All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[Tami]

Screenshot_2020-04-15 Steve Schmidt on Twitter This joshuabickel photo is worthy of a Pulitzer I.jpg

Twitter Link

[aja_christopher]

You not being a Democrat doesn't change anything I've had to say.

Of course it doesn't because -- again -- as a Republican you benefit from the racism, homophobia, and xenophobia fostered by your party in their efforts to win election, and can turn a blind eye to their lies and corruption so long as it helps your "side" win election.

You've already made up your mind that the facts regarding Republicans don't matter and your personal bias is tantamount to any real examination of both their unethical and criminal behavior.

You do this by automatically deflecting to "Democrats" and "liberals" and "both sides" any time someone points out facts about your party instead of offering any real objective analysis of the differences between the two.

You won't even address the fact that Trump can only behave this way due to the support of Republicans like Barr, McConnell, Graham and yourself -- it's all about attacking either Democrats or those who point out the failings of Republicans instead of holding your party accountable for their collective behavior.

That's simply the Republican way -- as it has been for decades now.

Gaslight (Trump), obstruct (McConnell), and in your case "project".

[Tami]

Trump Threatens to Adjourn Congress Over Nominees

WT...?

President Trump threatened to adjourn both chambers of Congress so he can appoint his nominees for key positions without confirmation by the Senate.

During a news conference at the White House on Wednesday, Mr. Trump called on lawmakers to formally adjourn the House and Senate so he can make recess appointments for positions he said were important to the administration’s response to the coronavirus outbreak.

The Senate, which confirms a president’s nominees, has been conducting what are called pro forma sessions while lawmakers are back in their states.

No legislative business is conducted during these brief meetings, which sometimes last only a few minutes, but they technically prevent the president from making recess appointments.

If lawmakers don’t agree to adjourn and end the pro forma sessions, “I will exercise my constitutional authority to adjourn both chambers of Congress,” Mr. Trump said. “The current practice of leaving town while conducting phony pro forma sessions is a dereliction of duty that the American people cannot afford during this crisis. It’s a scam, what they do.”

[Darkspellmaster]

Trump Threatens to Adjourn Congress Over Nominees

WT...?

Let's just admit it. He wants a full on coronation and for us surfs and peasants to be bowing and scraping to King Donald the first. That's what he wants. What he's forgetting is that monarchy tends to be disposed of.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Trump Threatens to Adjourn Congress Over Nominees

WT...?

Given past problems with Trump nominees who quickly flamed out because they were inept and/or unqualified, I’m not surprised he went this route so he can install cronies without going through the annoying process of proper vetting by Congress.

[TheDarman]

Given past problems with Trump nominees who quickly flamed out because they were inept and/or unqualified, I’m not surprised he went this route so he can install cronies without going through the annoying process of proper vetting by Congress.

Wouldn’t they be recess appointments constitutionally until they were confirmed? I mean, if they aren’t confirmed by the Senate before the end of this calendar year, it becomes difficult for Trump to keep these judges in office should Biden win and take the Senate with him. I mean, they could wreak havoc in the meantime, sure, but it becomes impossible to see a question of voting that isn’t decided by the Supreme Court in favor of Republicans anyway.

[Tami]

Wouldn’t they be recess appointments constitutionally until they were confirmed? I mean, if they aren’t confirmed by the Senate before the end of this calendar year, it becomes difficult for Trump to keep these judges in office should Biden win and take the Senate with him. I mean, they could wreak havoc in the meantime, sure, but it becomes impossible to see a question of voting that isn’t decided by the Supreme Court in favor of Republicans anyway.

First, I don't think Trump cares. He either expects to win, or if he loses he might as well leave a mess behind him when he goes. Second, trump has been filling slots with Temps for some time, 'Acting' this or 'Acting' that. All he cares about it trying to make his base happy by giving them a good show.

[TheDarman]

First, I don't think Trump cares. He either expects to win, or if he loses he might as well leave a mess behind him when he goes. Second, trump has been filling slots with Temps for some time, 'Acting' this or 'Acting' that. All he cares about it trying to make his base happy by giving them a good show.

The bigger issue is that I don’t think McConnell would be happy to see that Biden now has a bunch of vacancies that can be filled and forced down Republicans’ throats in the same way that he forced them down Democrat’s’.

[Tami]

The bigger issue is that I don’t think McConnell would be happy to see that Biden now has a bunch of vacancies that can be filled and forced down Republicans’ throats in the same way that he forced them down Democrat’s’.

McConnell is a tool, something Trump is using to get what he wants. So, occasionally he throws MCConnell a bone to make him happy. If Trump loses, then he no longer has any use for McConnell or the Republican Party. If there are vacancies that Biden can fill, Trump will just blame McConnell for it.

That Trump wants to put his own people in certain positions is all about his ego. Trump wants to surround himself with as many bootlickers, butt kissers, ego strokers, & yes men as he can find.

[Lightning Rider]

[QUOTE=4saken1;4934100]Do you have any evidence to support that this is because they were too moderate? Also, voter suppression and the EC helped (in the former case, at least). But actually, discounting the EC, Democrats have gotten more votes than Republicans in 6 of the last 7 Elections.



Again, taking facts and drawing the conclusions that you want from them while offering zero proof that those are the reasons for the results. Obama ran as anti-gay the first time he ran. Not too Progressive! I think you are confusing his populism with progressiveness. Also, your argument completely ignores the black vote as a huge reason for his winning and the fact that more often than not, most Presidents on both sides lose their midterm Elections, but that's not very convenient to the argument that you are trying to make.

Although to be accurate, the ardent "Bernie Bros" showed up for Hillary. It won't be their vote alone that abandons Biden, should he lose. It's the disaffected, alienated working class that stays home because they don't feel elections offer them anything./QUOTE]

Many who have been polled might state these as reasons why they don't vote, but voter turnout has stayed pretty consistent over the past 75 years, with some years, usually due to events that were happening at that time period, showed a spike:

1932 - 52.60%
1936 - 56.90%
1940 - 58.80%
1944 - 56.10%
1948 - 51.10%
1952 - 61.60%
1956 - 59.30%
1960 - 62.80%
1964 - 61.40%
1968 - 60.70%
1972 - 55.10%
1976 - 53.60%
1980 - 52.80%
1984 - 53.30%
1988 - 50.30%
1992 - 55.20%
1996 - 49.00%
2000 - 50.30%
2004 - 55.70%
2008 - 58.20%
2012 - 54.90%
2016 - 55.70%

The Occupy Wall Street movement and the vocal repudiation of Obama's performance during his 2nd term by key figures who were longtime Democratic Party advocates are just a few key indicators that demonstrated a loss of support.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...-house/606985/

There are countless of historical examples that show that a lack of a meaningful left program will leave the working class vulnerable to far-right galvanizing. It is practically the story of the 20th century. The liberal center has done an awful job at mediating social forces that, in reality, it can not control or overcome.

As for Obama not appearing progressive, his messaging of "Hope and Change", promise of healthcare reform, and running as the first black presidential candidate was plenty to signify a break from convention in US political culture. (Unfortunately it was anything but.)

[Tendrin]

Oh WBE-Eeeeeee..

https://www.dispatch.com/news/202004...virus-response

Republican Melissa Ackison was among about 100 protesters outside the Statehouse during DeWine’s appearance inside on Monday.
A Ohio Senate candidate took part in a protest Monday of Gov. Mike DeWine’s handling of the coronavirus shutdown, accusing the fellow Republican of fear-mongering and calling him a tyrant.
About 100 protesters gathered outside the Statehouse during DeWine’s appearance at his daily news conference inside. At least one protester wore a Donald Trump hat, and many carried signs expressing opposition to the governor’s stay-at-home order or waved American flags.

[Steel Inquisitor]

The Occupy Wall Street movement and the vocal repudiation of Obama's performance during his 2nd term by key figures who were longtime Democratic Party advocates are just a few key indicators that demonstrated a loss of support.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...-house/606985/

Occupy was a failed movement, as they refused to get into politics - that was beneath them. They had a short movement of relevance and wasted it, it's why Sanders to had to pick up where they left off.

There are countless of historical examples that show that a lack of a meaningful left program will leave the working class vulnerable to far-right galvanizing. It is practically the story of the 20th century. The liberal center has done an awful job at mediating social forces that, in reality, it can not control or overcome.

As for Obama not appearing progressive, his messaging of "Hope and Change", promise of healthcare reform, and running as the first black presidential candidate was plenty to signify a break from convention in US political culture. (Unfortunately it was anything but.)

They're far from perfect but they're managed to do much more than the left has by itself. The Democrats are in power, the left are on the sidelines or disorganised.

Which Obama tried. Failing to succeed isn't proof that he's a faking it, all it shows is that he didn't have the support required to do it. Fixing politics is a complex, cumbersome project which requires patience and planning and not dropping support the second it gets hard. If the left had supported Obama more maybe he wouldn't have ad to compromise as much as he did, he's working with the congress they gave him.

[InformationGeek]

Oh WBE-Eeeeeee..

https://www.dispatch.com/news/202004...virus-response

Posted that one on the last page, including a pic of her and a bunch of others recreating one of the opening scenes from the first Dead Rising.

[Mister Mets]

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...cdonalds-china

They've got some problematic attitudes on race in China.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...advert-outrage

[TheDarman]

Which Obama tried. Failing to succeed isn't proof that he's a faking it, all it shows is that he didn't have the support required to do it. Fixing politics is a complex, cumbersome project which requires patience and planning and not dropping support the second it gets hard. If the left had supported Obama more maybe he wouldn't have ad to compromise as much as he did, he's working with the congress they gave him.

I covered this in a much longer thread against folks using the #ThanksObama hashtag to post their ironic and biting commentaries of his presidency. I will post here for my personal response:

I know a lot of Sanders folks have been weaponizing the #ThanksObama hashtag to point out his problems as president. And it is true—Obama did things that I disagree with. However, it is important to not only understand context, but the reasons policies were adopted.

You know, merely disagreeing with the president on drone strikes isn’t helpful. You have to offer alternatives. If you offer no alternatives, you are essentially making the argument that it is okay to let folks who plan to murder thousands around the globe get away.

It’s a cold way of looking at things, granted. And no one really wants to have to look it at that way, but each target killed by drone strikes would’ve likely been responsible for more deaths than the civilian casualties in each drone strike.

So, again, we can be upset by it (and I certainly am), but you have to be willing to come to the table with other solutions to the problem. Otherwise you are bemoaning a system that you can’t replace. And I guarantee more people will find the “do nothing” strategy unacceptable.

Moving on to the last six years of Obama’s presidency, it is important to recognize that progressives left Obama to fight alone when he wasn’t on the ticket. When Democrats controlled Congress, Obama accomplished formal regulation of the banks, established the CPB, and got ACA. This is only a few of a number of things we got under two years with a productive Congress and Obama. When we refused to show up in mid-terms, and let discussions on health care be characterized as a battle between Obama and Paul Ryan instead of adding Warren or Sanders to that list. We lost.

JFK and Johnson were far less socially liberal leaders than Obama. They had very little interest in losing Southern support to get the civil rights legislation passed. It was activists that forced their hand. Obama was willing to be pushed to the left more than any president in a generation. We failed to show up consistently to show him that there was dual opposition from the left as well as the right. We let the right run rough-shod over Obama’s policy prerogatives and left him to make changes to a broken immigration system with executive authority.

Despite this, Obama negotiated a deal to avert war with Iran (that this president promptly decimated), created a trade deal that would formalize environmental standards into codified law globally, and created programs for young undocumented immigrants to get worker protections.

No president is perfect. Abraham Lincoln, my favorite president, was always more cautious than abolitionists (who were absolutely 100% right) wanted him to be. He also led the military under an expansion that resulted in continued hurt for Native Americans. But he accomplished a great deal (obviously; I don’t need to go into detail on what those are, we are politically engaged people) and was an ultimately transformative leader in the country. FDR allowed for Japanese internment and left black Americans explicitly on the cutting room floor of his programs. But he did create a number of really powerful transformative programs.

Under Obama’s leadership, and with help from two of the Justices that he appointed to the Supreme Court (the other two liberal justices being appointed by Clinton), there was the greatest expansion of social rights in modern history. He created programs for inclusion for transgender folks. He created DACA and tried to create DAPA. He tried to reshape the Supreme Court to be 5-4 Liberal to Conservative. He tried to close Guantanamo Bay and had to settle for reducing the inmate number by a substantial margin. Obama ended torture as a tool for United States intelligence gathering. He created a foreign policy in which it was appropriate to talk to even our adversaries without pre-conditions. Obama created the ACA and got people, including my brother, health care in spite of pre-existing conditions. Obama got a fair-pay act through Congress. And his administration fought to stop the Supreme Court from decimating the Voting Rights Act.

No, Obama wasn’t perfect. Like any of us, he was flawed. Like any past president, those flaws are not insignificant and cost people their lives and livelihoods. But, under Obama, we had a person who cared to avoid failure and to correct it when necessary. Without Obama, the health care debate doesn’t transform to Medicare For All versus the status quo. You are fighting on the house he built for us to fight on. And he still maintained his social and economic progressivism while all the folks torching him sat out elections.

Obama was the best modern president. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t flawed or that we shouldn’t talk about those flaws. But it does mean that, much like Sanders folks who love FDR, we have to put his entire presidency into context. I unironically say #ThanksObama.