I wasn't really offering it as proof of a movement per se, but it's indicative of grass roots activity on the left that the Democrats will pay a price for if they ignore it or take it for granted.
My original point being, "IF" the blue wave is fueled by these people the DNC needs to recognize it, or risk losing these people forever.
If the party bosses and backroom deals were still the way politics were done, Trump wouldn't have sniffed the Republican nomination. So the empowered Republican voter is what go them Trump, similar to the empowered Democratic voter going for McGovern in 1972 and resulting in the Superdelegate system being put in to try to avoid that happening again.
And the obvious problem with parliamentary systems is concentrated power. Imagine the Congressional Republicans getting to name the head of government, and not having to give a rat's ass about anything the minority opposition does. And an individual congress person disagreeing with a party position on a party line vote gets censured and stripped of party affiliation for the next election.
if a politician behaved the way trump has, he would never have been elected and if he had somehow managed to get elected, he would have been impeached because there would have been a political price to pay by the population. republicans have the opposite incentive now, they've allowed trump to take over their party, largely because of the 2-party system (and the primary process run by the parties).
there's a reason tho why there aren't very many countries that have emulated our system of government. parliamentary systems have their own problems (ie, small parties have disproportionate power) but many of the core problems with our system just don't exist in a parliamentary system.
Last I remember checking, Gore running away from Clinton and not bringing him out on the campaign trail much was viewed as a significant part of Gore's downfall.
Clinton may have had high approval ratings (I don't know and don't wish to research) but I do blame the election of George W Bush over Gore on Clinton because at the time, people just felt a kind of sick feeling about that whole crew and Bush seemed to offer people some kind of fresh start as a likeable, decent guy (and never did end up having too many personal skeletons that weren't already known like past drug abuse, bad college grades etc).
The Democrats need to be careful. If the blue-wave is fueled by Anti-Trump progressives, if all of the Bernie supporters who stayed home and didn't vote for Hillary come out in November, the Democrats better do SOMETHING to make them happy. If they don't, there could very well be a permanent fracture on the left. The DNC needs to decide if they want to be the party of the people or the party of their donors.
Have a feeling they are going to be the party of the people...until they get elected and then they will welcome the donors back with open arms (they aren't any better than the Republicans when it comes to money). What the country needs is a viable 3rd and possibly 4th party that can break the hold of the Republicans and Democrats. I lived in Australia for 6 years and while I know that is a parliamentary government, they have more than 2 parties and they have been forced to form coalition governments between independents and small parties to govern. Think it makes people more accountable since they don't just have their own party to satisfy.
As for Trump, he will never spend a day in jail and talk of impeachment will just energize his base to come out for the midterms. Personally, I would like him to resign and hand it over to Pence, but I doubt that will happen unless the Republicans get shellacked in the midterms and the shit with Cohen and Muller gets worse....maybe. And if he does resign, Pence will probably pardon him for anything he is charged with the way Ford did with Nixon.
Canada has 4 national parties (Conservative, Liberal, NDP and Green) and a 5th party (Bloq Quebecois) who only run in one province (Quebec) - there aren't enough seats in Quebec alone for them to ever be able to name a Prime Minister, but they can win enough seats to become the Official Opposition so they're sort-of a national party.
For the most part, it works out well. I'd like to see us ditch our 'first past the post' system and replace it with proportional representation, but right now only my party (the NDP) support that idea.
I agree with @akritenbrink. I think the best outcome for Democrats is that they win the house in November, tie Trumps hands a little, and then win the presidency in 2020. If Trump is impeached in 2019 and Pence becomes president, I feel like that could give Republicans new life. Their reasoning would be " Oh lets give him a chance, he seems like a reasonable decent man". Six years of Pence would be terrifying.
The US system is structured such that you can’t sustain more than 2 parties for national office.
While there is much made about intraparty conflict in the moment, it’s not a new phenomenon and isn’t especially bad right now. You generally have 2-3 significant “wings” in the party and the party leader has to coalition build to get their support.
Post-Kennedy the GOP has been balancing the Libertarian wing with the Christian Conservative wing and the White Vote in the south (which has been a race-driven vote historically, but which overlaps enough with the Christian Conservative vote that you never had to openly admit it), and Defence Hawks. The Democrats have been balancing the Union wing, several Minority wings, Fiscal Conservative/Social Liberal Wing, and what we would now call Social Democrats (they would be called New Dealers back in the day, war on poverty/Great Society supporters, basically the folks Reagan demonized and then that became the GOP fashion), and Peace-nicks.
The kind of coalition building that happens in Parlimentary governments was what party primaries and conventions were for.
More recently the environmental movement has gained strength and the GOP squandered the opportunity with them given that environmentalism and conservatism are natural matches and Nixon created the EPA.
What does seems new is the just blind loyalty to party (always existed, but seems bigger percentage of population now) and the respective information/news bubbles when you can almost choose your own reality.
And now Trump is trying to distract by pusing white-nationalist hysteria (apparently after watching Tucker Carlson) about white farmers in South Africa. Some context: yes, there are very contentious and complex issues about land and farm ownership in South Africa - stemming from colonization and apartheid - and the government is trying to take farmland. But no, there is not a "white genocide" happening.
Is it even worth posting outrage at the latest racist / conspiracy theory tweet by POTUS?
I guess the answer is yes - we are still posting Trump / GOP racism.
My sister-in-law posts the tweets on facebook and I wish she would stop. He doesn't add anything to the conversation and every tweet or statement falls into one of a few broad categories. You could go through and replace every tweet with "I am a narcissistic racist serial sexual predator who is desperate to escape accountability" and it would be exactly the same.
I mean it’s not like a rules violation to point out all the racist stuff Trump says but also I don’t know if it really adds to the conversation at this point? I’m not gonna stop you though.
I mean it’s not like a rules violation to point out all the racist stuff Trump says but also I don’t know if it really adds to the conversation at this point? I’m not gonna stop you though.
Yea you're right - I guess I'm just venting ... not really much point in getting riled up and bringing attention to everything that he does to deflect from the real issues at hand.
I don't know that that is true. I kind of see it as a contract. A sort of version of a permanent covenant not to compete (as an example, not that the two concepts are related). I see where you're coming from, but I'm (definitely not at all claiming to be a constitutional scholar or even one all that educated on the matter, just kind of riffing) not sure it would rise to that level. Also (and better to carry weight in my sort of educated guessing), I believe that Warren was a law professor so I imagine she would have the knowledge to take issues like that into account when drafting a bill like this. Once again though, totally just intuiting my way through it. I don't know for sure.
For once I think I agree with the President. Flipping should be illegal. Housing prices in So. Cal are so out of control to begin with without fucking investors snatching up all of the good fixer uppers. It's a real problem.
You going to prevent renting as well? You going to stop large landowners from owning multiple units? Good luck trying to price ceiling or rent control your way out of a supply problem. Building more affordable housing was the answer.
For once I think I agree with the President. Flipping should be illegal. Housing prices in So. Cal are so out of control to begin with without fucking investors snatching up all of the good fixer uppers. It's a real problem.
"I asked the current Administration official whether the outcry over family separation had caught the government by surprise. It had, the official said. “The expectation was that the kids would go to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, that the parents would get deported, and that no one would care.” Yet, when it became clear that the public did, the Administration chose not to change course."
"I asked the current Administration official whether the outcry over family separation had caught the government by surprise. It had, the official said. “The expectation was that the kids would go to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, that the parents would get deported, and that no one would care.” Yet, when it became clear that the public did, the Administration chose not to change course."
"I asked the current Administration official whether the outcry over family separation had caught the government by surprise. It had, the official said. “The expectation was that the kids would go to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, that the parents would get deported, and that no one would care.” Yet, when it became clear that the public did, the Administration chose not to change course."
"I asked the current Administration official whether the outcry over family separation had caught the government by surprise. It had, the official said. “The expectation was that the kids would go to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, that the parents would get deported, and that no one would care.” Yet, when it became clear that the public did, the Administration chose not to change course."
You going to prevent renting as well? You going to stop large landowners from owning multiple units? Good luck trying to price ceiling or rent control your way out of a supply problem. Building more affordable housing was the answer.
For once I think I agree with the President. Flipping should be illegal. Housing prices in So. Cal are so out of control to begin with without fucking investors snatching up all of the good fixer uppers. It's a real problem.
I'm not sure if you're joking at my joking, or didn't know that I was joking (problem with text is lack of tone), but I was totally joking. You're 100% right. Trust me, I have a "lack of affordable housing" rant in me, and plenty about the injustice in how renters are treated. I was totally just making a word play joke.
The notion of the President pontificating on how "flipping (in a getting the 'bigger fish' sense) might need to become illegal" is honestly kind of a new level of ridiculous. The worst part is him talking about how people always lie when they cooperate, totally blowing past the fact that it generally will invalidate your deal and leave you open to entirely new charges if you are caught lying in the process. Of course, when he says that on Fox though like 30% of the country finds themselves scratching their chins, saying "yeah. that's a great point!" It'll be very interesting when they try to get Giuliani to talk on the matter as he made tons of these deals back in the day. The whole thing is just too ridiculous. The fact that he can outwardly celebrate Manafort, a now convicted felon, for not ratting him out just right out there on his Twitter account for the world to see. Literally saying that he likes him better than Cohen because he's "not a rat." It's so surreal.
Also, when I heard him say "if I were impeached the market would crash" (not a direct quote, but he did say it), all I could hear was "you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall." He's so close to "YES I DID!" (order the code red). He's so close. Just bring it home, man. You'll feel so good. Do it! Do it!
Comments
And the obvious problem with parliamentary systems is concentrated power. Imagine the Congressional Republicans getting to name the head of government, and not having to give a rat's ass about anything the minority opposition does. And an individual congress person disagreeing with a party position on a party line vote gets censured and stripped of party affiliation for the next election.
Last I remember checking, Gore running away from Clinton and not bringing him out on the campaign trail much was viewed as a significant part of Gore's downfall.
As for Trump, he will never spend a day in jail and talk of impeachment will just energize his base to come out for the midterms. Personally, I would like him to resign and hand it over to Pence, but I doubt that will happen unless the Republicans get shellacked in the midterms and the shit with Cohen and Muller gets worse....maybe. And if he does resign, Pence will probably pardon him for anything he is charged with the way Ford did with Nixon.
If we want a quick win for our political system - take money out of politics. Fund campaigns, and, regulate the hell outta lobbying.
While there is much made about intraparty conflict in the moment, it’s not a new phenomenon and isn’t especially bad right now. You generally have 2-3 significant “wings” in the party and the party leader has to coalition build to get their support.
Post-Kennedy the GOP has been balancing the Libertarian wing with the Christian Conservative wing and the White Vote in the south (which has been a race-driven vote historically, but which overlaps enough with the Christian Conservative vote that you never had to openly admit it), and Defence Hawks. The Democrats have been balancing the Union wing, several Minority wings, Fiscal Conservative/Social Liberal Wing, and what we would now call Social Democrats (they would be called New Dealers back in the day, war on poverty/Great Society supporters, basically the folks Reagan demonized and then that became the GOP fashion), and Peace-nicks.
The kind of coalition building that happens in Parlimentary governments was what party primaries and conventions were for.
More recently the environmental movement has gained strength and the GOP squandered the opportunity with them given that environmentalism and conservatism are natural matches and Nixon created the EPA.
What does seems new is the just blind loyalty to party (always existed, but seems bigger percentage of population now) and the respective information/news bubbles when you can almost choose your own reality.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/23/world/africa/trump-south-africa-white-farmers.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2018/08/21/elizabeth-warren-unveils-anti-corruption-plan-takes-aim-at-trump/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e8d61b3b5411
Some info about how she has been treated in prison to date leading up to and during her trial:
https://shadowproof.com/2018/08/21/reality-winners-sentencing-culmination-effort-break-whistleblowers-spirit/
"high-ranking government officials will be banned from ever becoming lobbyists"
Speaking in Tongues
Loved how TYT responded to the right wing propaganda over the murder of Mollie Tibbetts
"I asked the current Administration official whether the outcry over family separation had caught the government by surprise. It had, the official said. “The expectation was that the kids would go to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, that the parents would get deported, and that no one would care.” Yet, when it became clear that the public did, the Administration chose not to change course."
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/will-anyone-in-the-trump-administration-ever-be-held-accountable-for-the-zero-tolerance-policy
The notion of the President pontificating on how "flipping (in a getting the 'bigger fish' sense) might need to become illegal" is honestly kind of a new level of ridiculous. The worst part is him talking about how people always lie when they cooperate, totally blowing past the fact that it generally will invalidate your deal and leave you open to entirely new charges if you are caught lying in the process. Of course, when he says that on Fox though like 30% of the country finds themselves scratching their chins, saying "yeah. that's a great point!" It'll be very interesting when they try to get Giuliani to talk on the matter as he made tons of these deals back in the day. The whole thing is just too ridiculous. The fact that he can outwardly celebrate Manafort, a now convicted felon, for not ratting him out just right out there on his Twitter account for the world to see. Literally saying that he likes him better than Cohen because he's "not a rat." It's so surreal.
Also, when I heard him say "if I were impeached the market would crash" (not a direct quote, but he did say it), all I could hear was "you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall." He's so close to "YES I DID!" (order the code red). He's so close. Just bring it home, man. You'll feel so good. Do it! Do it!