suppression and the like.

Submitted by zk on September 8, 2018 - 10:14am.

flu wrote:

If you were in this situation and had a choice between letting your family starve or supporting and adminstration that promises to make you whole by taking away benefits from someone else, most of us would do the exact same thing.


Well, the key word here is “promises.” Only if I believed those promises would I vote for such an administration. Although I think “fell for” would describe it better in this case. And I don’t think nearly as many people would fall for what trump is saying if he didn’t have a massive propaganda operation behind him.
flu wrote:

The democratic party ,I am afraid, had not offered a compelling alternative yet to these swing voters

The democratic party hasn’t offered anything “compelling” to anyone in decades. I guess "hope and change" was mildly interesting, but it was quite vague and not really all that grand. Hillary, as brilliant and tough as she is, had pretty much zero vision. Part of the problem is that people want a great and compelling vision from their candidates when, in reality, any great and compelling vision is most likely a bunch of bs. So a candidate (or a party) has to choose between 1) selling a grand, compelling, bullshit vision or 2) plotting a course that will keep our country and our economy and our society on a steadily upward path. The democrats choose to sell the latter, and it just doesn’t sell.

Submitted by zk on September 8, 2018 - 10:34am.

flu wrote:
Look at this way.

In elections there are 3 groups of people...

There are the people that are solid right that will always vote Republican, no matter what.

There are the people that are solid blue that will always vote democrat no matter what.

Neither of them will really decide the outcome of an election.

The only votes that really matter are the swing votes that could go either way....

Actually, there's another group. The people who don't usually vote. And millions of those people are energized by their disgust with trump and with the republicans who enable him.

Submitted by flu on September 8, 2018 - 11:00am.

zk wrote:
flu wrote:

If you were in this situation and had a choice between letting your family starve or supporting and adminstration that promises to make you whole by taking away benefits from someone else, most of us would do the exact same thing.


Well, the key word here is “promises.” Only if I believed those promises would I vote for such an administration. Although I think “fell for” would describe it better in this case. And I don’t think nearly as many people would fall for what trump is saying if he didn’t have a massive propaganda operation behind him.
flu wrote:

The democratic party ,I am afraid, had not offered a compelling alternative yet to these swing voters

The democratic party hasn’t offered anything “compelling” to anyone in decades. I guess "hope and change" was mildly interesting, but it was quite vague and not really all that grand. Hillary, as brilliant and tough as she is, had pretty much zero vision. Part of the problem is that people want a great and compelling vision from their candidates when, in reality, any great and compelling vision is most likely a bunch of bs. So a candidate (or a party) has to choose between 1) selling a grand, compelling, bullshit vision or 2) plotting a course that will keep our country and our economy and our society on a steadily upward path. The democrats choose to sell the latter, and it just doesn’t sell.

"promises"... If you were suggesting a lot of desperate Americans were conned into a vision put on by this administration... Yes,I agree with you..... I think for a lot of us on piggs, for example, we probably can tell the difference that those tax cuts really benefit corporations more than individuals and especially for any of us in high tax states causes more damage than good, albeit it's more annoying that financially impacting people that are affected by this....

But the way I look at it, these were the same people that bought into "hope and change" and when change didn't happen , probably abandoned the democrat. Hillary didn't have much to bring to the table for these folks. Bernie Sanders would have been better. There would be no way in hell I would have voted for Bernie (my socialist alarm bells were going off) but at least he brought to the table very interesting ideas that was aimed at helping people and his vision was much more aligned to the greater good than either Hillary or Trump. I didn't quite follow what exactly happened, but my personal opinion was that I think the DNC sold out Bernie to try to get the first woman elected, but that's my personal opinion.

Anyway, you and I both understand the compelling economic vision of the party is b.s., but that's what sells votes. These people, they don't have a lot going for them, so hope is all they got.
I really don't think most of them.care about the plight of DACA or even migrant children, or if they do they care it's only on the surface or with lip servicr, If push comes to shove, and their economic situation is on the line, they won't care. I mean we've seen this before on a much larger scale in history...in Germany with Hitler, with millions of Jews persecuted, and no I don't think we are that much better these days, maybe a bit better but not much.

When a large mass of people get left behind, weird things happen. that mass islooking for someone else to blame and even of the truth is there, they don't want to believe it. Prior to that, the blame fell on "rich people , 1%" ...Now it's China, immigrants, illegals, etc. The democrat party failed in that it really should have taken this playbook of protective tarriff and played it. Now, regardless of how effective or not, people have the perception that Donald trump is trying to do "something" when no one else did....he gets credit for that, despite everything else wrong with his administration.and every blatant lie Sarah says between her teeth, and despite the extent of russian collusion... that's how desperate people are....

And we won't see any of the tarriff repercussions for some time, not before the midterms at least. Trump isn't dumb when it comes to these games. There are two outcomes. Trump is pulling on the tarriff onto China right now basically on chinda entire export to the US. The timing is calculated....If China concedes by itself and gives concessions (which imho won't happen) trump gets credit , stock market goes on a Rocket ship, and everyone is happy before the midterms.

If China resists (which I think it will), we will get some relatiation that might sink the stock markets in the short term....then some time in October , Trump throws China a large bone, an agreement is made, the markets take off again, and everyone is happy again before November.

Forget about what's actually in the contents of the trade agreement, most people whont bother to try to understand it ... just like the US-Mexico agreement that is suppose to replace Nafta... people will fall for it.

This is why i question the blue wave beyond already heavily blue states. What happens in CA and NY doesn't really matter in the same way that briansd's vote doesn't really matter. it's going to be a consistent blue regardless. hence useless vote...what matters are all the unsure votes or votes that can cross party lines...ironically people like me.

I'd say states like Michigan would be an indicator, given their heavy dependency on manufacturing...

Submitted by flu on September 8, 2018 - 11:08am.

zk wrote:
flu wrote:
Look at this way.

In elections there are 3 groups of people...

There are the people that are solid right that will always vote Republican, no matter what.

There are the people that are solid blue that will always vote democrat no matter what.

Neither of them will really decide the outcome of an election.

The only votes that really matter are the swing votes that could go either way....

Actually, there's another group. The people who don't usually vote. And millions of those people are energized by their disgust with trump and with the republicans who enable him.

maybe, and it can go both ways....

I really only started to care more about voting after CA politicians tried to bring back affirmative action....

Submitted by FlyerInHi on September 8, 2018 - 12:34pm.

Flu, you pretty much agree that Trump voters are dumb because they were conned.

At least Democrats expect “free stuff”, as is said in right-wing parlance, and sometimes they get it. Republican voters are more easily conned by identity politics, and they get screwed on economics. Not all, but the preponderance of Republicans. There has been much written about why they vote against their own interests.

Also, Flu, how does an undecided turned Republican vote in coastal California matter? Democratic votes matters more because they’re holding the fort. I now vote in Nevada and that sure matters.

I still think demographics are destiny. When Texas, Arizona, Nevada and Florida turn blue, we would have won the states that matter USA. It’s only a matter of time. Trump is accelerating that just like Pete Wilson did for California. There are always silver linings and unintended consequences.

The blue wave that I’m most excited about is Beto O’rourke. That reminds me to send him a check. Beto is cool. He can skate. He’s a White Obama, but not Harvard educated.
https://youtu.be/SwizfmPNrH8

Submitted by FlyerInHi on September 8, 2018 - 1:05pm.

Flu, btw, i agree with a lot in your latest post.

What will you do when Republicans want affirmative action for White university applicants?

Submitted by flu on September 8, 2018 - 2:38pm.

I wouldn't consider that trump voters are smarter or dumber than Obama voters that fell for "hope and change"....

After all , a lot of them voted for both...

I wouldn't equate a person's desperation to their intelligence or lack there of.

In all, it boils down to which party is more capable of manipulating the most vunerable in our country to sway votes their way. The strategy and tools used by the democrats might have worked before, but they won't work moving forward. It needs to come up with a better manipulation machine to win votes back... It will be difficult win if you can't get buy in from the white working class.... it doesn't matter how many blacks or Latinos you try to convince.... they most likely vote blue anyway.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on September 8, 2018 - 5:17pm.

We will see if women will be part of the blue wave. Are women still subservient to their men. Or are they independent thinkers charting their own destiny?

Submitted by zk on September 9, 2018 - 7:04pm.

flu wrote:
I wouldn't consider that trump voters are smarter or dumber than Obama voters that fell for "hope and change"....

I disagree. Anyone who couldn't tell - before the election - that trump was impulsive, narcissistic, vindictive, belligerent, childish, petty, unstable, misogynistic, xenophobic, lazy, delusional, amoral, unintelligent, ignorant, concerned with no one and nothing but himself, a bully, a cheater, a liar, and a fool and therefore entirely unlikely to accomplish anything good seems like they'd have to be pretty much an idiot. If they could tell and didn't care... also an idiot.

Also, selling hope and change and delivering a steady hand and stable government is entirely different from selling make America great "again" and delivering an attack on the rule of law, an attack on the free press, a destructive trade war, rampant corruption, a degraded society, a generally incompetent and chaotic administration, a blizzard of lies, toadying up to a foreign power which interfered in our elections, angering several close allies, and seriously degrading the morale and effectiveness of the state department.

Submitted by flu on September 10, 2018 - 9:31am.

I predict in CA the Democrats lose their supermajority in 4-6 years, when people in the state rebel and a bachlash is released on unchecked, one party dominated decision making.

It's starts as small as passing laws stating restaurants can only sell kids meal with milk and water....or mandating middle school and high school can start no earlier than 830am... But people will grow tired of a one party unchecked party that passes laws that begin to overreached then there is a backlash and everything is undone, door good or worse. This happened at the national level.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on September 10, 2018 - 6:09pm.

Hope and change for more social benefits in the future is very rational.

Hope and change for a return to an illusionary time gone by... that's whack.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on September 16, 2018 - 12:49pm.

Zk, talking about anonymous, how that the sexual allegations against Brett Kavanaugh are not longer anonymous, I wonder if women will believe the accuser.

I personally think that men at pigs generally and society always minimalized their piggish behavior as “boys will be boys.”

We discussed this before, and with #metoo, the information economy and girls getting more educated than boys, it’s the beginning of male privilege. It’s only the beginning because women are still defending the piggish behavior of their men and sons. Women don’t seem to have the “sisterhood” the same way that men have “brotherhood.”

American women seem to be behind women in the developed world. In Europe, women don’t dream of weddings. Even in China, highly educated women don’t care so much about marriage. Oprah did a segment about that when she went to Denmark.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investiga...

Submitted by zk on September 17, 2018 - 9:42am.

FlyerInHi wrote:

Zk, talking about anonymous, how that the sexual allegations against Brett Kavanaugh are not longer anonymous, I wonder if women will believe the accuser.

I personally think that men at pigs generally and society always minimalized their piggish behavior as “boys will be boys.”

While behavior such as that described by the victim is extremely serious and should never be minimized...

And, while I despise Kavanaugh, and while I think making him a SCOTUS judge has the potential to significantly set women back in this country...

Setting a precedent where any person can derail a confirmation or election of a person by alleging previously unmentioned (or only privately mentioned, and not using names) crimes would, in my opinion, be dangerous.

Every candidate who ever runs for office henceforth runs the risk of some nut job from the opposition party making up a story. They can take anything they ever told their therapist and say, "that was about (candidate x)."

I'm not saying Ms. Ford is a nut job. I'm saying that those who follow this precedent in the future might be. I'm saying that even if the current allegation is true - which, to my untrained and relatively uninformed eye, it seems to probably be - the above still applies.

Anybody can say, "(candidate x) did this to me. How come you don't believe me? The evidence is the same as when Kavanaugh's confirmation was blocked." And I'm not sure what the answer would be.

FlyerInHi wrote:

We discussed this before, and with #metoo, the information economy and girls getting more educated than boys, it’s the beginning of male privilege. It’s only the beginning because women are still defending the piggish behavior of their men and sons. Women don’t seem to have the “sisterhood” the same way that men have “brotherhood.”

American women seem to be behind women in the developed world...

I presume you meant to say, "the beginning of the end of male privilege."

Male privilege has been on the decline in this country for some time. But the fight is oh-so-far from over. Unfortunately, we have a long way to go even in this country. Sure, maybe some countries are a little bit ahead of us. But in much of the Middle East, and some other parts of the developed world, and in huge swaths of the third world and the undeveloped world, male privilege is rampant. In many places it's not even questioned to any significant degree.

The only way to fix this particular problem (SCOTUS appointments) is at the ballot box. Unfortunately, progressives and rational people in general blew it at the ballot box in 2016. Not enough of us showed up. We (all Americans except rich people) are going to be paying the price for that for a long, long, long time.

Let's not make that mistake again in 2020. Or in 2018. Or ever again.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on September 17, 2018 - 1:47pm.

zk, I don’t think people will come out of the woodwork to make bogus claims.

Consider the risk of slander and perjury. Powerful people have the resources to sue accusers into poverty. Look how Stormy Daniels was minimized by Rudy Julianni. Any ordinary woman would have been crushed already.

Yes, I think it’s the beginning of the end male privilege. As women make money and girls acquire higher education, they will not stand for the same old. And parents will stand by their daughters.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on September 17, 2018 - 11:20pm.

In the end. people know what they did.
So I asked a friend who’s born again Christian. This is what he said. It should be important to Christian believers.

To God, all sin is the same. It is the breaking of His commandments. The penalty is the second death (eternal separation from God) unless you accept that Jesus's sacrifice for your sins covers yours since he died for you and me.
So lie or murder, still a sin.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.