All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[PwrdOn]

Unions played a major role in anti-racist, feminist, and other "woke" causes all through the early to middle 20th Century. Two of MLK's big supporters was Walter Reuther, Union leader of United Auto Works (UAW) and also Jimmy Hoffa, President of the Teamsters. This idea to paint the American working class as eternally racist and unchanging people who did nothing is so demeaning, insulting, and reductionist as to be absurd. Please read actual books on this.

Please update your 2016 Narrative of grievance about Trump's support from the working-class:
1) The majority and core part of Trump's supporters aren't working-class whites, they are in fact far more like the group who stormed the Capitol on the 6th, i.e. middle-class and high income earners from Dem-districts who resent the demographic shift around them.
2) Active white supremacists like the Ku Klux Klan were comprised in the main of white middle-class to upper-middle class types, even some country club denizens.
3) The white working-class is no more, or for that matter no less, racist than white people of any other class, and on average (in my experience at least) a good bit more progressive than upper-classes and middle-class whites.
4) The core part of the American working class was never predominantly white-male-cis-straight and certainly not so today. So quit centering the story on white working class as the protagonists of even the working class story. UAW Union in Michigan for instance, is now largely a union with majority African-American membership.

Trump won non-college educated whites by like 35 points in the last election, the most generous reading you can make is that the white working class mostly just doesn't vote and that this tally mostly represents middle class voters who are better off than we think, but even that doesn't really speak of their potential to be part of some future diverse progressive coalition. And I mean, it's not like these people are inherently racist, it's just that the media force feeds us this narrative about the ruggedly individualistic blue collar (white) American worker being the backbone of our society which gives them an inflated view of their own importance and leads them to discount the contributions of minorities and immigrants that have historically done most of the actual work.

And seriously, this is a tale as old as time - in this country there are people who by whatever arbitrary standards we apply are generally considered to be "real Americans" and people who aren't, and that the tried and true method for the latter group to assimilate into the former is to forcibly adopt whatever habits are acceptably mainstream and virulently disclaim any connection they have to anything that might appear too alien or ethnic. This is how American society manages to remain so xenophobic even after absorbing so many waves of immigration, creating the patently absurd situation that the people who are most vocal in this respect tend to be rather difficult to distinguish from the people they hate the most. It's not a coincidence that the Proud Boys have so many Latino members or that the Epoch Times were so eager to parrot Trump's foreign policy.

Did someone criticize China in even the slightest fashion recently?

Yeah, Chairman Xi pays me well to troll comic book forums to brainwash everyone about....Otto von Bismarck's health care policy.

[CaptainEurope]

Only if there is a new rightwing-Q-Trump Party. I don't see that happening.

Nader was a big reason Gore didn't win Florida, and the Greens hurt Hillary in Wisconsin.

Could the Constitution Party gather up some Trump cultists? After all, Trump's first failed presidential run was with them.

[CaptainEurope]

It doesn't.

Bismarck hijacked ideas proposed and put forth in the left-wing which is what he did all through his political career. Bismarck never created or innovated anything on his own.



If Bismarck truly weakened the left-wing by appropriating their ideas why did the Imperial state feel the need to gerrymander (don't know what the German word for this is, but same thing) and otherwise restrict and repress opposition parties to his rule. If he was truly confident in his policies and his legacies he would have contested it in a fair electoral contest. The fact is that Bismarck's pragmatism divided and alienated him from his fellow Prussian conservatives and lost him many of his friends, and cultivated a personal authority that did not recognize any equal parties. Bismarck's support for healthcare also fell short in many respects from Social Democrat pitches and ideas and had to be substantially reworked and developed later on.



Attachment 105857

1) Imperial Prussia also relied on cheap labor, you had an entire class of people called Junkers who owned plantations and agrarian and manorial estates much like the Old South with people working there for low wages. Then the Imperial Prussians got into colonialism in Africa and did some pretty awful things in Namibia. Bismarck's brand of bribe-the-left's-base worked in selected areas and so on, but that only addressed the class of German citizens who had some say in Imperial Germany (which was very small franchise).

2) "who were mostly just happy to be here and weren't really able to organize themselves" is complete hogwash. Immigrant workers on arriving in America were very active and important in unions and helped make unions into a major force in American, and world, affairs. The IWW, the Wobblies, which had many immigrants (such as the Swedish Joe Hill) were big players in putting forth many union goals and achievements, some of which are still on the books.



I don't know which Europeans you've been reading or been talking to, but this is Euro-nationalist claptrap.



Not always, not in all places, and not at all times. This is a childish, no infantile, simplification.

Your post on Europe strikes me as quite misinformed in several respects, to put it mildly, I suggest you read books on this subject and read more widely. Anything by Thomas Piketty albeit he might be too academic. But Tony Judt's POSTWAR is a good one-volume read for a start.

Bismarck literally outlawed the Social Democrats.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Socialist_Laws

He would not have felt the need to do that if they had been all that weakened. On my street, there is a plaque at a building memorizing the time when the bar that was once in it served as the meeting place of a supposed men's choir, which was really secret meetings of the Socialists and Social Democrats.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Hre is a small rant. Not so much a rant but something that annoys me.

Every dem law maker talk about how Covid relief if very much needed because people are hurting so bad. Yet they also say the Impeachment of Trump is a number one goal.

Now I am not saying Trump should not be impeached so dont come at me like that. i am saying Covid bill should come first. The upcoming Senate Trial of a man no longer in office when there is a 99.9 percent chance he gets off any way will not make one bit of difference in the lives of Americans. But The Covid bill will help a lot of people and passing that will get things started. So why not pass that first if it is so important and Americans need as much help ASAP as the law makers claim. What does it matter if they have the trial next week and spend this week getting help to the people who need it. Hold the trial, I am all for that. Put Trump and his cronies to the coals. But waiting a week or so will not change anything on what will happen with the trial. Just my two cents.

I understand your concern, and while it's important to get that COVID bill passed, it's also crucial that Trump be held responsible for having fomented last month's insurrection. Trump must be put on trial and not allowed to get away with that disaster at the Capitol which resulted in half a dozen deaths, lest the next Qpublican president try the same stunt in the future after losing the election. And, let's not kid ourselves, we all know that WILL happen if Trump isn't convicted as he should.

====================

Trump Claimed Election ‘Rigged’ Or ‘Stolen’ Over 100 Times Ahead Of Capitol Riot

The then-president whipped up distrust of U.S. democracy, the media and his own vice president in tweets and speeches leading up to the Jan. 6 attack. Meanwhile....

**********

GOP Lawmaker Urges Senate Republicans To Convict Trump In Powerful Op-Ed

Rep. Adam Kinzinger also called out members of his own party for repeating Trump’s lies.

**********

Georgia Officials Launch Investigation Into Trump’s Efforts To Overturn Election Results

The ex-president’s bombshell phone call urging officials to “find” enough votes for him to win the state will be a key focus.

**********

Democrats Unveil First Draft Of $1,400 Stimulus Checks Bill

In a win for progressives, the proposal retains the previous income threshold below which Americans would qualify for the full payment.

**********

CBO Report Says $15 Minimum Wage Would Reduce Poverty But Cost Jobs

An estimated 27 million workers would see raises, though there would be 1.4 million fewer jobs.

**********

Ingraham Goes Off The Rails In Wild Rant Blaming Everyone She Can Think Of

The Fox News host blamed Joe Biden, immigrants, Seth Rogen, Steve Carell, Black Lives Matter, Jeff Bezos and more in a rambling conspiracy thread. Girlfriend SERIOUSLY needs to switch to decaf!

[WestPhillyPunisher]

From The Lincoln Project, to call this powerful would be an understatement:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1358777607723118612

[worstblogever]

On this date in 2015, "Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day" ran a profile of Tom Mullins, a Tea Party candidate who ran for Congress in 2010 to represent New Mexico’s 3rd Congressional District. During his campaign, Mullins referred to Social Security as a “Ponzi scheme”, and talked about eliminating all Pell grants for college students and then allocating the money from them towards tax breaks for the rich. However, the real issue with Mullins perhaps that he went out of his way to say that Native Americans in his district were “two-faced”, and bemoaned the lack of “white faces” on the Kewa Pueblo. It became even harder for Mullins to dodge accusations of racism that followed when his suggestion to solving the immigration crisis was to set up a mine field on the U.S./Mexico border to discourage people from sneaking across. Mullins has not reappeared on the political scene in the past seven years, and for that we are grateful.



In both 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, as well as in 2020, "Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day" published its profiles of Pat Garofalo, a man with a history of demonizing Democrats and liberals in general with highly partisan rhetoric, gleefully trolling the opposite side of the aisle to an extent that he has compared the Minnesota state legislature in which he has served since 2004 to pro-wrestling, and defining his own antics as those of a traditional “heel” wrestler. (Oh, if only Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson would show up and brain this jagoff with a steel chair…) On social media, Garofalo seems to relish that role, where he has taunted liberal bloggers for having names that sound too similar for slang terms for vaginas, related environmentalists' distaste for mining companies to his own for Planned Parenthood, wished for a meteorite to hit a gathering of people watching cat videos to kill them all, and his most famous moment, perhaps, when he gave his humble opinion of what would happen if the NBA went out of business, "Let's be honest, 70% of teams in NBA could fold tomorrow + nobody would notice a difference w/ possible exception of increase in streetcrime." He apologized for that last one after being widely criticized, insisting that he in no way meant for his statement to be racist, and himself is not racist (Sure...)

Now, just being an unflinching ***hole for his own entertainment isn't the only way that Pat Garofalo is an utter bastard... he also does so in terms of his policy suggestions and votes. Like say, the time back in April 2015 that he pitched the idea to lower the minimum wage for wait staff who get at least $4 an hour in tips, lying and claiming it was needed to save restaurants from going under after Minnesota voted to raise its overall minimum wage to $9.50 an hour. Heaven forbid the blue collar workers in the service industry get any kind of an increase in wages, right? I mean, especially after the countless times that Garofalo voted against minimum wage increases during the greatest period of income inequality our nation has seen in the past century. Maybe it's not the waiters he hates, though, and just the waitresses if you apply his vote against Equal Pay laws to grant women equal pay for equal work. He also keeps insisting the Dept. of Justice “investigate massive voter fraud”.

(For the record, the Bush administration had its Department of Justice do the same thing, and found virtually none over a decade. Garofalo is effectively getting excited that taxpayer dollars will be wasted on something as useful as a unicorn hunt.)

In September of 2017, less than a month after Neo-Nazis terrorized Charlottesville and murdered Heather Heyer, members of Antifa turned up to face down a pro-Trump political gathering in Portland, Oregon. As tensions escalated, Garofalo, of course, only had a problem with the anti-Fascists, and put out the following suggestion on Twitter:

“1) Arrest them
2) Hold them for 72 hrs before posting bail
3) Give them alone time with Bubba in Appalachia.#EffectiveRehabilition

Now, once some media outlets started reporting on Garofalo joking about hoping the anti-Trump protesters were raped in prison, he denied that’s what his statement meant. I suppose he had a completely innocent idea of what “Alone time with Bubba in Applachia” is, that isn’t referencing Deliverance or something? (Pat’s full of s***, moving on…)

In April of 2019, after Donald Trump canceled a foreign trip because he was sulking about the fact that Denmark wouldn’t sell him Greenland (that is a real thing that still happened), Pat Garofalo was ready to cash in on the potential publicity by offering Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen to Minneapolis on a goodwill trip. Frederiksen, knowing a pathetic little fish when he sees one, kept swimming by.

By July 2019, Garofalo was again craving attention like a child whose parents never loved him enough, and decided to weigh in on the U.S. Women’s National Soccer team during their World Cup run, and how the team was protesting over being paid less than the men even though they are far more dominant over the competition than their male counterparts. Garofalo’s take was, predictably, stupid and sexist, as he declared that the USWNT’s low wages “It’s not sexism. It’s MATH.”

People checked the math, and Garofalo’s claims about revenue, only to discover SURPRISE! The women were bringing in more revenue, too.

Minnesota's House of Representatives has no term limits, and District 58B is aligned to be conservative enough that Pat Garofalo still wins even in presidential years comfortably by double digits. And regrettably, 2020 was no different, as Garofalo pulled down 62% of the vote for his tenth term in office. He is currently pretending like he never liked Donald Trump and that the people who stormed the Capitol Building in a violent coup attempt are not associated with the Republican Party… as well as “both sides”ing the events of 1/6 by lying and claiming that over the summer of 2020 that Black Lives Matter protesters somehow were the same in their own protests… that did not involve storming government buildings. Which is slightly more productive than him trying to spread misinformation about how bad the Covid-19 response of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz supposedly is (which has actually been good, compared to a lot of states).

But these things are to be expected of this hype-partisan troll and his s***posting.

[Mister Mets]

There are people that say the advent of the Green Party and Nader ended up hurting the Dems up until Obama was elected.

I could see the same argument being made here for the Rs.

It would depend on how an exodus from the Republican party goes. Who would leave? Where would they go?

There seem to be three main possibilities for change: "Moderate" Republicans (a catch-all phrase for Romney-Biden/ Hillary/ Gary Johnson 2016 voters) form their own party, "Moderate" Republicans join the Democratic party, and MAGA Republicans form their own party.

One hope for progressives would be that if moderate Republicans form their own party it splits the vote, allowing more Democrats to win. It does seem unlikely for moderates to do something as extreme as forming a new party. They can recognize that five million voters (the three million Johnson gained in 2016 plus two million pissed off Romney voters/ younger Republicans) are going to have more of an impact in primaries than supporting a third candidate in the general election.

Moderate Republicans could join the Democratic party, adding to its numbers. However, these people who follow politics closely and are more engaged than the normal voter (as is the case of anyone willing to vote for a third-party candidate) voting in primaries, and pushing Democrats to the right. Their candidates won't always win (five million votes is about half of what Sanders got in the Democratic party), but they're also not going to be guaranteed to stick around in the general election (most Republican candidates are not as bad as Majorie Taylor Greene or Lauren Boebert.) It may be seen as a worthwhile tradeoff if it results in more wins for the Democrats.

The final possibility is MAGA forming its own party. They're not very well organized, and it remains easier to have an outsized impact in the general election than in primaries, but if they can get decent candidates on the ballot in a few races, it could end up splitting the vote and costing Republicans some races. Strategically, the best they can hope for is concessions from the Republican party, but it would also be a way for right-wing grifters to increase their profiles, which will appeal to candidates and campaign managers who don't care as much about the results of the election, and would be glad if Democrats win if it helps their bottom line.

The likeliest scenario is that things largely stay the same. The party with half the Senators, and 48 percent of House seats sticks around benefitting from the mistakes of the party with the White House and a return to normalcy.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Trump won non-college educated whites by like 35 points in the last election,

"non-college educated" does not mean working class, my dude. Nor is it a case that people who go to college are outside the working-class.

...the most generous reading you can make is that the white working class mostly just doesn't vote and that this tally mostly represents middle class voters who are better off than we think,

This is closer to the mark than anything else you have said.

...but even that doesn't really speak of their potential to be part of some future diverse progressive coalition.

Because obviously we need to be beholden to a feudal conception of a group of people as eternal, unchanging, and static and not at all to the democratic project of seeing them as dynamic entities subject to all kinds of pressures and influences.

Fact is people change and come and go, in a democracy votes aren't a given or permanent, you need to renew a bond or contract every election.

[babyblob]

@WWP

I didnt want to quote your whole message I am being lazy today.

I think it is responsible to hold Trump accountable for what happened. But how is holding the trial this week before a covid bill that Biden and all The Dems say people need so bad holding him more accountable then having the trial at a later time? Even more so when it is pretty much a given that he will not be convicted? I say work this week on getting the bill passed and hold the trial next week. At least that is how I would handle it if I was the Dems.

[Tami]

@WWP

I didnt want to quote your whole message I am being lazy today.

I think it is responsible to hold Trump accountable for what happened. But how is holding the trial this week before a covid bill that Biden and all The Dems say people need so bad holding him more accountable then having the trial at a later time? Even more so when it is pretty much a given that he will not be convicted? I say work this week on getting the bill passed and hold the trial next week. At least that is how I would handle it if I was the Dems.

Ever find yourself in a situation where you need to do one project, say repairs on your home or maybe something work related, but you also have bills to pay? You might think, at least I would, that, bill paying needs to be done first. That it wouldn't take so long, and that you don't want these bills hanging over your head. After you get them out of the way you can focus on the more complicated work projects.

That is kind of how it is now for the Democrats. Also, note that the House had to do the Impeachment while Trump was still in office, and the Senate has to put him on trial in an expeditious way. Plus, there the the fact that this incident, January 6th, is still fresh in the minds of everyone who was there. Putting it off might just dull the emotional impact.

Senate sets stage for rapid Trump impeachment trial

Senate Democrats See Short Trump Trial Amid Covid-19 Stimulus Push

[Tami]

‘Its Own Domestic Army’: How the G.O.P. Allied Itself With Militants

LANSING, Mich. — Dozens of heavily armed militiamen crowded into the Michigan Statehouse last April to protest a stay-at-home order by the Democratic governor to slow the pandemic. Chanting and stomping their feet, they halted legislative business, tried to force their way onto the floor and brandished rifles from the gallery over lawmakers below.

Initially, Republican leaders had some misgivings about their new allies. “The optics weren’t good. Next time tell them not to bring guns,” complained Mike Shirkey, the State Senate majority leader, according to one of the protest organizers. But Michigan’s highest-ranking Republican came around after the planners threatened to return with weapons and “militia guys signing autographs and passing out blow-up AR-15s to the kiddies on the Capitol lawn.”

“To his credit,” Jason Howland, the organizer, wrote in a social media post, Mr. Shirkey agreed to help the cause and “spoke at our next event.”

Following signals from President Donald J. Trump — who had tweeted “LIBERATE MICHIGAN!” after an earlier show of force in Lansing — Michigan’s Republican Party last year welcomed the support of newly emboldened paramilitary groups and other vigilantes. Prominent party members formed bonds with militias or gave tacit approval to armed activists using intimidation in a series of rallies and confrontations around the state. That intrusion into the Statehouse now looks like a portent of the assault halfway across the country months later at the United States Capitol.

As the Senate on Tuesday begins the impeachment trial of Mr. Trump on charges of inciting the Jan. 6 Capitol rioting, what happened in Michigan helps explain how, under his influence, party leaders aligned themselves with a culture of militancy to pursue political goals.

[Tendrin]

Oh no, poor WBE.

The lead organizer of the April 30 armed protest, Ryan Kelley, a local Republican official, last week announced a bid for governor. “Becoming too closely aligned with militias — is that a bad thing?” he said in an interview. Londa Gatt, a pro-Trump activist close to him was named last month to a leadership position in a statewide Republican women’s group. She welcomed militias and Proud Boys at protests, posting on the social media site Parler: “While BLM destroy/murder people the Proud Boys are true patriots.” Prosecutors have accused members of the Proud Boys of playing a leading role in the Jan. 6 assault.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/08/u...gtype=Homepage

[4saken1]

It would depend on how an exodus from the Republican party goes. Who would leave? Where would they go?

There seem to be three main possibilities for change: "Moderate" Republicans (a catch-all phrase for Romney-Biden/ Hillary/ Gary Johnson 2016 voters) form their own party, "Moderate" Republicans join the Democratic party, and MAGA Republicans form their own party.

One hope for progressives would be that if moderate Republicans form their own party it splits the vote, allowing more Democrats to win. It does seem unlikely for moderates to do something as extreme as forming a new party. They can recognize that five million voters (the three million Johnson gained in 2016 plus two million pissed off Romney voters/ younger Republicans) are going to have more of an impact in primaries than supporting a third candidate in the general election.

Moderate Republicans could join the Democratic party, adding to its numbers. However, these people who follow politics closely and are more engaged than the normal voter (as is the case of anyone willing to vote for a third-party candidate) voting in primaries, and pushing Democrats to the right. Their candidates won't always win (five million votes is about half of what Sanders got in the Democratic party), but they're also not going to be guaranteed to stick around in the general election (most Republican candidates are not as bad as Majorie Taylor Greene or Lauren Boebert.) It may be seen as a worthwhile tradeoff if it results in more wins for the Democrats.

The final possibility is MAGA forming its own party. They're not very well organized, and it remains easier to have an outsized impact in the general election than in primaries, but if they can get decent candidates on the ballot in a few races, it could end up splitting the vote and costing Republicans some races. Strategically, the best they can hope for is concessions from the Republican party, but it would also be a way for right-wing grifters to increase their profiles, which will appeal to candidates and campaign managers who don't care as much about the results of the election, and would be glad if Democrats win if it helps their bottom line.

The likeliest scenario is that things largely stay the same. The party with half the Senators, and 48 percent of House seats sticks around benefitting from the mistakes of the party with the White House and a return to normalcy.

It really wouldn't take very many (1-2% across the board) to have a huge impact. In 2016, there were 4 States totaling 75 Electoral Votes which Trump won by less than 2%.

[worstblogever]

It would depend on how an exodus from the Republican party goes. Who would leave? Where would they go?

There seem to be three main possibilities for change: "Moderate" Republicans (a catch-all phrase for Romney-Biden/ Hillary/ Gary Johnson 2016 voters) form their own party, "Moderate" Republicans join the Democratic party, and MAGA Republicans form their own party.

One hope for progressives would be that if moderate Republicans form their own party it splits the vote, allowing more Democrats to win. It does seem unlikely for moderates to do something as extreme as forming a new party. They can recognize that five million voters (the three million Johnson gained in 2016 plus two million pissed off Romney voters/ younger Republicans) are going to have more of an impact in primaries than supporting a third candidate in the general election.

Moderate Republicans could join the Democratic party, adding to its numbers. However, these people who follow politics closely and are more engaged than the normal voter (as is the case of anyone willing to vote for a third-party candidate) voting in primaries, and pushing Democrats to the right. Their candidates won't always win (five million votes is about half of what Sanders got in the Democratic party), but they're also not going to be guaranteed to stick around in the general election (most Republican candidates are not as bad as Majorie Taylor Greene or Lauren Boebert.) It may be seen as a worthwhile tradeoff if it results in more wins for the Democrats.

The final possibility is MAGA forming its own party. They're not very well organized, and it remains easier to have an outsized impact in the general election than in primaries, but if they can get decent candidates on the ballot in a few races, it could end up splitting the vote and costing Republicans some races. Strategically, the best they can hope for is concessions from the Republican party, but it would also be a way for right-wing grifters to increase their profiles, which will appeal to candidates and campaign managers who don't care as much about the results of the election, and would be glad if Democrats win if it helps their bottom line.

The likeliest scenario is that things largely stay the same. The party with half the Senators, and 48 percent of House seats sticks around benefitting from the mistakes of the party with the White House and a return to normalcy.

"My political party is filled with conspiracy theorists, many of whom are becoming inspired to become domestic terrorists, and the elected officials keep fueling them with the same lies to radicalize them.

But, I dunno, I guess I'll wait and see if the terrorists leave first before I do. I'm sure it will work itself out."

Ah, the bravery of Republicans. So inspiring.

[Kirby101]

I don't think the moderate Republicans will leave. It would be too much for them to admit what their Party has become. They will keep holding out the hope that it will return to something it was decades ago. A futile hope, but they will never admit that is more of a racist, extreme right-wing, religious fundamentalist Party, then the socially moderate, fiscally conservative Party it is in their dreams.