-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
US PoliERA 2018 |OT10| McConnell is "mule piss"
- Thread starter Midnight Jon
- Start date
- Status
IL-14 does not look good for Republicans.
R+10 GCB, eight-point registration advantage...
But the Republican incumbent only leads 45-42 with about 70% done, and that's been the margin for a while.
I said earlier I think Rauner's dragging down the entire ballot. A poll earlier this week had him either carrying downstate by only 1 or losing it by 1 (can't remember). Either way, that's disastrous for an IL Republican. He might get us two pretty red House seats, which means we could win three total. (I think we have Roskam's because of the suburban backlash.)
Lee Zeldin in NY-01 also performing more weakly than I would've guessed. It's a Lean R seat or even Likely, according to some outlets, but we had it as recently as 2014 - eastern Long Island, where the ladies of Grey Gardens lived. Caveat: this poll's a bit less far along, so Zeldin might surge. I didn't think we had much of a shot at this seat, so it'd be a nice surprise.
R+10 GCB, eight-point registration advantage...
But the Republican incumbent only leads 45-42 with about 70% done, and that's been the margin for a while.
I said earlier I think Rauner's dragging down the entire ballot. A poll earlier this week had him either carrying downstate by only 1 or losing it by 1 (can't remember). Either way, that's disastrous for an IL Republican. He might get us two pretty red House seats, which means we could win three total. (I think we have Roskam's because of the suburban backlash.)
Lee Zeldin in NY-01 also performing more weakly than I would've guessed. It's a Lean R seat or even Likely, according to some outlets, but we had it as recently as 2014 - eastern Long Island, where the ladies of Grey Gardens lived. Caveat: this poll's a bit less far along, so Zeldin might surge. I didn't think we had much of a shot at this seat, so it'd be a nice surprise.
Lot of things to ding Obama for but he fought mad for Garland. Turtle had the upper hand there.
Why didn't Obama order a general strike and a snap election to pass Medicare for All and appoint Garland to the Supreme Court, by order of the Grand Marshal of the Supreme Court who is issuing death sentences this very moment? Please don't look at my post history to see that I'm grossly uneducated and probably a "leftist" debby downer, thank you.
If it wasn't for Ebola , maybe we would have hung onto the senate in 2014, Obama gets to replace Scalia, and if 2016 plays out the same, Trump has to deal with a democratic senate
You know, I follow British politics pretty closely, but I usually don't enter threads on it unless I'm nuking Corbyn, who is objectively bad.
we only have to glance at your avatar to see that
checkmate, buster.
Not all democrats are equal. Nancy "I have to say, we're capitalists, that's just the way it is," Peloci is not the same as Bernie Sanders.
It would be hilarious if this actually ended up helping her.
QUEEN
She gives no fucks.
I hope Heidi can pull it out.
She has enough money to try mobilizing every possible vote she can. There is not a liberal or left-leaning person in ND who has an excuse to stay home now. She took a firm moral position, put women and the country before her electoral prospects, and did the right thing. She deserves another term.
She has enough money to try mobilizing every possible vote she can. There is not a liberal or left-leaning person in ND who has an excuse to stay home now. She took a firm moral position, put women and the country before her electoral prospects, and did the right thing. She deserves another term.
That's true, not all members of Congress are as unproductive as Bernie 'friend of neocon warhawk John McCain' Sanders.
So I had mentioned a few days back that Obama's election was a transforming moment for the GOP, a catalyst away from Reagan-style Movement Conservatism to Trump Style White Nationalism/Alt-Right. I wanted to illustrate the other watershed moments for the two parties over the years:
Jefferson's Legacy:
Catalyst 1: Expansion of the vote to all White Men, ~1824. This ended the Democratic Republican party with its Libertarian ideology to the early Democrats, who were Populist.
Catalyst 2: Texas Independence, 1835. This shifts the Democrats from a Populist party to a Nationalist one as the party re-orients towards western expansion. Jackson's focus on Indian Removal also assists with this shift.
Catalyst 3: Fugitive Slave Act, 1850. This shifts the Democrats towards being pro-slavery as their defining issue, changing Nationalism to American (in the broader New World sense) style Conservatism (so similar to the kind of Conservative parties you saw in Latin America at the time)
Catalyst 4: Hayes-Tilden Compromise, 1876. This ended reconstruction and put race issues on the back burner in the US for 80 years. For the Democrats, this meant giving up the ghost of American Conservatism and switching to an economic issues focus. They became an anti-industrial or sort of Luddite Conservative party.
Catalyst 5: The silver boom of circa 1890. This shifted the party from Luddite Conservative back to Populist on the back of growing urban-rural inequality and a focus on getting stuff back for the rural white majority.
Catalyst 6: Treaty of Versailles, 1919. This is where globalist ideals were elevated to the top of the Democratic party by Woodrow Wilson, which cut against the nativist flank of the party and pushed the party to a sort of Left Populist position, helped by the growth of labor unions in the party ranks through the early 1900s.
Catalyst 7: Truman's Fair Deal, especially integrating the US military, circa 1950. This is when you start to see the left-wing ideas really take over the party and pushes the party to Social Democratic, despite the huge numbers of Southern Dems contributing to the overall party still.
Catalyst 8: Stagflation, circa 1975. This is when the social democratic economic policies of the Dems suffered a crisis and Keynesian economics was discredited. Followed by the electoral drubbings of 1980 and 1984, this pushed the party from Social Democratic to Third Way, both economically "liberal" and socially liberal.
Catalyst 9: Grassroots Activism of the 2010s. I think Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter are what's pushing the party to the left, dropping Third Way policies in favor of Progressive ideals. Obviously inertia is a big thing and the party is not a monolith, but it's turned a corner and those two grassroots movements are the cause.
Adams's Legacy:
Catalyst 1: Expansion of the vote to all White Men, ~1824. The Federalist party had already collapsed, but this allowed it to be replaced by the National Republicans. The Federalists were based around European-style Authoritarianism, the National Republicans held a more popular view, Mercantilism.
Catalyst 2: Panic of 1837. This first major economic crisis faced by the US helped to discredit the fiscal and monetary policies of the Jacksonian Democrats and galvanized the opposition around new economic philosophies. The National Republicans faded and were replaced by the Whigs. 18th-century style Mercantilism was replaced by 19th century Capitalism.
Catalyst 3: Fugitive Slave Act, 1850. This again polarized the country around the slavery. The Whigs had pro-slave elements and collapsed because of the polarization. Anti-slave Whigs aligned with Free Soilers formerly aligned with the Democrats and made the Republican party. The crisis of slavery turned Capitalism into Classical Liberalism.
Catalyst 4: Hayes-Tilden Compromise, 1876. Again, putting race issues on the back burner meant that the more radical ideals of the Republicans at the time faded away and they refocused on economic issues, going from Classical Liberalism to Corporatism.
Catalyst 5: Sherman Antitrust Act, 1890. The massive inequalities of the Gilded Age caused a Progressive sentiment to rise up in the urban and suburban voting base for the GOP at the time and pushed it into a Progressive posture for a while (not left-progressive like the Dems today, a more Scientific Progressivism focused literally on the idea of human progress).
Catalyst 6: The First Red Scare, ~1920. The first red scare in the wake of the Bolshevik Revolution and backlash to the Versailles Treaty stumped the Progressive elements of the GOP and put it back to a Corporatist party.
Catalyst 7: The Second Red Scare, ~1950. The second Red Scare during the Cold War pushed socially conservative people towards the Republican party and changed it from Corporatist to Conservative (but a sort of Nixon-style conservatism which was NOT the reactionary movement that followed).
Catalyst 8: The Culture Wars, ~1975. For this I'd point specifically to two Supreme Court Cases, Roe v Wade and Bob Jones University. Bob Jones was the last vestige of legal segregation, an attempt by a Christian university to claim a legal right to bar black people under first amendment religious grounds which was struck down. Roe helped to take its place, with the right-wing movement realizing that the segregation battle was finally lost, they switched to other forms of social and religious agitation. Conservatism became Movement Conservatism, a more activist and reactionary form.
Catalyst 9: Barack Obama's election, 2009. To the GOP, this was a sign that they had lost the Culture Wars and their worst fears were realized (at least to them). This radicalized the party, combined with the toxic stew of right wing media, and pushed the party from Movement Conservatism and towards White Nationalism and the alt-right.
So that's my theory on how we got here.
Jefferson's Legacy:
Catalyst 1: Expansion of the vote to all White Men, ~1824. This ended the Democratic Republican party with its Libertarian ideology to the early Democrats, who were Populist.
Catalyst 2: Texas Independence, 1835. This shifts the Democrats from a Populist party to a Nationalist one as the party re-orients towards western expansion. Jackson's focus on Indian Removal also assists with this shift.
Catalyst 3: Fugitive Slave Act, 1850. This shifts the Democrats towards being pro-slavery as their defining issue, changing Nationalism to American (in the broader New World sense) style Conservatism (so similar to the kind of Conservative parties you saw in Latin America at the time)
Catalyst 4: Hayes-Tilden Compromise, 1876. This ended reconstruction and put race issues on the back burner in the US for 80 years. For the Democrats, this meant giving up the ghost of American Conservatism and switching to an economic issues focus. They became an anti-industrial or sort of Luddite Conservative party.
Catalyst 5: The silver boom of circa 1890. This shifted the party from Luddite Conservative back to Populist on the back of growing urban-rural inequality and a focus on getting stuff back for the rural white majority.
Catalyst 6: Treaty of Versailles, 1919. This is where globalist ideals were elevated to the top of the Democratic party by Woodrow Wilson, which cut against the nativist flank of the party and pushed the party to a sort of Left Populist position, helped by the growth of labor unions in the party ranks through the early 1900s.
Catalyst 7: Truman's Fair Deal, especially integrating the US military, circa 1950. This is when you start to see the left-wing ideas really take over the party and pushes the party to Social Democratic, despite the huge numbers of Southern Dems contributing to the overall party still.
Catalyst 8: Stagflation, circa 1975. This is when the social democratic economic policies of the Dems suffered a crisis and Keynesian economics was discredited. Followed by the electoral drubbings of 1980 and 1984, this pushed the party from Social Democratic to Third Way, both economically "liberal" and socially liberal.
Catalyst 9: Grassroots Activism of the 2010s. I think Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter are what's pushing the party to the left, dropping Third Way policies in favor of Progressive ideals. Obviously inertia is a big thing and the party is not a monolith, but it's turned a corner and those two grassroots movements are the cause.
Adams's Legacy:
Catalyst 1: Expansion of the vote to all White Men, ~1824. The Federalist party had already collapsed, but this allowed it to be replaced by the National Republicans. The Federalists were based around European-style Authoritarianism, the National Republicans held a more popular view, Mercantilism.
Catalyst 2: Panic of 1837. This first major economic crisis faced by the US helped to discredit the fiscal and monetary policies of the Jacksonian Democrats and galvanized the opposition around new economic philosophies. The National Republicans faded and were replaced by the Whigs. 18th-century style Mercantilism was replaced by 19th century Capitalism.
Catalyst 3: Fugitive Slave Act, 1850. This again polarized the country around the slavery. The Whigs had pro-slave elements and collapsed because of the polarization. Anti-slave Whigs aligned with Free Soilers formerly aligned with the Democrats and made the Republican party. The crisis of slavery turned Capitalism into Classical Liberalism.
Catalyst 4: Hayes-Tilden Compromise, 1876. Again, putting race issues on the back burner meant that the more radical ideals of the Republicans at the time faded away and they refocused on economic issues, going from Classical Liberalism to Corporatism.
Catalyst 5: Sherman Antitrust Act, 1890. The massive inequalities of the Gilded Age caused a Progressive sentiment to rise up in the urban and suburban voting base for the GOP at the time and pushed it into a Progressive posture for a while (not left-progressive like the Dems today, a more Scientific Progressivism focused literally on the idea of human progress).
Catalyst 6: The First Red Scare, ~1920. The first red scare in the wake of the Bolshevik Revolution and backlash to the Versailles Treaty stumped the Progressive elements of the GOP and put it back to a Corporatist party.
Catalyst 7: The Second Red Scare, ~1950. The second Red Scare during the Cold War pushed socially conservative people towards the Republican party and changed it from Corporatist to Conservative (but a sort of Nixon-style conservatism which was NOT the reactionary movement that followed).
Catalyst 8: The Culture Wars, ~1975. For this I'd point specifically to two Supreme Court Cases, Roe v Wade and Bob Jones University. Bob Jones was the last vestige of legal segregation, an attempt by a Christian university to claim a legal right to bar black people under first amendment religious grounds which was struck down. Roe helped to take its place, with the right-wing movement realizing that the segregation battle was finally lost, they switched to other forms of social and religious agitation. Conservatism became Movement Conservatism, a more activist and reactionary form.
Catalyst 9: Barack Obama's election, 2009. To the GOP, this was a sign that they had lost the Culture Wars and their worst fears were realized (at least to them). This radicalized the party, combined with the toxic stew of right wing media, and pushed the party from Movement Conservatism and towards White Nationalism and the alt-right.
So that's my theory on how we got here.
I think the difference is she actually gives so many fucks and that's what makes her so much better than Cramer.
She definitely should be a cabinet member if she loses.
This post evinces complete ignorance not just of American politics but of basic economics. Bernard Sanders has no desire to abolish capitalism. He is a social democrat who wants to tax the rich and corporations and redistribute the fruits throughout society. Never has he mentioned seizing the means of productions or abolishing private ownership. Increased welfare state =/= socialism.
Nancy Pelosi is right; we are capitalists. But guess what? She wants the same things Bernard wants. That's why she's been one of the most progressive members of the House for over thirty years. Hell, they served in the House together for decades and compiled similar voting records: they both supported same-sex marriage and opposed the war in Iraq.
I will say that, unlike Bernard, the ultimate sideline sniper, Pelosi has actual achievements to her name.
So either you don't know what socialism means; don't know that capitalism can have a welfare state, as both Bernard and Pelosi want; or you deliberately misrepresented the facts so you could slam the ~~~evil capitalist corporatist Democrats~~~.
Last edited:
I really hope she pulls through. Being more vulnerable than Manchin but voting against Kavanaugh anyway was a brave thing to do.
She's a good person.
Clinton was the manifestation of the Third Way at the highest levels of the party. The Gingrich Revolution was I think full manifestation of Movement Conservatism, that kind of grassroots "we have to take our government back," kind of conservatism. The difference from Nixon conservatism being that Nixon conservatism was a kind of defensive posture, Gingrich/Reagan/Bush conservatism was the same ideas but taking an offensive posture. The seeds for that were laid before.
Not all states would agree to this but I'm sure California would,
If we made every land that is recognised as belonging to native Americans it's own state
Their are a lot
If we made every land that is recognised as belonging to native Americans it's own state
Their are a lot
Bernie inspires people to be their best and envision a better future. Sadly, many Dems can't to do that and just get by on being not a Republican...while also getting nothing passed in congress. Bernie is a beacon. Corporatists are corporatists who don't want you to believe there's another way.
Manchin is not running in WV. Kavanaugh's confirmation approval margin is higher than his current poll margins.
That's like whatever beyond "galaxy brain" level of thinking in that Hell would freeze over, then exist, then thaw, then freeze over again.
Bernie provides simple answers to complicated problems that many like because theyre not able to understand the complicated problems.
Populism is terrible regardless of which side of the aisle its on.
Yeah, as disappointing as it is to have a Democrat support Kavanaugh at the end of the day all he was doing was enacting the will of his constituents which is all we wish Moderate Darling Collins had actually done.
Not sure what committees she is on but I'm guessing a department of the interior, or agriculture would be a good place.
Manchin and Heidi clearly had the two most difficult votes to make.
Florida's so divided that Nelson's guaranteed to please and piss off half the people, so all he has to do is turn out Democrats, with which Gillum is helping immensely. Fairly easy vote.
McCaskill and Donnelly represent R+9 states that are not as red as some others and have decent minority populations. Both can probably win with angry suburban women, black voters in the urban areas, and cutting margins in rural areas. Difficult vote, but not insurmountable.
Tester represents a unique and uniquely elastic state with its own quirky politics.
But ND and WV are so deeply red and so homogeneous.
Florida's so divided that Nelson's guaranteed to please and piss off half the people, so all he has to do is turn out Democrats, with which Gillum is helping immensely. Fairly easy vote.
McCaskill and Donnelly represent R+9 states that are not as red as some others and have decent minority populations. Both can probably win with angry suburban women, black voters in the urban areas, and cutting margins in rural areas. Difficult vote, but not insurmountable.
Tester represents a unique and uniquely elastic state with its own quirky politics.
But ND and WV are so deeply red and so homogeneous.
User banned (48 hours): Trolling, derailing the thread.
Says the guy with a videogame avatar and name. Haha. Grow up son.
You're right.
What I mean is she gives no fucks re: her popularity in favor of doing the right thing.
And your name sounds like some cheap fizzy drink that no one likes because it, like your posts, goes flat.
What's your point?
Theblogic is the first people deserve representation, but we just cant lump every tribe together,
I know if we followed this through exactly theirs be well over 200 senators, probably way more, but idgaf
It also limit the power of white supremacist a lot
Which is why Ocasio-Cortez is my new best friend. Bernie is out.
Then why the hell did you speak of him favorably if you've already tossed him aside for the new thing on the block?
States can't be carved out of existing states without the consent of congress plus the state legislature, so you'd need a D trifecta to do it. That's why those ideas always die in the ballot petition phase.
DC is different because it's not a state and Congress has direct authority to set DC's boundaries, and there's precedent since DC used to be a full rectangle but Congress ceded the southern part of it back to Virginia in the early 1800s. So congress cedes most of the rest of it to a territory of Columbia which then immediately petitions for statehood. Only the Capitol building needs to be in a Federal District.
The territories should definitely all be given the same choice as Puerto Rico. One once-and-for-all statehood-or-independence vote. Staying as a territory would not be a choice on the ballot.
Ultimate Galaxy-Hell-Refrozen-After-Thawing-In-The-Saharan-Sun Brain: Every Native American is their own state
The RBG documentary is bad. I didn't like it the first time I saw it and hate it more the second time. It's a dumb mess. It wastes a lot of potentially interesting interviews to make a hagiography, and has not one but two framing devices that ultimately prove fruitless. Like, are we framing this around her hearing? No? Okay, so this specific court cases? No? Ok, so both? Maybe.
It's a bad mess. It'll be nominated for an Oscar, because why not, but it's not a good documentary.
*puts on Galaxy Brain hat*
And it's all Pelosi's and the Democrat's faults, not not beloved Bernie's*
It's a bad mess. It'll be nominated for an Oscar, because why not, but it's not a good documentary.
*puts on Galaxy Brain hat*
And it's all Pelosi's and the Democrat's faults, not not beloved Bernie's*
- Status