Trump: "Long Live the KIng"
February 19, 2025 7:29 PM Subscribe
Trump likens himself to a king on Truth Social. The post was in relation to the USDOT killing New York City's planned congestion pricing. In case you missed it: Yesterday, Trump issued an executive order ending the independence of multiple agencies. A few days ago, he claimed that "He who saves his Country does not violate any Law". And after firing nuclear safety workers, the regime said "Oops" and struggled to rehire them. In a bit of good news, a court reinstated the head of the Merit Systems Protection Board, which hears appeals from federal workers.
It also hasn’t been killed. Trump doesn’t have the authority to do that and we shouldn’t just normalize what he says as true. Eff eff ess!
posted by Captaintripps at 7:44 PM on February 19 [75 favorites]
posted by Captaintripps at 7:44 PM on February 19 [75 favorites]
Thanks, I stand corrected. Took my cue from the press, which is doing much of the normalizing.
posted by NotLost at 7:45 PM on February 19 [21 favorites]
posted by NotLost at 7:45 PM on February 19 [21 favorites]
He might, it did need federal approval in the first place.
posted by BungaDunga at 7:45 PM on February 19
posted by BungaDunga at 7:45 PM on February 19
firehose of shit. and once humphrey's is gone at the SC.....
posted by lalochezia at 7:47 PM on February 19
posted by lalochezia at 7:47 PM on February 19
Chop chop #madamedefarge
posted by supermedusa at 7:47 PM on February 19 [7 favorites]
posted by supermedusa at 7:47 PM on February 19 [7 favorites]
the only thing that is left is for the supreme court to roll into nyc in an rv bought and paid for by one or another billionaire
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 8:02 PM on February 19 [10 favorites]
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 8:02 PM on February 19 [10 favorites]
Or John Oliver
posted by gottabefunky at 8:07 PM on February 19 [8 favorites]
posted by gottabefunky at 8:07 PM on February 19 [8 favorites]
Congestion pricing required approval under a regime that believed in rule of law. That clearly no longer applies.
posted by Just the one swan, actually at 8:20 PM on February 19 [4 favorites]
posted by Just the one swan, actually at 8:20 PM on February 19 [4 favorites]
We Americans do know a thing or two about dealing with kings. If Trump wants to be a king we can go 1776 on his sorry orange ass.
Meanwhile, Mad King Don appointed Louis DeJoy to be Postmaster General and destroy the Post Office.
When Biden won suddenly it was TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE to replace the Postmaster General with someone who wasn't hellbent on destroying the Post Office and many Democrats even changed their tune and began saying DeJoy was a great guy who would be a fine Postmaster General.
Now that Trump is King again, DeJoy says the Post Office is destroyed and he'll be resigning sometime since Mad King Don can appoint his successor. Trump says he wants to privatize the post office and points to the economic failure wrought by DeJoy as why the Post Office should be fully privatized.
Mission Accomplished.
But hey, I'm sure the powder is super duper dry, right Democrats? By God we must have the driest powder ever!
posted by sotonohito at 8:21 PM on February 19 [84 favorites]
Meanwhile, Mad King Don appointed Louis DeJoy to be Postmaster General and destroy the Post Office.
When Biden won suddenly it was TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE to replace the Postmaster General with someone who wasn't hellbent on destroying the Post Office and many Democrats even changed their tune and began saying DeJoy was a great guy who would be a fine Postmaster General.
Now that Trump is King again, DeJoy says the Post Office is destroyed and he'll be resigning sometime since Mad King Don can appoint his successor. Trump says he wants to privatize the post office and points to the economic failure wrought by DeJoy as why the Post Office should be fully privatized.
Mission Accomplished.
But hey, I'm sure the powder is super duper dry, right Democrats? By God we must have the driest powder ever!
posted by sotonohito at 8:21 PM on February 19 [84 favorites]
The MTA's lawsuit. NJ Governor Phil Murphy has gone out of his way to thank Trump over this.
posted by BungaDunga at 8:24 PM on February 19 [4 favorites]
posted by BungaDunga at 8:24 PM on February 19 [4 favorites]
The MTA argues that 1) the law that approved these sorts of projects doesn't let Trump just renege, 2) it violates due process, 3) it violates the Administrative Procedures Act in two different ways, and 4) violates the National Environmental Policy Act since it was done without an environmental review, which of course the whole tolling program was delayed by having to do in the first place. Filed nearly instantly so they must have had this all written up and ready to go.
posted by BungaDunga at 8:28 PM on February 19 [19 favorites]
posted by BungaDunga at 8:28 PM on February 19 [19 favorites]
By God we must have the driest powder ever!
posted by sotonohito
ashes are dry
posted by lalochezia at 8:29 PM on February 19 [14 favorites]
posted by sotonohito
ashes are dry
posted by lalochezia at 8:29 PM on February 19 [14 favorites]
come on lets get it really goin !! Cut snap/foodstamps to the bone Cut/eliminate section 8 housing assistance Throw up numerous walls/hoops in order to receive medicaid All of that should push us to FINALLY bring about a revolution
posted by robbyrobs at 8:44 PM on February 19 [3 favorites]
posted by robbyrobs at 8:44 PM on February 19 [3 favorites]
Jesus Christ, fuck these assholes. Keep resisting, never never never normalize this shit.
posted by crazy_yeti at 8:46 PM on February 19 [14 favorites]
posted by crazy_yeti at 8:46 PM on February 19 [14 favorites]
The Supreme Court already made him a king. Now he just has the crown to go with it.
posted by Lemkin at 8:51 PM on February 19 [7 favorites]
posted by Lemkin at 8:51 PM on February 19 [7 favorites]
"Whatever you subsidize, you get more of." — George Will.
From that, I think they extrapolate: 1) If you subsidize poor people, you get more poor people. 2) If you subsidize rich people, you get more rich people. So down with entitlements and up with tax breaks.
However, in reality, if you subsidize rich people, you just get the same number of rich people, but with even more wealth. Just a thought...
posted by zaixfeep at 9:10 PM on February 19 [13 favorites]
From that, I think they extrapolate: 1) If you subsidize poor people, you get more poor people. 2) If you subsidize rich people, you get more rich people. So down with entitlements and up with tax breaks.
However, in reality, if you subsidize rich people, you just get the same number of rich people, but with even more wealth. Just a thought...
posted by zaixfeep at 9:10 PM on February 19 [13 favorites]
How many of Trump’s EO’s don’t have a lawsuit filed against them?
The Democrats have been weak as hell thus far, so now we get to see if the Supreme Court, which has spent the last half decade trying to grow their own power dramatically (Chevron, anyone?), is truly ready to hand all of it over to the executive branch.
I mean, maybe? The legislative branch certainly seems to have rolled over. But they have to stand for election every four to six years. They are looking out for themselves.
The judiciary has no similar need to appease the people. I smell a constitutional crisis brewing.
I know Vance loves his made-up Andrew Jackson quote about “seeing John Marshall enforce his decision,” but do we really have any historical parallels to go of off?
It’s bizarre that our rule of law boils down to which branch is less brazenly corrupt at this moment. That is slightly terrifying.
posted by ifatfirstyoudontsucceed at 9:18 PM on February 19 [12 favorites]
The Democrats have been weak as hell thus far, so now we get to see if the Supreme Court, which has spent the last half decade trying to grow their own power dramatically (Chevron, anyone?), is truly ready to hand all of it over to the executive branch.
I mean, maybe? The legislative branch certainly seems to have rolled over. But they have to stand for election every four to six years. They are looking out for themselves.
The judiciary has no similar need to appease the people. I smell a constitutional crisis brewing.
I know Vance loves his made-up Andrew Jackson quote about “seeing John Marshall enforce his decision,” but do we really have any historical parallels to go of off?
It’s bizarre that our rule of law boils down to which branch is less brazenly corrupt at this moment. That is slightly terrifying.
posted by ifatfirstyoudontsucceed at 9:18 PM on February 19 [12 favorites]
BREWING? IT'S DONE BREWED MY FRIENDS. IT'S OVER-BREWED. IT'S CHARRED AND BURNED ITSELF TO A CRISP AT THE BOTTOM OF THE POT AND FORMED A STINKING BURN MARK. IT IS BEYOND HERE. IT IS DONE. THE CRISIS IS CRISIS'D. IT’S TIME TO DEAL WITH THE CRISIS THAT HAPPENED AND MAYBE UNDO IT.
posted by Going To Maine at 9:32 PM on February 19 [34 favorites]
posted by Going To Maine at 9:32 PM on February 19 [34 favorites]
I forgot to mention Trump's recent treatment of Ukraine, such as saying that country started the war with Russia.
posted by NotLost at 10:16 PM on February 19 [10 favorites]
posted by NotLost at 10:16 PM on February 19 [10 favorites]
How many of Trump’s EO’s don’t have a lawsuit filed against them?
The Democrats have been weak as hell thus far
like half the lawsuits are from Democratic state Attorneys General, fwiw
posted by BungaDunga at 10:37 PM on February 19 [15 favorites]
The Democrats have been weak as hell thus far
like half the lawsuits are from Democratic state Attorneys General, fwiw
posted by BungaDunga at 10:37 PM on February 19 [15 favorites]
If you're looking for Project 2025 trackers:
Project 2025 Observer
Project 2025 Tracker (google sheet) from Center for Progressive Reform
posted by rubatan at 10:45 PM on February 19 [13 favorites]
Project 2025 Observer
Project 2025 Tracker (google sheet) from Center for Progressive Reform
posted by rubatan at 10:45 PM on February 19 [13 favorites]
Bungadunga — great point. The states have been the strongest line of defense so far. Not fair to lump them in with Congressional Dems.
I think we’re about to see the hardest about face ever on states’ rights by conservatives. And *that’s* something I can see SCOTUS capitulating on. Then it gets very weird.
posted by ifatfirstyoudontsucceed at 11:41 PM on February 19 [13 favorites]
I think we’re about to see the hardest about face ever on states’ rights by conservatives. And *that’s* something I can see SCOTUS capitulating on. Then it gets very weird.
posted by ifatfirstyoudontsucceed at 11:41 PM on February 19 [13 favorites]
Mad King Don.
At some point it's going to occur to the Project 2025 folks that Donny has done his job for them by delivering power, and that from this point onwards he's really just an embarrassing liability. It'll be interesting to see what happens then.
Trump's recent treatment of Ukraine.
Trump's had it in for Zelenskyy ever since the Ukrainian leader refused to help him dig dirt on Hunter Biden. That's not the only factor determining Trump's attitude towards the war by any means, but I bet it's there in the mix somewhere. After all, we all know how pathetically petty and vindictive he is.
Project 2025 trackers
It's not a tracker, but of you missed this previous post summing up the Project 2025 measures as a series of single page comic strips, it's well worth a look.
posted by Paul Slade at 12:57 AM on February 20 [17 favorites]
At some point it's going to occur to the Project 2025 folks that Donny has done his job for them by delivering power, and that from this point onwards he's really just an embarrassing liability. It'll be interesting to see what happens then.
Trump's recent treatment of Ukraine.
Trump's had it in for Zelenskyy ever since the Ukrainian leader refused to help him dig dirt on Hunter Biden. That's not the only factor determining Trump's attitude towards the war by any means, but I bet it's there in the mix somewhere. After all, we all know how pathetically petty and vindictive he is.
Project 2025 trackers
It's not a tracker, but of you missed this previous post summing up the Project 2025 measures as a series of single page comic strips, it's well worth a look.
posted by Paul Slade at 12:57 AM on February 20 [17 favorites]
At some point it's going to occur to the Project 2025 folks that Donny has done his job for them by delivering power, and that from this point onwards he's really just an embarrassing liability. It'll be interesting to see what happens then.
It'll be too late. He'll have absolute power. He's already acting as if he does. They'll have to wait for him to die, and in the meantime they'll have to watch their own backs.
posted by rory at 1:04 AM on February 20 [7 favorites]
It'll be too late. He'll have absolute power. He's already acting as if he does. They'll have to wait for him to die, and in the meantime they'll have to watch their own backs.
posted by rory at 1:04 AM on February 20 [7 favorites]
I look forward to the powerful Democratic response to all of this.
posted by tommasz at 1:09 AM on February 20 [10 favorites]
posted by tommasz at 1:09 AM on February 20 [10 favorites]
Are you fucking kidding me?! The first time I saw this, they didn't show the picture. Are you fucking kidding me?
posted by DeepSeaHaggis at 1:38 AM on February 20 [4 favorites]
posted by DeepSeaHaggis at 1:38 AM on February 20 [4 favorites]
Re: Congestion Pricing
May Phil Murphy, Josh Gottheimer, Hakeem Jeffries, and Kathy Hochul—whose unilateral and illegal delay of CP from June until January sets enough legal precedent for a court to side with Trump—never win an election ever again.
posted by thecaddy at 3:06 AM on February 20 [9 favorites]
May Phil Murphy, Josh Gottheimer, Hakeem Jeffries, and Kathy Hochul—whose unilateral and illegal delay of CP from June until January sets enough legal precedent for a court to side with Trump—never win an election ever again.
posted by thecaddy at 3:06 AM on February 20 [9 favorites]
Great job, voters who couldn't bear to sacrifice their 'principles' about Gaza!
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 3:47 AM on February 20 [18 favorites]
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 3:47 AM on February 20 [18 favorites]
Congestion pricing required approval under a regime that believed in rule of law. That clearly no longer applies.
This administration has already started cutting the federal purse strings (they stole $80 MM from New York City just last week) and we know they have it out for us. It's obvious whatever action is taken will incur more and various types of pressure from these assholes. We don't have to act like their illegal bullshit is legitimate, though.
The system is already on and working. So what if they "revoked" their approval? Their continued approval is irrelevant and unnecessary and doesn't need to be treated with seriousness. I'm glad our electeds are not even giving this dumb letter from another reality TV washup serious time, leaving the system running, and suing them.
I just wish they'd go a step further and film a whole hour of cars going under the gantries and mail it on DVD to Trump and all his cronies. Fax them screenshots of the video.
posted by Captaintripps at 4:11 AM on February 20 [7 favorites]
This administration has already started cutting the federal purse strings (they stole $80 MM from New York City just last week) and we know they have it out for us. It's obvious whatever action is taken will incur more and various types of pressure from these assholes. We don't have to act like their illegal bullshit is legitimate, though.
The system is already on and working. So what if they "revoked" their approval? Their continued approval is irrelevant and unnecessary and doesn't need to be treated with seriousness. I'm glad our electeds are not even giving this dumb letter from another reality TV washup serious time, leaving the system running, and suing them.
I just wish they'd go a step further and film a whole hour of cars going under the gantries and mail it on DVD to Trump and all his cronies. Fax them screenshots of the video.
posted by Captaintripps at 4:11 AM on February 20 [7 favorites]
Great job, voters who couldn't bear to sacrifice their 'principles' about Gaza!
Fuck off with that. As you know from the seven hundred times you've brought it up since the election, that's not what happened.
posted by mittens at 4:16 AM on February 20 [44 favorites]
Fuck off with that. As you know from the seven hundred times you've brought it up since the election, that's not what happened.
posted by mittens at 4:16 AM on February 20 [44 favorites]
reat job, voters who couldn't bear to sacrifice their 'principles' about Gaza!
I’ll say it a thousand times: people who didn’t vote for Biden because of the genocide he supported were infinitesimal and had no effect on the election. A possiblly bigger factor could have been smug white people shaming Arabs and Muslims about caring too much about their co ethnics, and thus turning them off from voting from dems.
Anyway, these types of comments shouldn’t be allowed.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 4:16 AM on February 20 [27 favorites]
I’ll say it a thousand times: people who didn’t vote for Biden because of the genocide he supported were infinitesimal and had no effect on the election. A possiblly bigger factor could have been smug white people shaming Arabs and Muslims about caring too much about their co ethnics, and thus turning them off from voting from dems.
Anyway, these types of comments shouldn’t be allowed.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 4:16 AM on February 20 [27 favorites]
Yes, it is absolutely not the fault of the seventy million people who voted for Trump, but in fact the seventeen people who voted for Jill Stein. Well done, you've figured it out.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:37 AM on February 20 [28 favorites]
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:37 AM on February 20 [28 favorites]
If you want a scapegoat, try the people who didn't vote.
posted by tommasz at 4:45 AM on February 20 [17 favorites]
posted by tommasz at 4:45 AM on February 20 [17 favorites]
Great job, voters who couldn't bear to sacrifice their 'principles' about Gaza!
If you were fine with letting Gaza slide for the sake of an election, and will chide people for not going your way, this has to be one of the most ironic election results of all time.
Anyway, the only current plan to push back appears to be via court cases. And so there's just a lot of waiting for the first Supreme Court action and wondering what flavor of fucked things will be after. Certainly, there appears to be a lack of compliance with court orders as is, just no official "actually the courts are just an opinion, man" declaration as yet.
posted by Slackermagee at 4:50 AM on February 20 [6 favorites]
If you were fine with letting Gaza slide for the sake of an election, and will chide people for not going your way, this has to be one of the most ironic election results of all time.
Anyway, the only current plan to push back appears to be via court cases. And so there's just a lot of waiting for the first Supreme Court action and wondering what flavor of fucked things will be after. Certainly, there appears to be a lack of compliance with court orders as is, just no official "actually the courts are just an opinion, man" declaration as yet.
posted by Slackermagee at 4:50 AM on February 20 [6 favorites]
We should wait and see if the Parliamentarian will allow congressional Dems to take any actions against the king!
posted by nofundy at 4:52 AM on February 20 [5 favorites]
posted by nofundy at 4:52 AM on February 20 [5 favorites]
They seem to be getting serious about destroying home rule in DC as well.
posted by reedbird_hill at 4:55 AM on February 20 [5 favorites]
posted by reedbird_hill at 4:55 AM on February 20 [5 favorites]
“My conscience is forcing me to sit out this election. Both candidates would be equally bad.”
If I were the king Mad Don pretends to be, everyone who made those statements or echoed, favorited, endorsed or repeated the sentiments on this site or any other in 2024 would be forced to eat those words, printed out on actual paper.
It’s the armchair progressives’ version of “Sending you my thoughts and prayers”.
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 5:25 AM on February 20 [6 favorites]
If I were the king Mad Don pretends to be, everyone who made those statements or echoed, favorited, endorsed or repeated the sentiments on this site or any other in 2024 would be forced to eat those words, printed out on actual paper.
It’s the armchair progressives’ version of “Sending you my thoughts and prayers”.
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 5:25 AM on February 20 [6 favorites]
And what would you have done if Biden had taken action on Gaza? Withheld your vote because of your principals? Isn't that the whole fucking reason Biden couldn't/didn't do anything about Gaza?
How dare you blame people for doing the same fucking thing you would have done if circumstances were different.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 5:35 AM on February 20 [9 favorites]
How dare you blame people for doing the same fucking thing you would have done if circumstances were different.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 5:35 AM on February 20 [9 favorites]
You know I see a lot of people chastising the left for not wanting to work with liberals or centrists without acknowledging that a lot of liberals and centrists spend their time punching left in really snide and gross ways. Maybe the people preventing a left/liberal alliance or whatever are not the leftists but the people who would rather make shitty remarks about them than try to accomplish anything, and maybe when people ask why the left doesn't trust liberals they should look at the way liberals treat and historically have treated the left.
(Noting for the record that I voted for Harris and all of my lefty friends except a couple in DC voted for Harris and I'm also skeptical of the "the leftists didn't vote" narrative which is always stated as a fact and for which I have seen no evidence from the people on this site who keep trotting it out. It sure does seem to make them happy to direct vitriol at the left though!)
posted by an octopus IRL at 5:37 AM on February 20 [28 favorites]
(Noting for the record that I voted for Harris and all of my lefty friends except a couple in DC voted for Harris and I'm also skeptical of the "the leftists didn't vote" narrative which is always stated as a fact and for which I have seen no evidence from the people on this site who keep trotting it out. It sure does seem to make them happy to direct vitriol at the left though!)
posted by an octopus IRL at 5:37 AM on February 20 [28 favorites]
I voted for Harris, but I'm not going to childishly blame anyone who was affected by fucking genocide for not voting.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 5:39 AM on February 20 [17 favorites]
posted by RonButNotStupid at 5:39 AM on February 20 [17 favorites]
Yeah we get it. Your mad about 12 real people and thousands of imaginary ones.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:41 AM on February 20 [1 favorite]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:41 AM on February 20 [1 favorite]
We don't have to circle around to Blame in the stages of grief again, y'all.
posted by seanmpuckett at 5:48 AM on February 20 [14 favorites]
posted by seanmpuckett at 5:48 AM on February 20 [14 favorites]
We don't have to circle around to Blame in the stages of grief again, y'all.
Okay, but I reserve the right to slip back into Denial a couple times a day.
posted by mittens at 5:58 AM on February 20 [14 favorites]
Okay, but I reserve the right to slip back into Denial a couple times a day.
posted by mittens at 5:58 AM on February 20 [14 favorites]
I’ll say it a thousand times: people who didn’t vote for Biden because of the genocide he supported were infinitesimal and had no effect on the electionI thought that at first, too, but this post election poll says the opposite:
Biden 2020 voters who cast a ballot for someone besides Harris who say their top issue was ending Israel’s violence in Gaza in key battleground states:Now, as we know, Harris promised throughout to be better than Biden, much less Trump’s promised full support for the settlers, but there were a lot of people who devoted their efforts to saying she was lying while ignoring the “finish the job” guy. I think some of that is the usual purity tests but a pretty large chunk of it dovetailed with misogyny and racism not being limited to Republicans. When elections are being decided by a percentage point or two, that’s more than enough to matter.
Arizona - 38%
Michigan - 32%
Wisconsin - 32%
Pennsylvania - 19%
posted by adamsc at 6:06 AM on February 20 [23 favorites]
Y'all, unless one of you has a time machine you're not telling us about, it's time to move away from What Should Have Happened and deal with What is Happening Right Now. Relitigating the 2024 election is useless because it doesn't change anything.
posted by Kitteh at 6:18 AM on February 20 [34 favorites]
posted by Kitteh at 6:18 AM on February 20 [34 favorites]
They seem to be getting serious about destroying home rule in DC as well.
I bet the Mayor is fine with this, since she gets her RTO ask from Donnie and Donnie gives her a pink slip.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 6:24 AM on February 20
I bet the Mayor is fine with this, since she gets her RTO ask from Donnie and Donnie gives her a pink slip.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 6:24 AM on February 20
I have a couple of lawyer friends, and when we were all hanging out recently one greeted the other by saying "hello, partner in crime" -- both are immigration lawyers, they help immigrants navigate the path to becoming citizens.
Both of them have been hearing from multiple channels that the Powers That Be have decided that lawyers helping immigrants become "legal" are equally guilty of the "illegal's" crimes. Both lawyers are building a network of who to call to get bail and what organizations can help with legal defense funding and essentially creating secret handshakes to know who they can trust.
This absolutely baffles me -- it was emphasized to me more than once in school that the fact that the US grants the right to have a defense attorney is critical to not having kangaroo courts like England had. Even if you're a criminal, you get to have a lawyer to help you maintain the rights you do have and ensure you're not being railroaded into a crime you didn't commit.
This isn't the first thing that has made me go "this is a bad direction" (not even the thousanth) but it is a seriously dark corner for The Powers That Be to go with, that lawyers doing their jobs are somehow guilty of a crime.
posted by AzraelBrown at 6:29 AM on February 20 [34 favorites]
Both of them have been hearing from multiple channels that the Powers That Be have decided that lawyers helping immigrants become "legal" are equally guilty of the "illegal's" crimes. Both lawyers are building a network of who to call to get bail and what organizations can help with legal defense funding and essentially creating secret handshakes to know who they can trust.
This absolutely baffles me -- it was emphasized to me more than once in school that the fact that the US grants the right to have a defense attorney is critical to not having kangaroo courts like England had. Even if you're a criminal, you get to have a lawyer to help you maintain the rights you do have and ensure you're not being railroaded into a crime you didn't commit.
This isn't the first thing that has made me go "this is a bad direction" (not even the thousanth) but it is a seriously dark corner for The Powers That Be to go with, that lawyers doing their jobs are somehow guilty of a crime.
posted by AzraelBrown at 6:29 AM on February 20 [34 favorites]
Adamsc——that certainly suggests so, but whether those poll results translated into actual votes is another thing, that’s a whole process. I’m not discounting that evidence, just to point out that the aggregate results are a lot muddier. I think it’s a very tricky question to nail down with a satisfactory answer.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:31 AM on February 20 [2 favorites]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:31 AM on February 20 [2 favorites]
He who saves his Country does not violate any Law.
I assume that includes people who save the country from Trump and Musk.
posted by MtDewd at 6:32 AM on February 20 [16 favorites]
I assume that includes people who save the country from Trump and Musk.
posted by MtDewd at 6:32 AM on February 20 [16 favorites]
Great job, voters who couldn't bear to sacrifice their 'principles' about Gaza!
Bonus troll points for the scare quotes. I appreciate the extra effort.
posted by Lemkin at 6:40 AM on February 20 [11 favorites]
Bonus troll points for the scare quotes. I appreciate the extra effort.
posted by Lemkin at 6:40 AM on February 20 [11 favorites]
Relitigating the 2024 election is useless because it doesn't change anything.
You say that, but I honestly believe part of the reason we're in ::gestures around wildly:: all this is because we didn't actually learn the lessons from the 2016 election, and the 2020 election, and the 2022 election.
"Vote Blue no matter who" was the correct choice for progressives in the 2024 election. Objectively, politically, morally, ethically, the correct call.
And if someone living through the past few months can't own up and admit that they were wrong, that using Gaza as the single defining litmus test for a candidate is destructive, that their arrogance caused real harm to every progressive cause they claim to champion, then I have difficulty viewing them as a rational person.
Maybe this just means I'll be the smuggest person in the concentration camp, I dunno.
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 6:41 AM on February 20 [20 favorites]
You say that, but I honestly believe part of the reason we're in ::gestures around wildly:: all this is because we didn't actually learn the lessons from the 2016 election, and the 2020 election, and the 2022 election.
"Vote Blue no matter who" was the correct choice for progressives in the 2024 election. Objectively, politically, morally, ethically, the correct call.
And if someone living through the past few months can't own up and admit that they were wrong, that using Gaza as the single defining litmus test for a candidate is destructive, that their arrogance caused real harm to every progressive cause they claim to champion, then I have difficulty viewing them as a rational person.
Maybe this just means I'll be the smuggest person in the concentration camp, I dunno.
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 6:41 AM on February 20 [20 favorites]
The Pluto Gangsta - they aren’t rational. But neither is it rational to expect them to be. Same people probably voted for Nader in 2000. Don’t want to get their hands dirty doing the right thing, must be nice to sleep so well with that clean conscience. Anyway pointless to point fingers these types will always be there.
posted by cotton dress sock at 6:45 AM on February 20 [3 favorites]
posted by cotton dress sock at 6:45 AM on February 20 [3 favorites]
Don’t want to get their hands dirty doing the right thing, must be nice to sleep so well with that clean conscience.
If you're going to stroke yourself, please do it in private instead of where the rest of us can see it.
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:49 AM on February 20 [12 favorites]
If you're going to stroke yourself, please do it in private instead of where the rest of us can see it.
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:49 AM on February 20 [12 favorites]
You say that, but I honestly believe part of the reason we're in ::gestures around wildly:: all this is because we didn't actually learn the lessons from the 2016 election, and the 2020 election, and the 2022 election.
I agree. But constantly fighting about it takes all the air out of the room and entrenches my own belief that folks would rather be arguing about this than actually helping out in their communities. You can't change the past. It sucks, it really does. But unless something magical happens and we get a do-over, all this is is wasted time. Trump dismantling your country right now.
posted by Kitteh at 6:51 AM on February 20 [22 favorites]
I agree. But constantly fighting about it takes all the air out of the room and entrenches my own belief that folks would rather be arguing about this than actually helping out in their communities. You can't change the past. It sucks, it really does. But unless something magical happens and we get a do-over, all this is is wasted time. Trump dismantling your country right now.
posted by Kitteh at 6:51 AM on February 20 [22 favorites]
And if someone living through the past few months can't own up and admit that they were wrong, that using Gaza as the single defining litmus test for a candidate is destructive, that their arrogance caused real harm to every progressive cause they claim to champion, then I have difficulty viewing them as a rational person.
If you can't own up and admit that an 86 electoral vote/2+ million popular vote loss to a convicted felon is the fault of a useless party running a lousy candidate rather than those darned hippies, I have difficulty viewing you as a rational person.
So I guess we're even.
posted by Lemkin at 6:54 AM on February 20 [17 favorites]
If you can't own up and admit that an 86 electoral vote/2+ million popular vote loss to a convicted felon is the fault of a useless party running a lousy candidate rather than those darned hippies, I have difficulty viewing you as a rational person.
So I guess we're even.
posted by Lemkin at 6:54 AM on February 20 [17 favorites]
It's a mistake to presume that the way progressives vote brought us Trump. There aren't that many progressives. Most of the people who are progressives are fairly well-read pragmatists who understood that an idealized notion of voting will not lead us to a better outcome. Nearly everyone I know who found Biden a disappointment voted for Harris. Two voted for independents. Zero of them voted for Donald Trump.
The problem is that the democrats do not appeal to normal people. As a progressive, I am comfortable identifying myself as "not normal." Normal people vote with what they see as their best interests at heart, but they also -- crucially -- vote positively; in the absence of a candidate they believe in, they don't vote for the lesser of two evils, they just don't vote.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 6:55 AM on February 20 [22 favorites]
The problem is that the democrats do not appeal to normal people. As a progressive, I am comfortable identifying myself as "not normal." Normal people vote with what they see as their best interests at heart, but they also -- crucially -- vote positively; in the absence of a candidate they believe in, they don't vote for the lesser of two evils, they just don't vote.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 6:55 AM on February 20 [22 favorites]
Eligible voters in 2016
38.6% didn't vote
31.4% Clinton
30.0% Trump
2.1% Johnson
0.7% Stein
As you can see, Jill Stein is the reason Hillary lost.
posted by Lemkin at 6:57 AM on February 20 [12 favorites]
38.6% didn't vote
31.4% Clinton
30.0% Trump
2.1% Johnson
0.7% Stein
As you can see, Jill Stein is the reason Hillary lost.
posted by Lemkin at 6:57 AM on February 20 [12 favorites]
I just wish they'd go a step further and film a whole hour of cars going under the gantries and mail it on DVD to Trump and all his cronies.
And label the thing “ASMR vroom vrooms”, please?
posted by ifatfirstyoudontsucceed at 6:57 AM on February 20 [3 favorites]
And label the thing “ASMR vroom vrooms”, please?
posted by ifatfirstyoudontsucceed at 6:57 AM on February 20 [3 favorites]
Anyway pointless to point fingers these types will always be there.
yes, we'll always be here, trying to vote our conscience like you should, slowly chipping away at this dumbass 2 party system that actually is just both sides of the same capitalist corporatocracy coin. If the rest of you recognized the hypocrites that is the Democratic party a couple decades ago and started to vote more third party, we all could've shifted the party more to the left and the messaging would have been much more appealing to the people that didn't vote in this election.
posted by numaner at 6:59 AM on February 20 [10 favorites]
yes, we'll always be here, trying to vote our conscience like you should, slowly chipping away at this dumbass 2 party system that actually is just both sides of the same capitalist corporatocracy coin. If the rest of you recognized the hypocrites that is the Democratic party a couple decades ago and started to vote more third party, we all could've shifted the party more to the left and the messaging would have been much more appealing to the people that didn't vote in this election.
posted by numaner at 6:59 AM on February 20 [10 favorites]
people who don't vote will always find a rationalization to not vote. They're just not voters.
posted by torokunai2 at 7:01 AM on February 20
posted by torokunai2 at 7:01 AM on February 20
anyway, the IRS is letting go of 6700 probationary employees today, and some of those remaining are even being asked to help with the deportations.
posted by numaner at 7:01 AM on February 20 [4 favorites]
posted by numaner at 7:01 AM on February 20 [4 favorites]
that using Gaza as the single defining litmus test for a candidate is destructive
i dunno, a whole ass genocide that we enabled seems to be a pretty defining litmus test for all of humanity.
posted by numaner at 7:05 AM on February 20 [15 favorites]
i dunno, a whole ass genocide that we enabled seems to be a pretty defining litmus test for all of humanity.
posted by numaner at 7:05 AM on February 20 [15 favorites]
slowly chipping away at this dumbass 2 party system - consider it chipped.
Look, nobody likes the current two-party system (for various reasons) but handing control over to one party whose goal is to be the only party doesn't seem like it was the right solution.
posted by tommasz at 7:06 AM on February 20 [13 favorites]
Look, nobody likes the current two-party system (for various reasons) but handing control over to one party whose goal is to be the only party doesn't seem like it was the right solution.
posted by tommasz at 7:06 AM on February 20 [13 favorites]
As you can see, Jill Stein is the reason Hillary lost.
Man, this whole “reasons why Kamala lost” debate is so tired in February 2025. It was tiresome by December 2024. There isn’t one reason, despite all of our desires for a neat way of framing the failure of the party since Obama (sure some of you will say Biden doesn’t get enough credit, others will say Obama gets too much — see, nuance!).
My point is, I don’t give a crap about this debate other than it becoming a huge derail again.
But, just for the sake of intellectual honesty, popular vote doesn’t count and in a world with 11 or whatever swing states effectively making the difference, those votes could definitely have mattered.
Can we please go back to talking about Mad King Don?
Somebody, please, toss out a “Metafilter: womp womp womp” joke to lighten the mood, maybe…
posted by ifatfirstyoudontsucceed at 7:09 AM on February 20 [9 favorites]
Man, this whole “reasons why Kamala lost” debate is so tired in February 2025. It was tiresome by December 2024. There isn’t one reason, despite all of our desires for a neat way of framing the failure of the party since Obama (sure some of you will say Biden doesn’t get enough credit, others will say Obama gets too much — see, nuance!).
My point is, I don’t give a crap about this debate other than it becoming a huge derail again.
But, just for the sake of intellectual honesty, popular vote doesn’t count and in a world with 11 or whatever swing states effectively making the difference, those votes could definitely have mattered.
Can we please go back to talking about Mad King Don?
Somebody, please, toss out a “Metafilter: womp womp womp” joke to lighten the mood, maybe…
posted by ifatfirstyoudontsucceed at 7:09 AM on February 20 [9 favorites]
a huge derail again
They started it.
But seriously, I'm picturing the mod on duty having given up in disgust and letting us have our playground fight here because we have no other way to cope with our scared angry feelings.
posted by Lemkin at 7:14 AM on February 20 [9 favorites]
They started it.
But seriously, I'm picturing the mod on duty having given up in disgust and letting us have our playground fight here because we have no other way to cope with our scared angry feelings.
posted by Lemkin at 7:14 AM on February 20 [9 favorites]
Metafilter: womp womp womp
posted by kokaku at 7:17 AM on February 20 [10 favorites]
posted by kokaku at 7:17 AM on February 20 [10 favorites]
>nobody likes the current two-party system
I think it's fine. We have a people problem, not a party problem. Coalitions are just as messy if not messier in Westminster systems.
You want better Democrats. work to elect better Democrats. That's what the evangelical right did on the other side, but in reverse.
posted by torokunai2 at 7:18 AM on February 20 [7 favorites]
I think it's fine. We have a people problem, not a party problem. Coalitions are just as messy if not messier in Westminster systems.
You want better Democrats. work to elect better Democrats. That's what the evangelical right did on the other side, but in reverse.
posted by torokunai2 at 7:18 AM on February 20 [7 favorites]
You want better Democrats. work to elect better Democrats
When every other Democrat still in the field (Kamala Harris having already bombed out) closed ranks to rescue Biden's faltering candidacy from the threat of that hippie from Vermont, I formed the impression that the Democratic Party doesn't want better Democrats.
posted by Lemkin at 7:24 AM on February 20 [15 favorites]
When every other Democrat still in the field (Kamala Harris having already bombed out) closed ranks to rescue Biden's faltering candidacy from the threat of that hippie from Vermont, I formed the impression that the Democratic Party doesn't want better Democrats.
posted by Lemkin at 7:24 AM on February 20 [15 favorites]
Anyway, back to the post, this genuinely surprised me:
posted by Lemkin at 7:29 AM on February 20 [8 favorites]
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered senior military and Defense Department officials to draw up plans to cut 8 percent from the defense budget over each of the next five years, officials said on Wednesday.Even if it's ultimately smoke-and-mirrors, even a pretend trimming of the Pentagon's budget seems likely to stir real opposition from the country's owners.
Mr. Hegseth said in a memo issued on Tuesday that a number of branches within the military and the Pentagon should turn in budget-cutting proposals by next Monday, two officials said. The memo listed some 17 exceptions to the proposed cuts, including military operations at the southern border.
One senior official said the cuts appeared likely to be part of an effort to focus Pentagon money on programs that the Trump administration favors, instead of actually cutting the Defense Department’s $850 billion annual budget.
posted by Lemkin at 7:29 AM on February 20 [8 favorites]
>Democratic Party doesn't want better Democrats
forest, trees. Organizations are improved from within, not from without
posted by torokunai2 at 7:31 AM on February 20 [2 favorites]
forest, trees. Organizations are improved from within, not from without
posted by torokunai2 at 7:31 AM on February 20 [2 favorites]
these types will always be there
and what types are we talking about
self-professed lifelong communist, outgrown_hobnail, who started the whole derail?
with all respect Kitteh, I'm all for relitigating the Harris loss. I don't care how much the genocide caused, or did not cause, the election loss. The fact of it, the years of policy that led to it, just the total failure of the US of fucking A to be anything better than a Fake King electing shithole country, I mean.. fuck. Yeah let's blame the shitstorm on people who stood up against genocide.
posted by ginger.beef at 7:36 AM on February 20 [13 favorites]
and what types are we talking about
self-professed lifelong communist, outgrown_hobnail, who started the whole derail?
with all respect Kitteh, I'm all for relitigating the Harris loss. I don't care how much the genocide caused, or did not cause, the election loss. The fact of it, the years of policy that led to it, just the total failure of the US of fucking A to be anything better than a Fake King electing shithole country, I mean.. fuck. Yeah let's blame the shitstorm on people who stood up against genocide.
posted by ginger.beef at 7:36 AM on February 20 [13 favorites]
>8 percent from the defense budget over each of the next five years
Silicon Valley's stack ranking -> DOD's $1.1T budget
posted by torokunai2 at 7:37 AM on February 20 [1 favorite]
Silicon Valley's stack ranking -> DOD's $1.1T budget
posted by torokunai2 at 7:37 AM on February 20 [1 favorite]
>on people who stood up against genocide
I won't blame anybody who doesn't regret their vote in 2024 later this decade
posted by torokunai2 at 7:38 AM on February 20
I won't blame anybody who doesn't regret their vote in 2024 later this decade
posted by torokunai2 at 7:38 AM on February 20
I forgot to mention Trump's recent treatment of Ukraine, such as saying that country started the war with Russia.
posted by NotLost at 2:16 AM on February 20
The fever dream on the right* is that the Euromaidan "coup" (they call it a coup, just like Russia does) was some kind of false flag and/or secret operation by neo-Nazis + NATO/Europe/"them" to "force" Russia to invade the Donbas region to "defend" the ethnically Russian people there who would otherwise have been murdered en masse by the Ukrainians. Because Ukraine was amassing forces in the region, not to defend themselves from Russia but to kill everybody who lived there. Russia had no choice but to invade in order to stop this genocide, you see.
Ukrainians, in this version of reality, are simultaneously murderous thugs who hate ethnically Russian people, and also helpless puppets of NATO/Europe (who, it is taken for granted, are bad).
If you really believe this nonsense, I can see why you would think we shouldn't be sending support to Ukraine.
*Source: a bunch of kooks on Facebook.
posted by joannemerriam at 7:38 AM on February 20 [10 favorites]
posted by NotLost at 2:16 AM on February 20
The fever dream on the right* is that the Euromaidan "coup" (they call it a coup, just like Russia does) was some kind of false flag and/or secret operation by neo-Nazis + NATO/Europe/"them" to "force" Russia to invade the Donbas region to "defend" the ethnically Russian people there who would otherwise have been murdered en masse by the Ukrainians. Because Ukraine was amassing forces in the region, not to defend themselves from Russia but to kill everybody who lived there. Russia had no choice but to invade in order to stop this genocide, you see.
Ukrainians, in this version of reality, are simultaneously murderous thugs who hate ethnically Russian people, and also helpless puppets of NATO/Europe (who, it is taken for granted, are bad).
If you really believe this nonsense, I can see why you would think we shouldn't be sending support to Ukraine.
*Source: a bunch of kooks on Facebook.
posted by joannemerriam at 7:38 AM on February 20 [10 favorites]
I'm going to bring my metaphor over from the other thread because it applies here, and because I would like to help drown out election re-litigators.
The American playground is a chaotic place, but it has rules. It has monitors and rules so that it doesn't become a straight Lord-of-the-Flies hellhole where the strongest bullies do whatever they want. But that only lasts as long as the rules apply to everyone and are enforced against everyone.
The lead bully has declared himself King of the Playground. His minions are running amok seizing others' lunches and pocket money, humiliating everyone they don't like, demanding everyone's locker combination and kicking smaller kids in the shins. One group is corralling those who look or act differently over by the jungle-gym and building a fence around it, exiling them. Another group is wandering around the playground, renaming equipment in honor of the King and listening carefully for signs of disloyalty amongst the rabble.
You look over at the monitors, the grown-ups, thinking Surely, they will put a stop to this? But they're not moving. A number of them are visibly counting bribes from the bullies. Many others are standing idly by, staring straight at the chaos and nodding with approval, having been voted into authority by the bullies and their friends. The ones that you thought were responsible and good people don't look happy, but they're sitting on the curb with their hands folded in their laps, raising one hand occasionally to ask if they can interject a point of order or raise a mild complaint.
If and when a semblance of order is restored, can that be enough? Can things go back to how they were before chaos reigned? Or does the entire concept, the entire authority structure need to be thrown out and replaced, simply because if it isn't, you'll always be potentially one election away from returning to despotism and mayhem?
If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?
posted by delfin at 7:47 AM on February 20 [49 favorites]
The American playground is a chaotic place, but it has rules. It has monitors and rules so that it doesn't become a straight Lord-of-the-Flies hellhole where the strongest bullies do whatever they want. But that only lasts as long as the rules apply to everyone and are enforced against everyone.
The lead bully has declared himself King of the Playground. His minions are running amok seizing others' lunches and pocket money, humiliating everyone they don't like, demanding everyone's locker combination and kicking smaller kids in the shins. One group is corralling those who look or act differently over by the jungle-gym and building a fence around it, exiling them. Another group is wandering around the playground, renaming equipment in honor of the King and listening carefully for signs of disloyalty amongst the rabble.
You look over at the monitors, the grown-ups, thinking Surely, they will put a stop to this? But they're not moving. A number of them are visibly counting bribes from the bullies. Many others are standing idly by, staring straight at the chaos and nodding with approval, having been voted into authority by the bullies and their friends. The ones that you thought were responsible and good people don't look happy, but they're sitting on the curb with their hands folded in their laps, raising one hand occasionally to ask if they can interject a point of order or raise a mild complaint.
If and when a semblance of order is restored, can that be enough? Can things go back to how they were before chaos reigned? Or does the entire concept, the entire authority structure need to be thrown out and replaced, simply because if it isn't, you'll always be potentially one election away from returning to despotism and mayhem?
If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?
posted by delfin at 7:47 AM on February 20 [49 favorites]
If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?
Do you have any idea how crazy you are?
(That was just for the pleasure of the quote. Flagged as Fantastic Comment.)
posted by Lemkin at 7:56 AM on February 20 [2 favorites]
Do you have any idea how crazy you are?
(That was just for the pleasure of the quote. Flagged as Fantastic Comment.)
posted by Lemkin at 7:56 AM on February 20 [2 favorites]
Even if it's ultimately smoke-and-mirrors, even a pretend trimming of the Pentagon's budget seems likely to stir real opposition from the country's owners
it's a way to purge disloyal generals
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 8:01 AM on February 20 [6 favorites]
it's a way to purge disloyal generals
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 8:01 AM on February 20 [6 favorites]
You know who else purged disloyal generals.
posted by Lemkin at 8:05 AM on February 20 [3 favorites]
posted by Lemkin at 8:05 AM on February 20 [3 favorites]
We've had dark periods before. The excesses of the go-go 1920s gave us FDR's 80% majorities (much of which were old-time Southern Democrats now firmly in the Trump camp, alas).
We need another Teddy, FDR or JFK at the top apparently, since loose, bottom-up consensus organizers are easily beaten down by top-down fascist hierarchical force like we see in the Heritage Foundation, FedSoc, and evangelical right.
Obama was not a bad version of JFK I guess, but contingencies of having to deal with a Great Depression-scale financial panic (it was probably worse maybe?) and loss of any power in Congress in the 2010 cycle cut his administration off at the knees, or neck really.
We need someone who is deadly serious about politics. We need a Superman I guess. If the GOP is smart, they won't push this nation into austerity like their top guys are planning.
Elizabeth Warren got my vote in 2020, fat lot of good it did. We missed our first chance with AOC in 2024, she turned 35 last October.
posted by torokunai2 at 8:07 AM on February 20 [3 favorites]
We need another Teddy, FDR or JFK at the top apparently, since loose, bottom-up consensus organizers are easily beaten down by top-down fascist hierarchical force like we see in the Heritage Foundation, FedSoc, and evangelical right.
Obama was not a bad version of JFK I guess, but contingencies of having to deal with a Great Depression-scale financial panic (it was probably worse maybe?) and loss of any power in Congress in the 2010 cycle cut his administration off at the knees, or neck really.
We need someone who is deadly serious about politics. We need a Superman I guess. If the GOP is smart, they won't push this nation into austerity like their top guys are planning.
Elizabeth Warren got my vote in 2020, fat lot of good it did. We missed our first chance with AOC in 2024, she turned 35 last October.
posted by torokunai2 at 8:07 AM on February 20 [3 favorites]
"well, look, sometimes the leopards are going to eat some of the faces, no matter what - but you need to vote for the inadequate leopard protection racket, i mean, party anyway and if you don't any extra faces eaten by leopards are YOUR fault"
posted by pyramid termite at 8:30 AM on February 20 [5 favorites]
posted by pyramid termite at 8:30 AM on February 20 [5 favorites]
^ that, but seriously. Every election has consequences.
posted by torokunai2 at 8:36 AM on February 20
posted by torokunai2 at 8:36 AM on February 20
Relitigating the 2024 election is useless because it doesn't change anything.We can’t redo the election but the same people are still here. Someone who spent 2024 either talking about “Genocide Joe”/“Killer Kamala” or pushing Biden to avoid confrontation with Netanyahu shouldn’t be trusted in the future either because even if they were acting in good faith, they didn’t have a good understanding of the political reality we face.
posted by adamsc at 8:45 AM on February 20 [2 favorites]
if they were acting in good faith
Thank you for allowing the possibility that I might have had a principled objection to genocide.
posted by Lemkin at 8:57 AM on February 20 [8 favorites]
Thank you for allowing the possibility that I might have had a principled objection to genocide.
posted by Lemkin at 8:57 AM on February 20 [8 favorites]
If you live and vote in the United States and you say your biggest wedge issue is Gaza and that's why you can't/couldn't support the least damaging option.... how to say this.... YOU'RE A FUCKING GRADE A IDIOT MORON AND YOU 100% DESERVE WHAT IS HAPPENING TO YOU.
To be clear, I'm not targeting anybody in this thread or on Mefi specifically, it's a general claim.
The United States are the biggest military force on the planet, and the biggest economic entity on it too. Malicious governance of that country will kill and ruin the lives of more people than lived in Gaza on top of actively fucking up Gaza. You cannot morally or logically take that stance, that country has too much power to let it in the hands of malicious people.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 8:57 AM on February 20 [17 favorites]
To be clear, I'm not targeting anybody in this thread or on Mefi specifically, it's a general claim.
The United States are the biggest military force on the planet, and the biggest economic entity on it too. Malicious governance of that country will kill and ruin the lives of more people than lived in Gaza on top of actively fucking up Gaza. You cannot morally or logically take that stance, that country has too much power to let it in the hands of malicious people.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 8:57 AM on February 20 [17 favorites]
"After Hitler, Our Turn."
posted by torokunai2 at 9:01 AM on February 20
posted by torokunai2 at 9:01 AM on February 20
Someone who spent 2024 either talking about “Genocide Joe”/“Killer Kamala” or pushing Biden to avoid confrontation with Netanyahu shouldn’t be trusted in the future either because even if they were acting in good faith, they didn’t have a good understanding of the political reality we face.
So now the goalpost is that anyone who said 'genocide joe' is responsible for Trump?
If you live and vote in the United States and you say your biggest wedge issue is Gaza and that's why you can't/couldn't support the least damaging option.... how to say this.... YOU'RE A FUCKING GRADE A IDIOT MORON AND YOU 100% DESERVE WHAT IS HAPPENING TO YOU.
I'll be a lot of money that righteous smug liberals who condescend to normies are a bigger problem for people voting for democrats than a Jill Stein voter.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:02 AM on February 20 [8 favorites]
So now the goalpost is that anyone who said 'genocide joe' is responsible for Trump?
If you live and vote in the United States and you say your biggest wedge issue is Gaza and that's why you can't/couldn't support the least damaging option.... how to say this.... YOU'RE A FUCKING GRADE A IDIOT MORON AND YOU 100% DESERVE WHAT IS HAPPENING TO YOU.
I'll be a lot of money that righteous smug liberals who condescend to normies are a bigger problem for people voting for democrats than a Jill Stein voter.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:02 AM on February 20 [8 favorites]
YOU'RE A FUCKING GRADE A IDIOT MORON AND YOU 100% DESERVE WHAT IS HAPPENING TO YOU.
if I'm choosing my slurs, I'd have you call me a retard thanks
lovely community
posted by ginger.beef at 9:07 AM on February 20 [4 favorites]
if I'm choosing my slurs, I'd have you call me a retard thanks
lovely community
posted by ginger.beef at 9:07 AM on February 20 [4 favorites]
There's a new FPP about Wellness Farms (The Camps). Do I trust people that had a moral red line on genocide to not dime my friends out to the camps? Yes.
Do I extend that same trust to people that were Blue No Matter Who for like 8 months of horror abroad so that they could safe at home? Fuck No. Gods above no. The stakes were not even directly personal in July 2024 and so many people took the line of Never Again Means Later.
That's the tie-in of the Genocide abroad to authoritarianism at home. Trust and a vast cavernous vacuum of it.
posted by Slackermagee at 9:08 AM on February 20 [13 favorites]
Do I extend that same trust to people that were Blue No Matter Who for like 8 months of horror abroad so that they could safe at home? Fuck No. Gods above no. The stakes were not even directly personal in July 2024 and so many people took the line of Never Again Means Later.
That's the tie-in of the Genocide abroad to authoritarianism at home. Trust and a vast cavernous vacuum of it.
posted by Slackermagee at 9:08 AM on February 20 [13 favorites]
>a retard
"Perspective is worth 80 IQ points" works in both directions, alas
posted by torokunai2 at 9:09 AM on February 20
"Perspective is worth 80 IQ points" works in both directions, alas
posted by torokunai2 at 9:09 AM on February 20
>Never Again Means Later
Meanwhile, back on the FPP topic, King Trump is on the loose. Thanks!
posted by torokunai2 at 9:11 AM on February 20 [2 favorites]
Meanwhile, back on the FPP topic, King Trump is on the loose. Thanks!
posted by torokunai2 at 9:11 AM on February 20 [2 favorites]
Hey, anyone thought about this Trump guy lately? He and his boss Musk seem to be doing to some bad stuff. Worth a Post?
posted by WatTylerJr at 9:13 AM on February 20 [17 favorites]
posted by WatTylerJr at 9:13 AM on February 20 [17 favorites]
I'll be a lot of money that righteous smug liberals who condescend to normies are a bigger problem for people voting for democrats than a Jill Stein voter.
I'm not going for condescension, I'm going for insult, but not to you personally. Because at some point reality is what it is.
Dems sucked on Gaza... but Trump is just fucking going to erase Gaza and we all knew it, so voting Trumps does not help. So morally and logically it's the wrong call.
But more importantly, in a US election, besides Gaza, there are a ton of other issues that need to be considered, and letting the US burn and turn fascists because 'Biden bad on Gaza' (and I agree with that statement BTW) is the wrong action.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 9:17 AM on February 20 [13 favorites]
I'm not going for condescension, I'm going for insult, but not to you personally. Because at some point reality is what it is.
Dems sucked on Gaza... but Trump is just fucking going to erase Gaza and we all knew it, so voting Trumps does not help. So morally and logically it's the wrong call.
But more importantly, in a US election, besides Gaza, there are a ton of other issues that need to be considered, and letting the US burn and turn fascists because 'Biden bad on Gaza' (and I agree with that statement BTW) is the wrong action.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 9:17 AM on February 20 [13 favorites]
An overt narcissist needs people to praise or credit them because they seek unlimited attention to feed their grandiosity. Politically, this requires a voting majority of insecure fortune beggars waiting around for this worldly magician to appear. Most people could never hide their natural response to total authority, whether disgusted by it or by the lack of it.
posted by Brian B. at 9:22 AM on February 20 [1 favorite]
posted by Brian B. at 9:22 AM on February 20 [1 favorite]
I only have so much capacity for anger. I won't spend it on people who drew a hard line with Biden's treatment of Gaza. I think it's very likely that they have very similar values to mine, and that commonality is something we can build on for the future.
posted by a faded photo of their beloved at 9:23 AM on February 20 [20 favorites]
posted by a faded photo of their beloved at 9:23 AM on February 20 [20 favorites]
I agree WaterAndPixels, but my disgust is at someone who is more mad that some guy in Michigan won't vote for Biden because his admin sent bombs that murdered his cousins than it is at, say, Biden or anyone in power.
Regardless of who did what, constantly bringing up people who are so livid about a genocide that they engage in destructive behavior is not a way to move forward or build consensus.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:26 AM on February 20 [5 favorites]
Regardless of who did what, constantly bringing up people who are so livid about a genocide that they engage in destructive behavior is not a way to move forward or build consensus.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:26 AM on February 20 [5 favorites]
The stakes were not even directly personal in July 2024 and so many people took the line of Never Again Means Later.
Already you hear murmurings in the Democratic power structure that they made a mistake supporting trans rights and need to back away from that going forward.
"To better align themselves with the electorate", you see.
posted by Lemkin at 9:42 AM on February 20 [11 favorites]
Already you hear murmurings in the Democratic power structure that they made a mistake supporting trans rights and need to back away from that going forward.
"To better align themselves with the electorate", you see.
posted by Lemkin at 9:42 AM on February 20 [11 favorites]
WaterAndPixels I get that you're extremely angry that some people didn't vote for Harris.
But all the data I can find shows that the decline in voting among "the left" was more or less the same as the decline in voting among the moderate Democrats you presumably think are fine.
The fact is that as a whole people who voted for Biden voted less in 2024 and I can't find anything that shows this was the fault of people who thought genocide was wrong.
You're just scapgoating.
Which is understandable up to a point, the loss is painful, and I'm as guilty of looking for a convenient person to blame as you are.
But the fact is what failed us was the Democrats because they failed to convince enough people who had voted for Biden that it was worthwhile to vote for Harris.
I'm always a little puzzled when people are angry at voters for not voting Democratic instead of at Democrats for not making the case for their election.
To an extent you and I have a similar blind spot: we both think that simply gesturing at Trump and saying "see?" should be more than enough to convince more or less anyone that he's awful. The awfulness of Trump is so apparent to us, and to most here on MeFi that it seems like a basic fact of nature: people are repulsed by Trump. I damn sure am.
But we're wrong. The awfulness of Trump is not apparent to everyone, and simply gesturing at him and saying "see" isn't actually enough.
I will say right out that I thought Harris was doing things right by centering the election on Trump and how awful he is. And I was wrong and so was she. Clearly it was NOT the right call to center the election on Trump's awfulness, and Harris should have done something else. I don't know what else, and if she had been doing something else I'd have been ranting that she was totally fucking up and that focusing on Trump's awfulness was the obvious right choice. But, as noted, that was wrong.
The fact is, the Democrats had just one job: convince people they were a better choice than Trump. And they didn't.
That's not the fault of people who called Genocide Joe by his proper name. That's the fault of the Democrats for failing to do whatever it was that would work. I don't know what might have worked, I'm not an expert and clearly the experts were wrong too.
Maybe they had failed to deliver on real economic issues (that is, prices and rents not the Dow Jones average and whatever other unreal BS people mean when they said that the economy was doing better) and nothing they tried would work. I don't know.
But I do know where the blame lies: with the people running for offcice and their campaigns. It isn't the fault of people like you who thought genocide was bad but not worth getting worked up over, and it's not the fault of people like me who thought getting worked up over genocide was the only moral option.
Blame the people at fault: the people who ran the campaigns.
posted by sotonohito at 9:48 AM on February 20 [23 favorites]
But all the data I can find shows that the decline in voting among "the left" was more or less the same as the decline in voting among the moderate Democrats you presumably think are fine.
The fact is that as a whole people who voted for Biden voted less in 2024 and I can't find anything that shows this was the fault of people who thought genocide was wrong.
You're just scapgoating.
Which is understandable up to a point, the loss is painful, and I'm as guilty of looking for a convenient person to blame as you are.
But the fact is what failed us was the Democrats because they failed to convince enough people who had voted for Biden that it was worthwhile to vote for Harris.
I'm always a little puzzled when people are angry at voters for not voting Democratic instead of at Democrats for not making the case for their election.
To an extent you and I have a similar blind spot: we both think that simply gesturing at Trump and saying "see?" should be more than enough to convince more or less anyone that he's awful. The awfulness of Trump is so apparent to us, and to most here on MeFi that it seems like a basic fact of nature: people are repulsed by Trump. I damn sure am.
But we're wrong. The awfulness of Trump is not apparent to everyone, and simply gesturing at him and saying "see" isn't actually enough.
I will say right out that I thought Harris was doing things right by centering the election on Trump and how awful he is. And I was wrong and so was she. Clearly it was NOT the right call to center the election on Trump's awfulness, and Harris should have done something else. I don't know what else, and if she had been doing something else I'd have been ranting that she was totally fucking up and that focusing on Trump's awfulness was the obvious right choice. But, as noted, that was wrong.
The fact is, the Democrats had just one job: convince people they were a better choice than Trump. And they didn't.
That's not the fault of people who called Genocide Joe by his proper name. That's the fault of the Democrats for failing to do whatever it was that would work. I don't know what might have worked, I'm not an expert and clearly the experts were wrong too.
Maybe they had failed to deliver on real economic issues (that is, prices and rents not the Dow Jones average and whatever other unreal BS people mean when they said that the economy was doing better) and nothing they tried would work. I don't know.
But I do know where the blame lies: with the people running for offcice and their campaigns. It isn't the fault of people like you who thought genocide was bad but not worth getting worked up over, and it's not the fault of people like me who thought getting worked up over genocide was the only moral option.
Blame the people at fault: the people who ran the campaigns.
posted by sotonohito at 9:48 AM on February 20 [23 favorites]
Dems sucked on Gaza... but Trump is just fucking going to erase Gaza and we all knew it, so voting Trumps does not help.
Yes, but keep in mind that Democrats sucked on Gaza because they perceived that there were more votes contingent onnot stopping the genocide than stopping it. By their election calculus, there were actually more people threatening to stay home or switch their votes to Trump if Biden intervened on Gaza than there were if he turned a blind eye to it.
It's unfair and callous to blame one group of voters for doing the exact same thing another group of voters were already doing...making their votes contingent on extracting some policy re: Gaza.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 9:52 AM on February 20 [8 favorites]
Yes, but keep in mind that Democrats sucked on Gaza because they perceived that there were more votes contingent on
It's unfair and callous to blame one group of voters for doing the exact same thing another group of voters were already doing...making their votes contingent on extracting some policy re: Gaza.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 9:52 AM on February 20 [8 favorites]
>I'm always a little puzzled when people are angry at voters for not voting Democratic instead of at Democrats for not making the case for their election.
I'm not angry at anyone. Blame is assignment of responsibility.
posted by torokunai2 at 9:52 AM on February 20 [1 favorite]
I'm not angry at anyone. Blame is assignment of responsibility.
posted by torokunai2 at 9:52 AM on February 20 [1 favorite]
Storytelling is a great way to visualize outcomes. I would like to hear people's imagined tracks for the next year/2 years/4 years/longer that describe a path back to where we were even 6 months ago as a country, or ideally to someplace better than we had then. I am not able to do it right now, which is paralyzing me on action a bit. Lawsuits and letter writing are not making me feel better. Any ideas? What's it going to take? My starting take is that the US is over as a world power unless we decide to go full military option to stay on top (sadly possible).
posted by caviar2d2 at 9:57 AM on February 20 [1 favorite]
posted by caviar2d2 at 9:57 AM on February 20 [1 favorite]
Harris should have done something else. I don't know what else
[raises hand]
She should have done everything humanly possible to distance herself from Joe Biden's historically unpopular presidency. (Admittedly difficult since he was solely responsible for her even being the candidate.)
Instead she went on daytime television and said she couldn't think of a single thing she would have done differently than him.
Harris sucked as a candidate. People thought she was an empty suit in 2020, they thought she was an empty suit in 2024, and they were right both times.
As a campaigner, Hillary Clinton was Churchill by comparison.
posted by Lemkin at 10:00 AM on February 20 [14 favorites]
[raises hand]
She should have done everything humanly possible to distance herself from Joe Biden's historically unpopular presidency. (Admittedly difficult since he was solely responsible for her even being the candidate.)
Instead she went on daytime television and said she couldn't think of a single thing she would have done differently than him.
Harris sucked as a candidate. People thought she was an empty suit in 2020, they thought she was an empty suit in 2024, and they were right both times.
As a campaigner, Hillary Clinton was Churchill by comparison.
posted by Lemkin at 10:00 AM on February 20 [14 favorites]
Already you hear murmurings in the Democratic power structure that they made a mistake supporting trans rights and need to back away from that going forward.
As a trans person, that would ensure I only ever vote third party in future elections. Of course, I expect to be excoriated for making a distinction between voting directly against my own self interest and voting for an option that leads indirectly to the same outcome.
posted by nightfires at 10:03 AM on February 20 [10 favorites]
As a trans person, that would ensure I only ever vote third party in future elections. Of course, I expect to be excoriated for making a distinction between voting directly against my own self interest and voting for an option that leads indirectly to the same outcome.
posted by nightfires at 10:03 AM on February 20 [10 favorites]
Yes, but keep in mind that Democrats sucked on Gaza because they perceived that there were more votes contingent on not stopping the genocide than stopping it.
I do wonder about that - icymi, this article alludes to what I would consider to be statistical malfeasance:
A Harris organizer who worked on youth turnout said that senior campaign officials gave them an order: When they sent out mass volunteer or fundraising emails and people replied by asking about Gaza, they were told to mark it as “no response.” The result? They seldom ended up engaging with voters on that issue.
“We also didn’t create a new category for Gaza responses out of fear that category would be leaked. Instead we were told to mark them as ‘no response,’” the organizer said, faulting top Harris campaign leaders for failing to address the issue.
I do also think back to some speculation that the same kind of brain trust had gamed out the next four years and in a very opportunistic way, counts the way Trump et al is just collapsing the government as making the case for the Democrats in the next election. If so, I do think they're making the same kind of intelligent analysis as in the above quote about the rate and speed of collapse, especially judging by their current energy. Do South Koreans need to return the favour and launch some kind of democracy promotion project for US lawmakers?
posted by cendawanita at 10:03 AM on February 20 [12 favorites]
I do wonder about that - icymi, this article alludes to what I would consider to be statistical malfeasance:
A Harris organizer who worked on youth turnout said that senior campaign officials gave them an order: When they sent out mass volunteer or fundraising emails and people replied by asking about Gaza, they were told to mark it as “no response.” The result? They seldom ended up engaging with voters on that issue.
“We also didn’t create a new category for Gaza responses out of fear that category would be leaked. Instead we were told to mark them as ‘no response,’” the organizer said, faulting top Harris campaign leaders for failing to address the issue.
I do also think back to some speculation that the same kind of brain trust had gamed out the next four years and in a very opportunistic way, counts the way Trump et al is just collapsing the government as making the case for the Democrats in the next election. If so, I do think they're making the same kind of intelligent analysis as in the above quote about the rate and speed of collapse, especially judging by their current energy. Do South Koreans need to return the favour and launch some kind of democracy promotion project for US lawmakers?
posted by cendawanita at 10:03 AM on February 20 [12 favorites]
>full military option
Violence is playing into their playbook.
Coretta Scott King's social media account, 2017:
Some Wise Advice Circulating:
1. Don't use his name; EVER (45 will do)
2. Remember this is a regime and he's not acting alone;
3. Do not argue with those who support him--it doesn't work;
4. Focus on his policies, not his orange-ness and mental state;
5. Keep your message positive; they want the country to be angry and fearful because this is the soil from which their darkest policies will grow;
6. No more helpless/hopeless talk;
7. Support artists and the arts;
8. Be careful not to spread fake news. Check it;
9. Take care of yourselves; and
10. Resist!
Keep demonstrations peaceful. In the words of John Lennon, "When it gets down to having to use violence, then you are playing the system's game. The establishment will irritate you - pull your beard, flick your face - to make you fight! Because once they've got you violent, then they know how to handle you. The only thing they don't know how to handle is nonviolence and humor."
When you post or talk about him, don't assign his actions to him, assign them to "The Republican Administration," or "The Republicans." This will have several effects: the Republican legislators will either have to take responsibility for their association with him or stand up for what some of them don't like; he will not get the focus of attention he craves; Republican representatives will become very concerned about their re-elections.
posted by torokunai2 at 10:03 AM on February 20 [35 favorites]
Violence is playing into their playbook.
Coretta Scott King's social media account, 2017:
Some Wise Advice Circulating:
1. Don't use his name; EVER (45 will do)
2. Remember this is a regime and he's not acting alone;
3. Do not argue with those who support him--it doesn't work;
4. Focus on his policies, not his orange-ness and mental state;
5. Keep your message positive; they want the country to be angry and fearful because this is the soil from which their darkest policies will grow;
6. No more helpless/hopeless talk;
7. Support artists and the arts;
8. Be careful not to spread fake news. Check it;
9. Take care of yourselves; and
10. Resist!
Keep demonstrations peaceful. In the words of John Lennon, "When it gets down to having to use violence, then you are playing the system's game. The establishment will irritate you - pull your beard, flick your face - to make you fight! Because once they've got you violent, then they know how to handle you. The only thing they don't know how to handle is nonviolence and humor."
When you post or talk about him, don't assign his actions to him, assign them to "The Republican Administration," or "The Republicans." This will have several effects: the Republican legislators will either have to take responsibility for their association with him or stand up for what some of them don't like; he will not get the focus of attention he craves; Republican representatives will become very concerned about their re-elections.
posted by torokunai2 at 10:03 AM on February 20 [35 favorites]
I think the problem is that no one wants the America of six months ago. Sure, they may want it compared to right now. But they don't really want it; if they woke up and discovered the last six months were a dream, they'd be relieved all morning long but by afternoon would be back to thinking everything sucks. Because six months ago, most everything sucked.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 10:05 AM on February 20 [4 favorites]
posted by kittens for breakfast at 10:05 AM on February 20 [4 favorites]
I'm angry at an hypothetical person who confronted with that choice would make it for the reasons I stated. Angry for pure 'this is not logical/moral' reasons. I'm not at all convinced this is what threw the election, and I'm not pinning the blame for the current mess on people who made that choice, I'm just really angry at that choice. Like unreasonably angry, I guess I also don't always make sense.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 10:05 AM on February 20 [3 favorites]
posted by WaterAndPixels at 10:05 AM on February 20 [3 favorites]
thanks torokunai2
posted by ginger.beef at 10:05 AM on February 20
posted by ginger.beef at 10:05 AM on February 20
The only thing they don't know how to handle is nonviolence and humor
During the Vietnam War, which lasted longer than any war we've ever been in -- and which we lost -- every respectable artist in this country was against the war. It was like a laser beam. We were all aimed in the same direction. The power of this weapon turns out to be that of a custard pie dropped from a stepladder six feet high.posted by CrystalDave at 10:09 AM on February 20 [27 favorites]
― Kurt Vonnegut
>Because six months ago, most everything sucked.
All Employees, Total Nonfarm
4-Week Moving Average of Initial Claims
I do wonder what 2026 is going to look like, economically. Elon isn't talking about $2T of cuts "over 10 years", he means $2T of cuts now.
$5T was just the spending of the FY19-20 federal budget [1] so is mathematically possible, but not politically. If the GOP does go full-on austerity though, don't expect sunshine and flowers coming into the midterms.
I'll tell you this, July 4, 2026 is going to be fucking weird
posted by torokunai2 at 10:12 AM on February 20 [2 favorites]
All Employees, Total Nonfarm
4-Week Moving Average of Initial Claims
I do wonder what 2026 is going to look like, economically. Elon isn't talking about $2T of cuts "over 10 years", he means $2T of cuts now.
$5T was just the spending of the FY19-20 federal budget [1] so is mathematically possible, but not politically. If the GOP does go full-on austerity though, don't expect sunshine and flowers coming into the midterms.
I'll tell you this, July 4, 2026 is going to be fucking weird
posted by torokunai2 at 10:12 AM on February 20 [2 favorites]
> I guess I also don't always make sense
never underestimate the collective power of the left half of the IQ curve
posted by torokunai2 at 10:15 AM on February 20 [1 favorite]
never underestimate the collective power of the left half of the IQ curve
posted by torokunai2 at 10:15 AM on February 20 [1 favorite]
I think the problem is that no one wants the America of six months ago. Sure, they may want it compared to right now. But they don't really want it; if they woke up and discovered the last six months were a dream, they'd be relieved all morning long but by afternoon would be back to thinking everything sucks. Because six months ago, most everything sucked.
The phrase that pays in modern politics is CHANGE. Obama won twice running on Hope and Change. Bernie built his base more from his open admission and insistence that Things Are Broken than from the practicality of some of his proposed solutions. Trump snuck in the first time as the ultimate Outsider candidate running against the ultimate Establishment politician. Biden was Not Trump. Trump II was Not Biden, then Not Biden's Heir.
It's an oversimplification of the various dynamics of those elections, but it's also a general rule -- if the low-information folks feel like/are told repeatedly that things are going badly, many of them will vote CHANGE by reflex simply to put someone else in charge until they either get what they want or they're headed to the camps.
posted by delfin at 10:21 AM on February 20 [9 favorites]
The phrase that pays in modern politics is CHANGE. Obama won twice running on Hope and Change. Bernie built his base more from his open admission and insistence that Things Are Broken than from the practicality of some of his proposed solutions. Trump snuck in the first time as the ultimate Outsider candidate running against the ultimate Establishment politician. Biden was Not Trump. Trump II was Not Biden, then Not Biden's Heir.
It's an oversimplification of the various dynamics of those elections, but it's also a general rule -- if the low-information folks feel like/are told repeatedly that things are going badly, many of them will vote CHANGE by reflex simply to put someone else in charge until they either get what they want or they're headed to the camps.
posted by delfin at 10:21 AM on February 20 [9 favorites]
I mean, the whole country was telling the opinion polls they were unhappy, they were broke, they didn't like the direction things were going in. The democratic response was, "Nunh uh!" People very clearly said what they wanted, and the democrats read it as, "You want the opportunity to watch Kamala Harris hang out with Beyonce!" It turned out that wasn't what people wanted.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 10:25 AM on February 20 [14 favorites]
posted by kittens for breakfast at 10:25 AM on February 20 [14 favorites]
>whole country was telling the opinion polls they were unhappy
"Two in 3 voters say the country is on the “wrong track” but 1 in 2 voters are right wing fucksticks so weren't going to publicly admit things were better for them under Biden.
Half the country rents, and they did indeed get fucked by the nation's landlords since COVID.
I'm sure the Trump admin will get right on that.
posted by torokunai2 at 10:32 AM on February 20 [3 favorites]
"Two in 3 voters say the country is on the “wrong track” but 1 in 2 voters are right wing fucksticks so weren't going to publicly admit things were better for them under Biden.
Half the country rents, and they did indeed get fucked by the nation's landlords since COVID.
I'm sure the Trump admin will get right on that.
posted by torokunai2 at 10:32 AM on February 20 [3 favorites]
Keep your message positive
I'll probably go to hell for disagreeing with this, but. Something the Democrats really didn't have, that the Republicans did, was a filth-spreading secondary communications channel via social media. Democrats were very on-message. But I think you need that other channel. You need people to be able to say the crazy offensive things that you can plausibly deny. "Isn't it funny how every single Republican who uses the word groomer gets busted for CP?" Right? Kamala couldn't have said that. She couldn't get her hands dirty, and I respect that. But you need a whole army of people pointing out the gross stuff, at just the right distance...but with your support.
These people who are taking over have so many skeletons in the closet, and you have to have someone drag them out into the daylight. Gaetz's Venmos caused concerned throat clearing by responsible Democrats, but where was the army of podcasters getting far nastier with the accusations? People love that. They eat it up. The throat-clearing is boring. We need drama. We need blood-red meat.
posted by mittens at 10:38 AM on February 20 [19 favorites]
I'll probably go to hell for disagreeing with this, but. Something the Democrats really didn't have, that the Republicans did, was a filth-spreading secondary communications channel via social media. Democrats were very on-message. But I think you need that other channel. You need people to be able to say the crazy offensive things that you can plausibly deny. "Isn't it funny how every single Republican who uses the word groomer gets busted for CP?" Right? Kamala couldn't have said that. She couldn't get her hands dirty, and I respect that. But you need a whole army of people pointing out the gross stuff, at just the right distance...but with your support.
These people who are taking over have so many skeletons in the closet, and you have to have someone drag them out into the daylight. Gaetz's Venmos caused concerned throat clearing by responsible Democrats, but where was the army of podcasters getting far nastier with the accusations? People love that. They eat it up. The throat-clearing is boring. We need drama. We need blood-red meat.
posted by mittens at 10:38 AM on February 20 [19 favorites]
Already you hear murmurings in the Democratic power structure that they made a mistake supporting trans rights and need to back away from that going forward.
Yeah, the centrists' have decided to take home that message, and it is dumb. There are three things worth noting about the Republicans' anti-trans fearmongering:
1. the number of Democratic voters it scared off is indistinguishable from zero, and
2. while it might well have motivated a significant number of Republican voters,
3. they would have characterized the Democrats as genital-mutilating gender-eliminationists regardless of what the Democratic position actually was (and indeed did so, as the Democratic position was pretty listless).
Broadly speaking, the idea that Democrats have lost their way and alienated their base by supporting marginalized identities is total bullshit. Gains in 2020 and 2022 were on the back of public marginalized-identity movements (the George Floyd protests, BLM). In 2024 they were tepid in support of marginalized groups and got their ass kicked. That's not coincidence.
Rebecca Traister says it better than me, really.
posted by jackbishop at 10:45 AM on February 20 [21 favorites]
Yeah, the centrists' have decided to take home that message, and it is dumb. There are three things worth noting about the Republicans' anti-trans fearmongering:
1. the number of Democratic voters it scared off is indistinguishable from zero, and
2. while it might well have motivated a significant number of Republican voters,
3. they would have characterized the Democrats as genital-mutilating gender-eliminationists regardless of what the Democratic position actually was (and indeed did so, as the Democratic position was pretty listless).
Broadly speaking, the idea that Democrats have lost their way and alienated their base by supporting marginalized identities is total bullshit. Gains in 2020 and 2022 were on the back of public marginalized-identity movements (the George Floyd protests, BLM). In 2024 they were tepid in support of marginalized groups and got their ass kicked. That's not coincidence.
Rebecca Traister says it better than me, really.
posted by jackbishop at 10:45 AM on February 20 [21 favorites]
Good luck with the nonviolence. I really hope it works, but I suspect it may be too late. I'm reminded of this meme that's been circulating a while:
HOW I DEFEATED FASCISM WITH THE POWER OF LOVE
Chapter 1: The Power of Love
The first step in my journey was realizing that it is impossible to defeat fascism with the power of love.
Chapter 2: The Power of Incredible Violence
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 11:07 AM on February 20 [21 favorites]
HOW I DEFEATED FASCISM WITH THE POWER OF LOVE
Chapter 1: The Power of Love
The first step in my journey was realizing that it is impossible to defeat fascism with the power of love.
Chapter 2: The Power of Incredible Violence
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 11:07 AM on February 20 [21 favorites]
As long as elections are fair*, the votes are counted accurately**, and the winners*** take office there is no need for violent action.
We the People voted this ~ in, and thus far, we can vote it out.
* This first has certainly been under GOP attack these several decades.
** I was not a fan of Diebold machines but apparently that attack vector has been closed
*** 2000 was, I guess, close enough to steal, alas.
posted by torokunai2 at 11:25 AM on February 20
We the People voted this ~ in, and thus far, we can vote it out.
* This first has certainly been under GOP attack these several decades.
** I was not a fan of Diebold machines but apparently that attack vector has been closed
*** 2000 was, I guess, close enough to steal, alas.
posted by torokunai2 at 11:25 AM on February 20
Even if it's ultimately smoke-and-mirrors, even a pretend trimming of the Pentagon's budget seems likely to stir real opposition from the country's owners.
Except if Putin has a controlling stake, which does seem to be the case.
The long-running love of the rich for destroying the lives of ordinary Americans for profit has finally dovetailed perfectly with external actors' desire to destroy America.
posted by reedbird_hill at 11:57 AM on February 20 [6 favorites]
Except if Putin has a controlling stake, which does seem to be the case.
The long-running love of the rich for destroying the lives of ordinary Americans for profit has finally dovetailed perfectly with external actors' desire to destroy America.
posted by reedbird_hill at 11:57 AM on February 20 [6 favorites]
I've heard regular democrats say Harris was a terrible candidate for all kinds of reasons. I don't think that. She had her problems, but her real problem was having to run a presidential campaign in only three months. We never got beyond "can she do an interview?" "can she win a debate?" "does she look like a president?" if she had a victory in a regular primary, those questions would have been long settled. At the annual fourth of July party, you might have got into it with crazy uncle Joe who doesn't follow politics, and maybe convinced him that she deserved his vote.
Familiarity is likely to have been worth the few percentage points needed to win. The Gaza issue, or Jill Stein voters, or any other issue really, is regular politics. The short campaign is the wild aberration (well, that and Trump's reality distortion field). It's a waste of time blaming people for voting in the frustrating ways that they always vote.
That's what I think anyway. If I'm right, then the idea that there was a huge shift rightward is largely an illusion, and Democrats that put up an actual fight are going to see support and political success from all of us looking on in horror at what is going on in the country.
posted by surlyben at 12:06 PM on February 20 [6 favorites]
Familiarity is likely to have been worth the few percentage points needed to win. The Gaza issue, or Jill Stein voters, or any other issue really, is regular politics. The short campaign is the wild aberration (well, that and Trump's reality distortion field). It's a waste of time blaming people for voting in the frustrating ways that they always vote.
That's what I think anyway. If I'm right, then the idea that there was a huge shift rightward is largely an illusion, and Democrats that put up an actual fight are going to see support and political success from all of us looking on in horror at what is going on in the country.
posted by surlyben at 12:06 PM on February 20 [6 favorites]
it wasn't a huge shift, but it was wide.
the GOP loves finding narcissist single-issue voters where they can.
speaking on their economic program, up to 1970, one out of 4 core working-age people in the US were in manufacturing, now it's one out of 10.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1DRlg
"You know what the trouble is, Brucey? We used to make shit in this country, build shit. Now we just put our hand in the next guy's pocket."
The Democrats got IIJA in 2021 and IRA in 2022 passed, but things that took 50 years to break aren't going to be repaired in 2 or 4.
posted by torokunai2 at 12:30 PM on February 20 [1 favorite]
the GOP loves finding narcissist single-issue voters where they can.
speaking on their economic program, up to 1970, one out of 4 core working-age people in the US were in manufacturing, now it's one out of 10.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1DRlg
"You know what the trouble is, Brucey? We used to make shit in this country, build shit. Now we just put our hand in the next guy's pocket."
The Democrats got IIJA in 2021 and IRA in 2022 passed, but things that took 50 years to break aren't going to be repaired in 2 or 4.
posted by torokunai2 at 12:30 PM on February 20 [1 favorite]
Great job, voters who couldn't bear to sacrifice their 'principles' about Gaza!
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 3:47 AM on February 20 [14 favorites +] [⚑]
Go away. Take your hobby horse somewhere else.
posted by kensington314 at 12:37 PM on February 20 [16 favorites]
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 3:47 AM on February 20 [14 favorites +] [⚑]
Go away. Take your hobby horse somewhere else.
posted by kensington314 at 12:37 PM on February 20 [16 favorites]
Don't look at me. I'm now a single-issue voter and that issue is will I be able to live happily tomorrow and right now the answer is looking more and more like "not just no but fuck you" from both sides. I see the bus.
The government has openly stated that they want to destroy me and people like me.
Part of me wants to run and part of me is thinking that I need to find a way to destroy it right the fuck back. Or what nightfires said and Rebecca Traister wrote (thanks jackbishop).
I do know that if this stupid-sounding "DOGE Dividend" thing goes through, the absolute first thing I am doing is running to get fingerprinted and then file the paperwork for my name change and praying for it to be expedited and maybe even point at the news for why I should have the publication requirement here in PA be changed (including the fact that Doug "The Thumb" Mastiano, former gubernatorial candidate, MAGA-head and friend of the right wing filed a bill that makes Trump's stupid executive order Pennsylvania state law), and then when it's done, turbo to get my birth cert changed, then see if I can get my SS# updated, and then get my first passport so I can have the paperwork to get a pair of bags with me into another country before RFK the Lesser gets his camps in order.
If the country wants to say "fuck you" to me, I will say "fuck you" right back. I don't fucking care anymore. Call me a coward, call me an idiot, call me a shithead. Don't care. The politicos on my own side aren't just throwing me to the wolves, they are breeding wolf packs to throw me to, and I'm done with all of them.
posted by mephron at 12:55 PM on February 20 [9 favorites]
The government has openly stated that they want to destroy me and people like me.
Part of me wants to run and part of me is thinking that I need to find a way to destroy it right the fuck back. Or what nightfires said and Rebecca Traister wrote (thanks jackbishop).
I do know that if this stupid-sounding "DOGE Dividend" thing goes through, the absolute first thing I am doing is running to get fingerprinted and then file the paperwork for my name change and praying for it to be expedited and maybe even point at the news for why I should have the publication requirement here in PA be changed (including the fact that Doug "The Thumb" Mastiano, former gubernatorial candidate, MAGA-head and friend of the right wing filed a bill that makes Trump's stupid executive order Pennsylvania state law), and then when it's done, turbo to get my birth cert changed, then see if I can get my SS# updated, and then get my first passport so I can have the paperwork to get a pair of bags with me into another country before RFK the Lesser gets his camps in order.
If the country wants to say "fuck you" to me, I will say "fuck you" right back. I don't fucking care anymore. Call me a coward, call me an idiot, call me a shithead. Don't care. The politicos on my own side aren't just throwing me to the wolves, they are breeding wolf packs to throw me to, and I'm done with all of them.
posted by mephron at 12:55 PM on February 20 [9 favorites]
As you can see, Jill Stein is the reason Hillary lost.
That was a general conclusion.
posted by Brian B. at 12:56 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
That was a general conclusion.
posted by Brian B. at 12:56 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
the off-topic comments in this thread are incredibly tiresome
posted by Lyme Drop at 1:15 PM on February 20 [3 favorites]
posted by Lyme Drop at 1:15 PM on February 20 [3 favorites]
Well, Hillary Clinton could have tried not sucking shit. Can we move on?
posted by kittens for breakfast at 1:15 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
posted by kittens for breakfast at 1:15 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
The only theory as to why this thread so quickly devolved into relitigating the election is that it's just ultimately much more comforting rehashing that familiar ground than looking at the current situation squarely in the face. Lord knows, I'm having trouble with it. I'm constantly looking for rocks to hide under now-a-days.
posted by gwint at 1:19 PM on February 20 [8 favorites]
posted by gwint at 1:19 PM on February 20 [8 favorites]
I think you're at least partially correct gwint. The current situation is scary as hell and it's constantly changing.
Health camps! FEMA! DOGE! Airplane crashes! long live the king! Just keeping up with the headlines is exhausting and the firehose of shit keeps pumping out so much you never can stay focused.
And, ultimately, it's all because he won. So arguing over why sort of feels like arguing over the root cause of the massive manifold branches of bullshit that are too big to confront all at once.
I would suggest that while we damn sure aren't the people who decide anything, it'd be a really damn good idea for the Democratic leadership to figure out what went wrong and how to address it effectively. But they seem focused on punching hippies and throwing trans people under the bus instead of acknowledging a systemic failure on their own part.
I don't think what we're doing here is especially effective, but it's at least vaguely related to going forward.
Either we're all in camps and elections are outlawed or in 2026 the Democrats will have to run an election. And the question of how they can best do so and win is pretty important.
They'll have the advantage of not being incumbents but in the end if they're still pushing more of the same the only way they'll take back the House, and have even a faint chance at the Senate, is by people being fed up with Trump. And like Biden's 2020 win that's not something you can repeat.
posted by sotonohito at 1:35 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
Health camps! FEMA! DOGE! Airplane crashes! long live the king! Just keeping up with the headlines is exhausting and the firehose of shit keeps pumping out so much you never can stay focused.
And, ultimately, it's all because he won. So arguing over why sort of feels like arguing over the root cause of the massive manifold branches of bullshit that are too big to confront all at once.
I would suggest that while we damn sure aren't the people who decide anything, it'd be a really damn good idea for the Democratic leadership to figure out what went wrong and how to address it effectively. But they seem focused on punching hippies and throwing trans people under the bus instead of acknowledging a systemic failure on their own part.
I don't think what we're doing here is especially effective, but it's at least vaguely related to going forward.
Either we're all in camps and elections are outlawed or in 2026 the Democrats will have to run an election. And the question of how they can best do so and win is pretty important.
They'll have the advantage of not being incumbents but in the end if they're still pushing more of the same the only way they'll take back the House, and have even a faint chance at the Senate, is by people being fed up with Trump. And like Biden's 2020 win that's not something you can repeat.
posted by sotonohito at 1:35 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
The only theory as to why this thread so quickly devolved into relitigating the election
My theory is it's one particular person who's made a point of spamming this (sometimes verbatim) in every politics thread they can; & even if some percentage of people flag-and-move-on it only takes one or two people to take the bait and then we're right where we are now.
posted by CrystalDave at 1:41 PM on February 20 [8 favorites]
My theory is it's one particular person who's made a point of spamming this (sometimes verbatim) in every politics thread they can; & even if some percentage of people flag-and-move-on it only takes one or two people to take the bait and then we're right where we are now.
posted by CrystalDave at 1:41 PM on February 20 [8 favorites]
>punching hippies and throwing trans people under the bus
how so? The GOP found a wedge issue with trans people competing in sports and ran with it.
Of the 1,025 people who identified as Democrats or leaning Democrat, 67% said transgender athletes should not be allowed to compete with women.[1]
we talk about "kitchen table issues" but that doesn't mean just jobs or grocery store prices, but, rather, actual policies that parents talk about at home. This issue is in fact one of those "kitchen table issues".
Maybe it'll be like not preventing racial minorities entrance to public swimming pools every day vs. entrance on the last day before the weekly pool cleaning. Or not, time will tell.
posted by torokunai2 at 1:47 PM on February 20 [1 favorite]
how so? The GOP found a wedge issue with trans people competing in sports and ran with it.
Of the 1,025 people who identified as Democrats or leaning Democrat, 67% said transgender athletes should not be allowed to compete with women.[1]
we talk about "kitchen table issues" but that doesn't mean just jobs or grocery store prices, but, rather, actual policies that parents talk about at home. This issue is in fact one of those "kitchen table issues".
Maybe it'll be like not preventing racial minorities entrance to public swimming pools every day vs. entrance on the last day before the weekly pool cleaning. Or not, time will tell.
posted by torokunai2 at 1:47 PM on February 20 [1 favorite]
what are you talking about? that's literally throwing trans people under the bus if Dem politicans aren't able to stand up for us and explain why trans people in sports is a wedge issue without credibility... this isn't a time will tell issue... it's happening right now as the NCAA talks about banning trans athletes from all sports
posted by kokaku at 1:52 PM on February 20 [10 favorites]
posted by kokaku at 1:52 PM on February 20 [10 favorites]
My theory is it's one particular person who's made a point of spamming this (sometimes verbatim) in every politics thread they can
No, it's because there's nothing else we can do.
Congress (in general) has failed us
Democrats in Congress have failed us
The Judiciary has failed us (seriously, the ruling on DOGE is yet another spit in the face).
The way the US is set up has failed us. If Kathy Hochul can arbitarily delay congestion pricing, then why not Trump?
So all anyone can do is post reasons why Democrats didn't win for reasons that sound right to them.
Also, I think most of us don't want a revolution - we want things to stay somewhat close to the static quo. Maybe even Kedrick Lamar didn't understand his own line: "[The] revolution about to be televised you picked the right time for the wrong guy.” We're getting a revolution, but it's not in the direction we all had interest in going.
posted by The_Vegetables at 1:52 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
No, it's because there's nothing else we can do.
Congress (in general) has failed us
Democrats in Congress have failed us
The Judiciary has failed us (seriously, the ruling on DOGE is yet another spit in the face).
The way the US is set up has failed us. If Kathy Hochul can arbitarily delay congestion pricing, then why not Trump?
So all anyone can do is post reasons why Democrats didn't win for reasons that sound right to them.
Also, I think most of us don't want a revolution - we want things to stay somewhat close to the static quo. Maybe even Kedrick Lamar didn't understand his own line: "[The] revolution about to be televised you picked the right time for the wrong guy.” We're getting a revolution, but it's not in the direction we all had interest in going.
posted by The_Vegetables at 1:52 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
I've heard regular democrats say Harris was a terrible candidate for all kinds of reasons. I don't think that. She had her problems, but her real problem was having to run a presidential campaign in only three months.
As an observer from outside the US who nevertheless follows US politics quite closely (because, haha, I live in a country the US is kind of suggesting it might invade or at least start dronestriking soon, haha, im_in_danger.gif), I thought Harris started out really strong, picking Waltz was a good move, and they were doing good work with the "weird" stuff and so on, and then there was very noticeably a point where the Democratic consultants came in and told them to basically run a standard campaign, tone that stuff down, and just say you're the younger, black female version of Biden, but exactly the same on the issues, and that's when it all died on the vine.
Democratic campaign consultants are, from what I've seen, the most idiotic, out of touch bunch of scaredy-cat centrists ever. Republican campaign consultants, on the other hand, are despicable, but at least they've got the courage of their convictions.
Say what you will about the tenets of the American right, but at least it's an ethos.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 1:52 PM on February 20 [31 favorites]
As an observer from outside the US who nevertheless follows US politics quite closely (because, haha, I live in a country the US is kind of suggesting it might invade or at least start dronestriking soon, haha, im_in_danger.gif), I thought Harris started out really strong, picking Waltz was a good move, and they were doing good work with the "weird" stuff and so on, and then there was very noticeably a point where the Democratic consultants came in and told them to basically run a standard campaign, tone that stuff down, and just say you're the younger, black female version of Biden, but exactly the same on the issues, and that's when it all died on the vine.
Democratic campaign consultants are, from what I've seen, the most idiotic, out of touch bunch of scaredy-cat centrists ever. Republican campaign consultants, on the other hand, are despicable, but at least they've got the courage of their convictions.
Say what you will about the tenets of the American right, but at least it's an ethos.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 1:52 PM on February 20 [31 favorites]
well, it's a lot easier to punch hippies than it is to punch nazis, isn't it?
posted by pyramid termite at 1:56 PM on February 20 [5 favorites]
posted by pyramid termite at 1:56 PM on February 20 [5 favorites]
>explain why trans people in sports is a wedge issue without credibility
If you polled sitting Democrat politicians that 67% would no doubt be much larger.
FDR couldn't get "domestic" and Ag workers into Social Security, that took Truman 15 years later.
posted by torokunai2 at 1:56 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
If you polled sitting Democrat politicians that 67% would no doubt be much larger.
FDR couldn't get "domestic" and Ag workers into Social Security, that took Truman 15 years later.
posted by torokunai2 at 1:56 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
>Democrats in Congress have failed us
Democrats in Congress are Out. Of. Power. They can go on the news shows, that's about it.
>We're getting a revolution, but it's not in the direction we all had interest in going.
yeah I'd like to see corporate income taxes doubled, nay quadrupled, not halved again.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1DRvN
posted by torokunai2 at 1:59 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
Democrats in Congress are Out. Of. Power. They can go on the news shows, that's about it.
>We're getting a revolution, but it's not in the direction we all had interest in going.
yeah I'd like to see corporate income taxes doubled, nay quadrupled, not halved again.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1DRvN
posted by torokunai2 at 1:59 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
Democrats in Congress are Out. Of. Power. They can go on the news shows, that's about it.
So clever of Republicans to wait until Democrats were out of power before they started smashing the government. If only they had tried this while Democrats were still in power...then maybe Democrats might have possibly done something about it!
posted by RonButNotStupid at 2:39 PM on February 20 [3 favorites]
So clever of Republicans to wait until Democrats were out of power before they started smashing the government. If only they had tried this while Democrats were still in power...then maybe Democrats might have possibly done something about it!
posted by RonButNotStupid at 2:39 PM on February 20 [3 favorites]
Mod note: if I'm choosing my slurs, I'd have you call me a retard thanks
The word 'retard' is considered a slur by many, please avoid using it MetaFilter. It's use accomplishes nothing except hurting and angering members.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 2:44 PM on February 20 [9 favorites]
The word 'retard' is considered a slur by many, please avoid using it MetaFilter. It's use accomplishes nothing except hurting and angering members.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 2:44 PM on February 20 [9 favorites]
Democratic campaign consultants are, from what I've seen, the most idiotic, out of touch bunch of scaredy-cat centrists ever.(Aside: Will Stancil has been banging this drum since forever. He is a very normie liberal Democrat but other normie Democrats think he must be some Bernie-pilled commie because of how much he specifically hates on feckless consultants.)
posted by a faded photo of their beloved at 2:56 PM on February 20 [6 favorites]
Democrats in Congress are Out. Of. Power. They can go on the news shows, that's about it.
Absolutely not true. They can use procedural processes, such as denying unanimous consent to slow everything to a halt, essentially requiring a vote on every little thing congress normally does by default. If they'd done that, they could have effectively stopped all voting and no candidates would have been confirmed. That they haven't only means they don't think this is serious enough to warrant using all means possible to stop the fascists, which says more about them than about the current situation.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 3:00 PM on February 20 [25 favorites]
Absolutely not true. They can use procedural processes, such as denying unanimous consent to slow everything to a halt, essentially requiring a vote on every little thing congress normally does by default. If they'd done that, they could have effectively stopped all voting and no candidates would have been confirmed. That they haven't only means they don't think this is serious enough to warrant using all means possible to stop the fascists, which says more about them than about the current situation.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 3:00 PM on February 20 [25 favorites]
>on every little thing congress
Senate, not the House. I agree it's something. Doesn't exactly grind things to a halt though.
The House doesn't really have these tricks for the minority to block proceedings.
Thus far there hasn't been any actual legislation hitting the Senate floor yet AFAIK.
posted by torokunai2 at 3:08 PM on February 20 [1 favorite]
Senate, not the House. I agree it's something. Doesn't exactly grind things to a halt though.
The House doesn't really have these tricks for the minority to block proceedings.
Thus far there hasn't been any actual legislation hitting the Senate floor yet AFAIK.
posted by torokunai2 at 3:08 PM on February 20 [1 favorite]
While we're talking about slurs, i would like to point out: the mods have apparently never noticed in the entire history of the site, but "moron" is exactly as much of a slur as "retard". So is "idiot". Also "cretin". They're all slurs.
posted by adrienneleigh at 3:20 PM on February 20 [6 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 3:20 PM on February 20 [6 favorites]
Obama Appointed Judge rules that he can't stop the mass firings, that the President-controlled mediators will need to decide.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 3:27 PM on February 20 [4 favorites]
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 3:27 PM on February 20 [4 favorites]
if she had a victory in a regular primary
She ran in regular primaries in 2020. And she did so badly that she was practically the first one out of the race.
At least you knew Hillary Clinton really wanted to be president. In 2024, Harris seemed to be running because she had no other job opportunities on the horizon.
posted by Lemkin at 3:27 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
She ran in regular primaries in 2020. And she did so badly that she was practically the first one out of the race.
At least you knew Hillary Clinton really wanted to be president. In 2024, Harris seemed to be running because she had no other job opportunities on the horizon.
posted by Lemkin at 3:27 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
Demystifying President Trump’s “National Energy Emergency” and the Scope of Emergency Authority
posted by jeffburdges at 3:33 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
posted by jeffburdges at 3:33 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
Democrats in Congress are Out. Of. Power. They can go on the news shows, that's about it.
If the Democrats were magically put back in power, all three branches, I do not believe they'd make the serious changes that could prevent another Trump. They'd breathe a huge sigh of relief, sure, but that's about all.
As for violent resistance, can you imagine fighting a revolution under the banner of Democratic leadership? March with guns for Schumer and Jeffries and Newsom? Lol.
posted by ryanrs at 3:45 PM on February 20 [4 favorites]
If the Democrats were magically put back in power, all three branches, I do not believe they'd make the serious changes that could prevent another Trump. They'd breathe a huge sigh of relief, sure, but that's about all.
As for violent resistance, can you imagine fighting a revolution under the banner of Democratic leadership? March with guns for Schumer and Jeffries and Newsom? Lol.
posted by ryanrs at 3:45 PM on February 20 [4 favorites]
I think Kamala Harris made the most sense, since she's who would have run (I think?) if Biden had died during the campaign. She was the only person besides Biden you could say anyone voted for. A candidate who was selected at the convention would have had to be awfully charismatic to win people over and win the election. If Biden was going to drop out in the middle of July, as opposed to just not running at all, the only option the democrats had was Harris.
Harris had run a weak campaign in '20, and didn't seem to have an agenda to speak of. She wasn't getting any better. I was stunned and horrified by the existential emptiness at the heart of her, and when I said so here I was so viciously and relentlessly attacked I was astonished. I was mostly astonished because I couldn't believe that no one was as terrified as I was to realize this nothingburger was what the DNC was pitting against Trump. Was I really the only person who saw a toy poodle drifting into a showdown with Cujo?
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:09 PM on February 20 [10 favorites]
Harris had run a weak campaign in '20, and didn't seem to have an agenda to speak of. She wasn't getting any better. I was stunned and horrified by the existential emptiness at the heart of her, and when I said so here I was so viciously and relentlessly attacked I was astonished. I was mostly astonished because I couldn't believe that no one was as terrified as I was to realize this nothingburger was what the DNC was pitting against Trump. Was I really the only person who saw a toy poodle drifting into a showdown with Cujo?
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:09 PM on February 20 [10 favorites]
. That they haven't only means they don't think this is serious enough to warrant using all means possible to stop the fascists, which says more about them than about the current situation.
Hell, plenty of dems have been voting for Trump nominees, effectively helping the fascists by adding more support for the coup.
posted by The Great Big Mulp at 4:10 PM on February 20 [9 favorites]
Hell, plenty of dems have been voting for Trump nominees, effectively helping the fascists by adding more support for the coup.
posted by The Great Big Mulp at 4:10 PM on February 20 [9 favorites]
Speaking of votes, do we expect the Dems to help out Johnson re. the budget and debt ceiling?
posted by ryanrs at 4:20 PM on February 20
posted by ryanrs at 4:20 PM on February 20
It's like Trump and his goons are almost daring us to revolt. They're dismantling the state and endlessly trolling us while they do it. Every fucking day is like a bully slapping the back of your neck and going, "Ya gonna cry? (Slap.) Gonna cry? (Slap.) Gonna cry? (Slap.) "
posted by Ursula Hitler at 4:21 PM on February 20 [13 favorites]
posted by Ursula Hitler at 4:21 PM on February 20 [13 favorites]
Speaking of votes, do we expect the Dems to help out Johnson re. the budget and debt ceiling?
How do you think the Enabling Act of 2025 gets passed?
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 4:30 PM on February 20 [1 favorite]
How do you think the Enabling Act of 2025 gets passed?
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 4:30 PM on February 20 [1 favorite]
^ Historically, the SPD voted no. The KPD were all arrested or fled. It was the Zentrum (Centrist Catholics) that threw the SPD under the bus.
Speech by the Social Democrat Otto Wels against the Passage of the "Enabling Act" (March 23, 1933)
As for 2025-26, if the Dems vote anything other than Present or No I am going to be *Pissed* with-a-capital-P
posted by torokunai2 at 4:44 PM on February 20 [3 favorites]
Speech by the Social Democrat Otto Wels against the Passage of the "Enabling Act" (March 23, 1933)
As for 2025-26, if the Dems vote anything other than Present or No I am going to be *Pissed* with-a-capital-P
posted by torokunai2 at 4:44 PM on February 20 [3 favorites]
>Was I really the only person who saw a toy poodle drifting into a showdown with Cujo?
In retrospect, Biden should have bowed out after the midterms, yes.
posted by torokunai2 at 4:48 PM on February 20 [3 favorites]
In retrospect, Biden should have bowed out after the midterms, yes.
posted by torokunai2 at 4:48 PM on February 20 [3 favorites]
The KPD were all arrested or fled
Well Kash Patel was confirmed today, so.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 5:29 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
Well Kash Patel was confirmed today, so.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 5:29 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
One ray of hope.
President Trump, furious about delays in delivering two new Air Force One jets, has empowered Elon Musk to explore drastic options to prod Boeing to move faster, including relaxing security clearance standards for some who work on the presidential planes.posted by Lemkin at 5:34 PM on February 20 [16 favorites]
Good luck with the nonviolence. I really hope it works, but I suspect it may be too late. I'm reminded of this meme that's been circulating a while:
HOW I DEFEATED FASCISM WITH THE POWER OF LOVE
Chapter 1: The Power of Love
The first step in my journey was realizing that it is impossible to defeat fascism with the power of love.
Chapter 2: The Power of Incredible Violence
posted by Joakim Ziegler
Thank you. Anybody who thinks this can still be resolved by peaceful means is not paying attention. That bridge was crossed and blown up on Nov 6, 2024. There is serious direct and indirect violence now locked in and coming straight at you all, fast and hard.
There are two broad possibilities for how it is how it is going to play out from here:
If the SCOTUS supports the Trumpista's massive smash and grab raid on [checks notes] everything in sight, and the Congress or military does not stand up to it, then the USA is over and will rapidly descend into a corrupt tyrannical shit hole. In this scenario there is very little prospect of the Congress doing its job, and not a whole lot more of the military doing theirs, as they will likely feel bound by the SCOTUS decisions.
If the SCOTUS denies the Trumpistas, and then they defy those rulings and go ahead with their smash and grab raid anyway, and the Congress or military does not stand up to it, then the USA is over and will rapidly descend into a corrupt tyrannical shit hole. In this scenario there is slightly more prospect of the Congress doing its job, and a fair bit more of the military doing theirs, as they will likely feel bound by the SCOTUS decisions.
TBH, I don't see the Congress doing its job. Hasn't thus far, to the contrary, it has basically bent over and invited the Trumpistas to do as they wish. So the fate of the USA, and indeed most of the world, is now in the hands of the SCOTUS and US military.
How the SCOTUS and military respond is going to depend in no small part on how overwhelming and organised public protest is from the citizenry.
posted by Pouteria at 7:41 PM on February 20 [11 favorites]
HOW I DEFEATED FASCISM WITH THE POWER OF LOVE
Chapter 1: The Power of Love
The first step in my journey was realizing that it is impossible to defeat fascism with the power of love.
Chapter 2: The Power of Incredible Violence
posted by Joakim Ziegler
Thank you. Anybody who thinks this can still be resolved by peaceful means is not paying attention. That bridge was crossed and blown up on Nov 6, 2024. There is serious direct and indirect violence now locked in and coming straight at you all, fast and hard.
There are two broad possibilities for how it is how it is going to play out from here:
If the SCOTUS supports the Trumpista's massive smash and grab raid on [checks notes] everything in sight, and the Congress or military does not stand up to it, then the USA is over and will rapidly descend into a corrupt tyrannical shit hole. In this scenario there is very little prospect of the Congress doing its job, and not a whole lot more of the military doing theirs, as they will likely feel bound by the SCOTUS decisions.
If the SCOTUS denies the Trumpistas, and then they defy those rulings and go ahead with their smash and grab raid anyway, and the Congress or military does not stand up to it, then the USA is over and will rapidly descend into a corrupt tyrannical shit hole. In this scenario there is slightly more prospect of the Congress doing its job, and a fair bit more of the military doing theirs, as they will likely feel bound by the SCOTUS decisions.
TBH, I don't see the Congress doing its job. Hasn't thus far, to the contrary, it has basically bent over and invited the Trumpistas to do as they wish. So the fate of the USA, and indeed most of the world, is now in the hands of the SCOTUS and US military.
How the SCOTUS and military respond is going to depend in no small part on how overwhelming and organised public protest is from the citizenry.
posted by Pouteria at 7:41 PM on February 20 [11 favorites]
Let's be clear about "Congress" in the above. That's the GOP majorities. Actually, not even that, just a few members from each caucus, 3 or so each. If 3 members of each chamber won't cross the aisle, then we indeed have mortal enemies of an entire political party.
I made my last vote for any GOP candidate in 2000 but still.
as for:
"will rapidly descend into a corrupt tyrannical shit hole."
that's a given, yes, but there is still a Constitution-provided offramp for all this on Nov 3, 2026. Trump lost his GOP House majority last time (20 seats changing), no reason it can't happen again.
posted by torokunai2 at 7:51 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
I made my last vote for any GOP candidate in 2000 but still.
as for:
"will rapidly descend into a corrupt tyrannical shit hole."
that's a given, yes, but there is still a Constitution-provided offramp for all this on Nov 3, 2026. Trump lost his GOP House majority last time (20 seats changing), no reason it can't happen again.
posted by torokunai2 at 7:51 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
The opposition party would never support such a thing, and no other plausible leader has arisen. Nothing has materially changed for most citizens, so they're not going to rise up.
posted by ryanrs at 7:52 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
posted by ryanrs at 7:52 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
We don't have a helluva lot to protest yet. Outrageous, offensive acts have been committed, but it's been all out of sight of the TV cameras.
Alas, Jan 6 was televised far and wide, and that didn't move the needle a fucking micrometer.
posted by torokunai2 at 7:54 PM on February 20 [1 favorite]
Alas, Jan 6 was televised far and wide, and that didn't move the needle a fucking micrometer.
posted by torokunai2 at 7:54 PM on February 20 [1 favorite]
Just to clarify: no Dem leadership would support violent protest.
They're probably fine with contesting the mid-terms.
posted by ryanrs at 7:54 PM on February 20 [1 favorite]
They're probably fine with contesting the mid-terms.
posted by ryanrs at 7:54 PM on February 20 [1 favorite]
Alas, Jan 6 was televised far and wide, and that didn't move the needle a fucking micrometer.
It absolutely did. There is no reason that Trump should have been allowed to get back into office after that, save for the incredible fecklessness and foot-dragging of Merrick Garland.
There was even a window where, had the Democrats moved fast enough on the articles of impeachment drawn up by (iirc) Ilhan Omar while under siege in the Capitol Building, that Senate Republicans would plausibly have voted to convict him. But instead they deferred for a couple of weeks to the cabinet and wishful dreams of everything going away via the 25th Amendment, and by the time they finally mobilized to act, the iron was lukewarm.
(A special hat-tip and fuck you to Chris Coons for curtailing the presentation of witnesses and evidence in the second impeachment trial so that he could make it home that weekend for Valentine's Day plans.)
posted by Gadarene at 8:50 PM on February 20 [19 favorites]
It absolutely did. There is no reason that Trump should have been allowed to get back into office after that, save for the incredible fecklessness and foot-dragging of Merrick Garland.
There was even a window where, had the Democrats moved fast enough on the articles of impeachment drawn up by (iirc) Ilhan Omar while under siege in the Capitol Building, that Senate Republicans would plausibly have voted to convict him. But instead they deferred for a couple of weeks to the cabinet and wishful dreams of everything going away via the 25th Amendment, and by the time they finally mobilized to act, the iron was lukewarm.
(A special hat-tip and fuck you to Chris Coons for curtailing the presentation of witnesses and evidence in the second impeachment trial so that he could make it home that weekend for Valentine's Day plans.)
posted by Gadarene at 8:50 PM on February 20 [19 favorites]
It’s early yet, for sure, but we already see damage that will take years to undo. We also see how hard it fight an enemy that lives in gated enclaves and the shadowy corridors of global finance and extremist think tanks with reasonable-sounding credentials in their membership. Like, if you really wanted to rise up in strength to stop all this, what would you do? Fly to DC for a protest? Camp out at a crypto mining facility? There’s nothing to strike at because these people have been deliberately making themselves more and more unaccountable to Americans and indistinguishable from the rest of the oligarchy.
I feel like I can yell at a cloud but that’s about it. All the stuff online where we say “can you believe they did …. “ might help us feel less alone, but what are we really gonna do?
posted by caviar2d2 at 8:58 PM on February 20 [3 favorites]
I feel like I can yell at a cloud but that’s about it. All the stuff online where we say “can you believe they did …. “ might help us feel less alone, but what are we really gonna do?
posted by caviar2d2 at 8:58 PM on February 20 [3 favorites]
> Republican representatives will become very concerned about their re-elections.
Why would they be concerned about re-elections? Project 2025 will ensure how people vote doesn't matter. As peter theil says, "my freedom is incompatible with democracy".
They are blatantly ignoring laws. They pardoned violent insurrectionists. They claim no election they lose can be legitimate. Why would you imagine they are going to care about democratic norms? Andbif they don't, why would you expect democratic norms to persist?
They plan to invade Canada, Greenland and the Gaza strip and occupy all 3. As a result, Canadians are being threatened and demonized when visiting the USA by the loyal party members.
A reasonable response is for Canada to pull some nuclear bombs out of a hat. That is the state of geopolitics.
This isn't a game: a dictator has taken over the USA. Polls matter about as much as the scoreboard on family fued does.
By the time the next election shows a surprising GOP landslide a few waves of purges will be complete in the military and federal police.
The institutions will not save you. Either you save your institutions right now, or the American Republic ends. Pick.
posted by NotAYakk at 9:39 PM on February 20 [17 favorites]
Why would they be concerned about re-elections? Project 2025 will ensure how people vote doesn't matter. As peter theil says, "my freedom is incompatible with democracy".
They are blatantly ignoring laws. They pardoned violent insurrectionists. They claim no election they lose can be legitimate. Why would you imagine they are going to care about democratic norms? Andbif they don't, why would you expect democratic norms to persist?
They plan to invade Canada, Greenland and the Gaza strip and occupy all 3. As a result, Canadians are being threatened and demonized when visiting the USA by the loyal party members.
A reasonable response is for Canada to pull some nuclear bombs out of a hat. That is the state of geopolitics.
This isn't a game: a dictator has taken over the USA. Polls matter about as much as the scoreboard on family fued does.
By the time the next election shows a surprising GOP landslide a few waves of purges will be complete in the military and federal police.
The institutions will not save you. Either you save your institutions right now, or the American Republic ends. Pick.
posted by NotAYakk at 9:39 PM on February 20 [17 favorites]
>They plan to invade Canada, Greenland and the Gaza strip and occupy all 3
As it is now, the "they" there is just Trumpo spouting off as he does, to grab all the oxygen in the room.
>the next election shows a surprising GOP landslide
2000 was close enough for the GOP to effect their steal. There's going to be a lot of damage to good governance, national security. and the general welfare – what we have our Federal government for – this year and next.
But it's way too soon to begin to know what November 3, 2026 will look like. They could make massive cuts to social spending and flood everybody with $20,000 in cash to get them through the mid-term test. I remember when Bush's 2001 tax cuts were forwarded to everyone immediately via checks, they'll probably pull a stunt like that again.
The economy might be great next year or utter shit. If it's the former, Trumpo will have won, just like Reagan's recovery arrived just in time for 1984. If massive government spending cuts throw us into a recession, the Fed will be more than happy to drop rates to 0% again, and we might see 3-5% mortgage rates to re-trigger the post-covid housing boom.
Or of course they might just repeat the Bush deregulation of mortgage lending so we start seeing all those wonderful suicide lending products available again. Or they could forcibly take over the Fed and have them fund 2% 40 year mortgages. Anything's possible!
The GOP defended their House majority and won big in the Senate; I can see the electorate granting ex-post-facto assent to Trumpo 2.0 next November, and no amount of street protests will change that.
It all depends on how the pieces fall with jobs & interest rates. So far, We The People are getting what we voted for. Well, the ~100,000 swing voters across WI, MI. and PA at least.
Pelosi did win 20 seats in the Blue Wave of 2018. Jeffries is no Pelosi but if Project 2025 isn't careful they might cut something load-bearing in our polity.
posted by torokunai2 at 10:41 PM on February 20 [1 favorite]
As it is now, the "they" there is just Trumpo spouting off as he does, to grab all the oxygen in the room.
>the next election shows a surprising GOP landslide
2000 was close enough for the GOP to effect their steal. There's going to be a lot of damage to good governance, national security. and the general welfare – what we have our Federal government for – this year and next.
But it's way too soon to begin to know what November 3, 2026 will look like. They could make massive cuts to social spending and flood everybody with $20,000 in cash to get them through the mid-term test. I remember when Bush's 2001 tax cuts were forwarded to everyone immediately via checks, they'll probably pull a stunt like that again.
The economy might be great next year or utter shit. If it's the former, Trumpo will have won, just like Reagan's recovery arrived just in time for 1984. If massive government spending cuts throw us into a recession, the Fed will be more than happy to drop rates to 0% again, and we might see 3-5% mortgage rates to re-trigger the post-covid housing boom.
Or of course they might just repeat the Bush deregulation of mortgage lending so we start seeing all those wonderful suicide lending products available again. Or they could forcibly take over the Fed and have them fund 2% 40 year mortgages. Anything's possible!
The GOP defended their House majority and won big in the Senate; I can see the electorate granting ex-post-facto assent to Trumpo 2.0 next November, and no amount of street protests will change that.
It all depends on how the pieces fall with jobs & interest rates. So far, We The People are getting what we voted for. Well, the ~100,000 swing voters across WI, MI. and PA at least.
Pelosi did win 20 seats in the Blue Wave of 2018. Jeffries is no Pelosi but if Project 2025 isn't careful they might cut something load-bearing in our polity.
posted by torokunai2 at 10:41 PM on February 20 [1 favorite]
A reasonable response is for Canada to pull some nuclear bombs out of a hat. That is the state of geopolitics
We don’t have that kind of hat. Maybe France or the UK can ship us one, but really we’re proper fucked if we have to go there.
As of now even though all that 51st state talk worries me, I think it’s still trolling or some failed shit thrown at the wall, maybe they thought it would stick, it doesn’t but it’s a massive distraction here, I’m unclear how it plays in the US, my feeling is that Americans don’t spend a lot of time thinking about Canada (it’s fine) and they’re probably not talking about this much in the news.
If it’s not trolling it’s a play for resources, but it looks like they might buy those from Russia instead, with Ukraine being the price.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 11:34 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
We don’t have that kind of hat. Maybe France or the UK can ship us one, but really we’re proper fucked if we have to go there.
As of now even though all that 51st state talk worries me, I think it’s still trolling or some failed shit thrown at the wall, maybe they thought it would stick, it doesn’t but it’s a massive distraction here, I’m unclear how it plays in the US, my feeling is that Americans don’t spend a lot of time thinking about Canada (it’s fine) and they’re probably not talking about this much in the news.
If it’s not trolling it’s a play for resources, but it looks like they might buy those from Russia instead, with Ukraine being the price.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 11:34 PM on February 20 [2 favorites]
NotAYakk> They plan to invade Canada, Greenland and the Gaza strip and occupy all 3. As a result, Canadians are being threatened and demonized when visiting the USA by the loyal party members.
I doubt anyone could fight the US "symmetrically", even if someone gives them nukes. Asymmetric is the only option.
Panama has easiest resistance: If the US invades, blow up Gatun dam, becauise Gatun lake is the canal. It took 3 years to fill Gatun lake the first time, so even a little further disruption for the rebuilding effort means no canal until 2029 or later. It'll screw up Panama's agriculture of course, but less than Trump dictating that all the water goes for the canal, not for agriculture.
Gaza would be completely fucked: Democrats would cheer Trump expanding the genocide in Gaza, in part because his people would be more focused above.
Canada needs enormous preparation work: Weaken Trump allies in Canada. Offer young people training in weapons and asymetric warfare. Arange asylum for people who "strongly dislike" America but would support Canada, like South American communists, but without violating extradition treaties.
Any US-Canada conflict would be fought over oil, so Canada needs semi-permanent well kills ready to execute in hours. If existing well-kills techniques are not permanent enough, then Canada should use nuclear waste in the kill mud. At the same time, Canada should avoid giving the US excuses for invasion, so these actions should be carried out by labor unions, not the government.
"Crude oil is the majority of US imports (76%), and petroleum products are the majority of US exports (60%)." Also Canada and Mexico are 52% and 11% of US oil imports. The SPR has an enormous impact upon US power, so Canada & others need Trump to spend the SPR to pump the US economy.
Greenland would likely be fucked, given how tiny their population is, but they could find some legal poison pills too, like aranging miniral rights deals with thr EU and China, so those powers would sanction the US. It's also possible the cold winters would help them during a real invasion, aka kill whole bases by sabatoging the heating & power.
Among the easiest way to damage the US would be screwing up NOAA reports, so that people do not evacuate during hurricanes.
posted by jeffburdges at 2:40 AM on February 21 [2 favorites]
I doubt anyone could fight the US "symmetrically", even if someone gives them nukes. Asymmetric is the only option.
Panama has easiest resistance: If the US invades, blow up Gatun dam, becauise Gatun lake is the canal. It took 3 years to fill Gatun lake the first time, so even a little further disruption for the rebuilding effort means no canal until 2029 or later. It'll screw up Panama's agriculture of course, but less than Trump dictating that all the water goes for the canal, not for agriculture.
Gaza would be completely fucked: Democrats would cheer Trump expanding the genocide in Gaza, in part because his people would be more focused above.
Canada needs enormous preparation work: Weaken Trump allies in Canada. Offer young people training in weapons and asymetric warfare. Arange asylum for people who "strongly dislike" America but would support Canada, like South American communists, but without violating extradition treaties.
Any US-Canada conflict would be fought over oil, so Canada needs semi-permanent well kills ready to execute in hours. If existing well-kills techniques are not permanent enough, then Canada should use nuclear waste in the kill mud. At the same time, Canada should avoid giving the US excuses for invasion, so these actions should be carried out by labor unions, not the government.
"Crude oil is the majority of US imports (76%), and petroleum products are the majority of US exports (60%)." Also Canada and Mexico are 52% and 11% of US oil imports. The SPR has an enormous impact upon US power, so Canada & others need Trump to spend the SPR to pump the US economy.
Greenland would likely be fucked, given how tiny their population is, but they could find some legal poison pills too, like aranging miniral rights deals with thr EU and China, so those powers would sanction the US. It's also possible the cold winters would help them during a real invasion, aka kill whole bases by sabatoging the heating & power.
Among the easiest way to damage the US would be screwing up NOAA reports, so that people do not evacuate during hurricanes.
posted by jeffburdges at 2:40 AM on February 21 [2 favorites]
If the king and his thugs are not stopped soon then the USA is not getting another meaningful election again, maybe not even the pretence of an election.
The new regime has no intention of allowing themselves to be removed by any means, let alone a free and fair vote.
posted by Pouteria at 3:18 AM on February 21 [8 favorites]
The new regime has no intention of allowing themselves to be removed by any means, let alone a free and fair vote.
posted by Pouteria at 3:18 AM on February 21 [8 favorites]
Harris had run a weak campaign in '20, and didn't seem to have an agenda to speak of. She wasn't getting any better. I was stunned and horrified by the existential emptiness at the heart of her, and when I said so here I was so viciously and relentlessly attacked I was astonished.
It's derail-y but I want to chime in that when Biden stepped down last year, I asked if there was going to a proper nominating convention. But everyone - and I mean *everyone* here - was immediately "Rah Rah Kamala". I know I know, we were tired and stunned but, fucking-a, y'all towed the line straight into fascism. Seriously, Biden as physical person was a fuckin' joke and the smart (not really!) thing to do was to replace his sclerotic ass with a fucking believe-nothing, corporo-cynical former cop. What a fucking banner to excite the electorate.
Moreover, super job DNC for cloning the 2016 ticket. 'Cuz, yeah, it didn't work that year but the polarizing racism and misogyny was totally overcome by last year. Tim Walz was boring, cringey wet noodle. Seriously, did people think calling Vance weird was gonna get votes. It's just your lame-ass dad being "disappointed" in us. JFC, hire a goddam marketer DNC before you give us some incompletely-matured, vat-grown, flaccid neoliberal bastards with no stage presence or vision. Fuck. They're so fucking lame.
Did they have no imagination or what? No spine? No bile? Christ, I would have given anything if they'd let Hillary lambaste Donald when he was interrupting her at the debates. There were obvious opportunities but her choice was to continue trying to make her point as he interrupted her. Cmon, show some spine.
Which is to say, Metafilter, you should go look at the Biden resignation threads now. And you should conclude that we accepted slop too easily and let ourselves dream of the demographic decimation of the Republicans and the inevitable failure of their incompetent President Trump - as if only one party - "our" party, natch - would somehow be the only one standing.
What a delusion. What a lie. And we accepted it because we, too, had no vision.
posted by DeepSeaHaggis at 4:26 AM on February 21 [2 favorites]
It's derail-y but I want to chime in that when Biden stepped down last year, I asked if there was going to a proper nominating convention. But everyone - and I mean *everyone* here - was immediately "Rah Rah Kamala". I know I know, we were tired and stunned but, fucking-a, y'all towed the line straight into fascism. Seriously, Biden as physical person was a fuckin' joke and the smart (not really!) thing to do was to replace his sclerotic ass with a fucking believe-nothing, corporo-cynical former cop. What a fucking banner to excite the electorate.
Moreover, super job DNC for cloning the 2016 ticket. 'Cuz, yeah, it didn't work that year but the polarizing racism and misogyny was totally overcome by last year. Tim Walz was boring, cringey wet noodle. Seriously, did people think calling Vance weird was gonna get votes. It's just your lame-ass dad being "disappointed" in us. JFC, hire a goddam marketer DNC before you give us some incompletely-matured, vat-grown, flaccid neoliberal bastards with no stage presence or vision. Fuck. They're so fucking lame.
Did they have no imagination or what? No spine? No bile? Christ, I would have given anything if they'd let Hillary lambaste Donald when he was interrupting her at the debates. There were obvious opportunities but her choice was to continue trying to make her point as he interrupted her. Cmon, show some spine.
Which is to say, Metafilter, you should go look at the Biden resignation threads now. And you should conclude that we accepted slop too easily and let ourselves dream of the demographic decimation of the Republicans and the inevitable failure of their incompetent President Trump - as if only one party - "our" party, natch - would somehow be the only one standing.
What a delusion. What a lie. And we accepted it because we, too, had no vision.
posted by DeepSeaHaggis at 4:26 AM on February 21 [2 favorites]
Anyways, Democrats, if you don't refuse to increase the debt ceiling, you'll have abdicated any political relevancy.
posted by DeepSeaHaggis at 4:33 AM on February 21 [1 favorite]
posted by DeepSeaHaggis at 4:33 AM on February 21 [1 favorite]
shut it down or own it, democrats
posted by pyramid termite at 5:33 AM on February 21 [2 favorites]
posted by pyramid termite at 5:33 AM on February 21 [2 favorites]
they don't care about what's written down. law or precedent: it's irrelevant. they care about what they're told to do. how many people of character are still left in the US government? anyone who doesn't do what they're told by the god emperor or his grand vizier will be fired, escorted out by armed guards, and replaced with a proper toady. i don't see how a debt ceiling even matters. it's just a number in a spreadsheet. they'll keep shovelling money into their own pockets, forever, until someone with bigger guns tells them to stop. the only real question anymore is: where will the us military fall, on the side of the people "in charge" or on the side of "the people." being commander in chief of the us military only means as much as the us military accepts it to mean, because they have the biggest guns.
better hope i'm wrong.
posted by seanmpuckett at 5:45 AM on February 21 [7 favorites]
better hope i'm wrong.
posted by seanmpuckett at 5:45 AM on February 21 [7 favorites]
being commander in chief of the us military only means as much as the us military accepts it to mean, because they have the biggest guns.
100%. I have no love for the military of any stripe or any country, but assuming that all soldiers are brainless jarheads who will only do what they're told feels wrong to me. We've seen in our own MeFi community that there are plenty of ex-military folks who swore an oath to the country, not to the sitting president. I suspect Trump doesn't get that and thinks he has a personal army. He only has one if they are in agreement with him and I don't think they are. I think there are a lot of soldiers who would not agree to shoot their own countrymen just because the acting president doesn't like their vibe. He's gutting veteran supports and the military as well so it's not making him popular. I'd be more worried about the private options like Blackwater etc.
posted by Kitteh at 6:30 AM on February 21 [3 favorites]
100%. I have no love for the military of any stripe or any country, but assuming that all soldiers are brainless jarheads who will only do what they're told feels wrong to me. We've seen in our own MeFi community that there are plenty of ex-military folks who swore an oath to the country, not to the sitting president. I suspect Trump doesn't get that and thinks he has a personal army. He only has one if they are in agreement with him and I don't think they are. I think there are a lot of soldiers who would not agree to shoot their own countrymen just because the acting president doesn't like their vibe. He's gutting veteran supports and the military as well so it's not making him popular. I'd be more worried about the private options like Blackwater etc.
posted by Kitteh at 6:30 AM on February 21 [3 favorites]
It's derail-y but I want to chime in that when Biden stepped down last year, I asked if there was going to a proper nominating convention. But everyone - and I mean *everyone* here - was immediately "Rah Rah Kamala".
As far as I can tell that's not true. Pelosi seems to have wanted someone else. Donors wanted some sort of "mini primary" as proposed by James Clyburn. So that's a bunch of party elites not sold on anointing Harris, and if Biden had dropped out much earlier maybe it would have gone differently.
posted by BungaDunga at 7:41 AM on February 21
As far as I can tell that's not true. Pelosi seems to have wanted someone else. Donors wanted some sort of "mini primary" as proposed by James Clyburn. So that's a bunch of party elites not sold on anointing Harris, and if Biden had dropped out much earlier maybe it would have gone differently.
posted by BungaDunga at 7:41 AM on February 21
Any US-Canada conflict would be fought over oil, so Canada needs semi-permanent well kills ready to execute in hours.
I think there are a few wells in Alberta, but most of our reserve is oil sands. It's more akin to a mining op than what we imagine we we think oil production. You can probably blow the infrastructure and the pipelines and it becomes a huge investment in money/time.
...thing to do was to replace his sclerotic ass with a fucking believe-nothing, corporo-cynical former cop.
Bidden fucked it up primarily by trying to run for a second mandate, we he dropped out there was no time for a primary and somebody correct me, but I think Kamala was the only one who could use the funds collected by Biden. These reasons do not make her the best candidate, but in the end I remember the consensus being, she's the only one who could run.
She may not have been an exciting public speaker with charisma and gravitas, and really VP is weird job that doesn't show case anybody's talent, but again by the moment the choice came it was too late.
Also she was an AG not a cop, we're all up in arm because Trump is firing AGs, so are they good or bad? And the 30% of the US electorate that didn't show up to vote is not some progressive activists reserve that couldn't bring themselves to vote for an AG.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 7:53 AM on February 21 [5 favorites]
I think there are a few wells in Alberta, but most of our reserve is oil sands. It's more akin to a mining op than what we imagine we we think oil production. You can probably blow the infrastructure and the pipelines and it becomes a huge investment in money/time.
...thing to do was to replace his sclerotic ass with a fucking believe-nothing, corporo-cynical former cop.
Bidden fucked it up primarily by trying to run for a second mandate, we he dropped out there was no time for a primary and somebody correct me, but I think Kamala was the only one who could use the funds collected by Biden. These reasons do not make her the best candidate, but in the end I remember the consensus being, she's the only one who could run.
She may not have been an exciting public speaker with charisma and gravitas, and really VP is weird job that doesn't show case anybody's talent, but again by the moment the choice came it was too late.
Also she was an AG not a cop, we're all up in arm because Trump is firing AGs, so are they good or bad? And the 30% of the US electorate that didn't show up to vote is not some progressive activists reserve that couldn't bring themselves to vote for an AG.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 7:53 AM on February 21 [5 favorites]
And the 30% of the US electorate that didn't show up to vote is not some progressive activists reserve that couldn't bring themselves to vote for an AG.
Not this again.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 7:58 AM on February 21
Not this again.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 7:58 AM on February 21
[ I apologize. I didn't see that very carefully placed not in your comment ]
posted by RonButNotStupid at 8:07 AM on February 21 [1 favorite]
posted by RonButNotStupid at 8:07 AM on February 21 [1 favorite]
RonButNotStupid, it's all cool. And I should write with fewer negations. I think we're all stressed, tired, worried and we all wished we had a time machine to go back and fix what's happening.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 8:15 AM on February 21 [1 favorite]
posted by WaterAndPixels at 8:15 AM on February 21 [1 favorite]
> let alone a free and fair vote
The House is the core of our Constitutional Order. The GOP FAs with that, hello Hunger Games.
posted by torokunai2 at 8:16 AM on February 21 [1 favorite]
The House is the core of our Constitutional Order. The GOP FAs with that, hello Hunger Games.
posted by torokunai2 at 8:16 AM on February 21 [1 favorite]
> time machine to go back and fix what's happening
Can't fix stupid.
posted by torokunai2 at 8:18 AM on February 21
Can't fix stupid.
posted by torokunai2 at 8:18 AM on February 21
The US left is both impotent and incompetent. It won't save the center, and the center complaining it didn't save them from MAGA is also stupid. Stop expecting the left to be of use. The US left can barely manage to elect a dozen congresscritters and a pair of Senators. The center is also pretty weak (I think mostly by belief that it is business as usual), but at least it managed to slow this down a bit; from what I can tell, 40 years of "Faux" news has killed the USA.
US institutions aren't going to save the USA. If you want to save the USA, you need to save the institutions.
USA has a self crowned King backed by 30% of the USA's population. If you don't stop him, he'll tear down the government, make elections nominal and ensure eternal victory, and in a little bit start mass incarceration and killing of his political opponents, just like his idol dictators do. If he dies of old age, his heir will follow in those footsteps, backed by billionaires who believe "my freedom and democracy are not compatible" and MAGAs who lap up their poisoned media diet about how everything is the fault of "the other".
You won't stop this transition to monarchy with legal maneuvers. The republicans are willing to ignore the supreme court and have enough loyal followers to do so. You won't stop the monarchy with standing in the cold yelling. At some point they may get around to rounding the protestors up and stuffing them in death camps, but that'll probably happen after they finish with brown skinned immigrants and the like; until then, they'll just be ignored. You won't even be covered in most media as you stand in the cold pointing out that the Republic is Falling.
This isn't game as usual. Canada is currently buying time to arrange for an effective defence against military invasion by the USA. Canadian politicians are giving speeches that sound like Churchhill's "never surrender" in a moose suit.
Re-litigating the 2016, 2020 and 2024 elections is irrelevant. Even if you worked out how to fix the problems, that is like someone working out how to learn to walk as a toddler when they are 8 years old. You aren't a toddler, knowing how to learn to walk as a toddler is useless information.
You won't have another election at all like that in your lifetime unless you stop the monarchy, and what is needed to stop the monarchy is going to be drastic enough that the political landscape is going to be very different.
posted by NotAYakk at 9:14 AM on February 21 [4 favorites]
US institutions aren't going to save the USA. If you want to save the USA, you need to save the institutions.
USA has a self crowned King backed by 30% of the USA's population. If you don't stop him, he'll tear down the government, make elections nominal and ensure eternal victory, and in a little bit start mass incarceration and killing of his political opponents, just like his idol dictators do. If he dies of old age, his heir will follow in those footsteps, backed by billionaires who believe "my freedom and democracy are not compatible" and MAGAs who lap up their poisoned media diet about how everything is the fault of "the other".
You won't stop this transition to monarchy with legal maneuvers. The republicans are willing to ignore the supreme court and have enough loyal followers to do so. You won't stop the monarchy with standing in the cold yelling. At some point they may get around to rounding the protestors up and stuffing them in death camps, but that'll probably happen after they finish with brown skinned immigrants and the like; until then, they'll just be ignored. You won't even be covered in most media as you stand in the cold pointing out that the Republic is Falling.
This isn't game as usual. Canada is currently buying time to arrange for an effective defence against military invasion by the USA. Canadian politicians are giving speeches that sound like Churchhill's "never surrender" in a moose suit.
Re-litigating the 2016, 2020 and 2024 elections is irrelevant. Even if you worked out how to fix the problems, that is like someone working out how to learn to walk as a toddler when they are 8 years old. You aren't a toddler, knowing how to learn to walk as a toddler is useless information.
You won't have another election at all like that in your lifetime unless you stop the monarchy, and what is needed to stop the monarchy is going to be drastic enough that the political landscape is going to be very different.
posted by NotAYakk at 9:14 AM on February 21 [4 favorites]
if the low-information folks feel like/are told repeatedly that things are going badly
Maybe because, oddly enough, they actually have been going badly? 25% of the workforce is functionally unemployed (in only part-time work, making a poverty wage), and actual median income is 16% lower than reported (when part-time workers are taken into account), among other things. And the increase real cost of living for the majority of working people (focusing on price changes in those items counted in the CPI that low- and middle-income people actually buy) was around 9.4%, greatly outpacing any concomitant rise in wages.
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 10:05 AM on February 21 [7 favorites]
Maybe because, oddly enough, they actually have been going badly? 25% of the workforce is functionally unemployed (in only part-time work, making a poverty wage), and actual median income is 16% lower than reported (when part-time workers are taken into account), among other things. And the increase real cost of living for the majority of working people (focusing on price changes in those items counted in the CPI that low- and middle-income people actually buy) was around 9.4%, greatly outpacing any concomitant rise in wages.
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 10:05 AM on February 21 [7 favorites]
She ran in regular primaries in 2020. And she did so badly that she was practically the first one out of the race. I regret emphasizing Harris as the candidate. *Any* candidate that the Democrats chose at the point Biden dropped out would have faced the structural problem of a short campaign, and lost voters over it, and would have had legitimacy problems, regardless of the method used to choose them. There are people in this very thread (in the very comment I am responding to!) bringing up the legitimacy problems caused by establishment democrats circling the wagons around HRC when it looked like Bernie might have a chance. That sort of thing is Democratic politics as usual.
It matters because if you think there is probably similar Democratic support as there has always been, you might want to use different tactics than you would if you thought most of the country had turned into evil Magas. You might have different levels of hope. A lot of people in this thread seem to be getting ready to set up the barricades and start blastin', when a more effective solution might be to become more active in their local political party. Your county Democrats probably have weekly or monthly meetings. You can can also man the barricades. Switch to using Signal. Pay more attention to your privacy. Don't make threats online.
Woodrow Wilson once said "never attempt to murder a man who is committing suicide." If you think that the democratic support is there, and you think that free elections are coming, a lot of what Trump is doing looks like political suicide. Everyone is going to feel it in their pocketbook, everyone is going to know someone who got fired, didn't get that grant they were promised, everyone is going to lose their insurance, is going to be forced to deal with a bureaucracy that will have extreme delays and provide fewer services, is going to have friends or family deported or directly harmed by these awful policies. People will notice the post office being gone, the parks and forests being worse. The cynical play is to (mostly) let it happen.
Of course, that doesn't work if elections don't happen, or the destruction is complete enough. And it doesn't help the people whose lives are destroyed in the interim. If Trump gets to be king, political cynicism looks pretty stupid. Still, I'll bet there are Democrats right now who are looking to the next election with something like glee.
posted by surlyben at 10:18 AM on February 21 [5 favorites]
It matters because if you think there is probably similar Democratic support as there has always been, you might want to use different tactics than you would if you thought most of the country had turned into evil Magas. You might have different levels of hope. A lot of people in this thread seem to be getting ready to set up the barricades and start blastin', when a more effective solution might be to become more active in their local political party. Your county Democrats probably have weekly or monthly meetings. You can can also man the barricades. Switch to using Signal. Pay more attention to your privacy. Don't make threats online.
Woodrow Wilson once said "never attempt to murder a man who is committing suicide." If you think that the democratic support is there, and you think that free elections are coming, a lot of what Trump is doing looks like political suicide. Everyone is going to feel it in their pocketbook, everyone is going to know someone who got fired, didn't get that grant they were promised, everyone is going to lose their insurance, is going to be forced to deal with a bureaucracy that will have extreme delays and provide fewer services, is going to have friends or family deported or directly harmed by these awful policies. People will notice the post office being gone, the parks and forests being worse. The cynical play is to (mostly) let it happen.
Of course, that doesn't work if elections don't happen, or the destruction is complete enough. And it doesn't help the people whose lives are destroyed in the interim. If Trump gets to be king, political cynicism looks pretty stupid. Still, I'll bet there are Democrats right now who are looking to the next election with something like glee.
posted by surlyben at 10:18 AM on February 21 [5 favorites]
>they actually have been going badly?
from the Politico piece:
what is perhaps the most widely reported economic indicator: unemployment. Known to experts as the U-3, the number misleads in several ways.
We also have U-6, which includes discouraged workers:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/U6RATE which confirms that employment is as good as it's ever been.
But the CPI also perceives reality through a very rosy looking glass.
CPI is over-stated for homeowners (except for those maybe in climate-affected areas with skyrocketing home insurance premiums). CPI numbers we look at don't really include "luxury" goods, just a basic basket here.
the aggregate measure of GDP has hidden the reality that a more modest societal split has grown into an economic chasm
This is entirely true. I don't even look at GDP since it's fudged so much with imputed rents. FRED series WASCUR is more interesting but needs to be broken out by quintiles or even deciles.
The problem isn’t that some Americans didn’t come out ahead after four years of Bidenomics
The idiocy of things is that the Biden administration was faced with a once-in-a-century global health and associated fiscal crisis. Then when that was put to bed in 2022 the electorate gave the power of the purse to the GOP, which proceeded to torch everything they could get their hands on.
There were 3 spending bills the Pelosi House got through the Senate: ARRA, the infrastructure bill, and IRA. We're not / weren't going to see the meaty part of this spending until later this decade.
Do we have a good picture of what a "good" economy looks like? I assume it includes things like ample, affordable, quality housing opportunities for everyone, great affordable education, great affordable child care, great affordable health care for all.
Are these private goods or public goods? Which party is on the best track to getting this wealth provision going?
Everything is stupid.
posted by torokunai2 at 11:34 AM on February 21 [4 favorites]
from the Politico piece:
what is perhaps the most widely reported economic indicator: unemployment. Known to experts as the U-3, the number misleads in several ways.
We also have U-6, which includes discouraged workers:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/U6RATE which confirms that employment is as good as it's ever been.
But the CPI also perceives reality through a very rosy looking glass.
CPI is over-stated for homeowners (except for those maybe in climate-affected areas with skyrocketing home insurance premiums). CPI numbers we look at don't really include "luxury" goods, just a basic basket here.
the aggregate measure of GDP has hidden the reality that a more modest societal split has grown into an economic chasm
This is entirely true. I don't even look at GDP since it's fudged so much with imputed rents. FRED series WASCUR is more interesting but needs to be broken out by quintiles or even deciles.
The problem isn’t that some Americans didn’t come out ahead after four years of Bidenomics
The idiocy of things is that the Biden administration was faced with a once-in-a-century global health and associated fiscal crisis. Then when that was put to bed in 2022 the electorate gave the power of the purse to the GOP, which proceeded to torch everything they could get their hands on.
There were 3 spending bills the Pelosi House got through the Senate: ARRA, the infrastructure bill, and IRA. We're not / weren't going to see the meaty part of this spending until later this decade.
Do we have a good picture of what a "good" economy looks like? I assume it includes things like ample, affordable, quality housing opportunities for everyone, great affordable education, great affordable child care, great affordable health care for all.
Are these private goods or public goods? Which party is on the best track to getting this wealth provision going?
Everything is stupid.
posted by torokunai2 at 11:34 AM on February 21 [4 favorites]
This isn't game as usual. Canada is currently buying time to arrange for an effective defence against military invasion by the USA. Canadian politicians are giving speeches that sound like Churchhill's "never surrender" in a moose suit.
Let's be realistic, we are buying time to try to reorganize what we can of our economy to reduce our dependency on US economic exchanges so that the tariffs don't hurt as much as they could when they come. It's not enough time, and geography is against us since we're really a resource economy. We'll strengthen our military but there's no catching up.
I'd say the major thing we have going for us is a renewed sense of unity, and a will to care about each other. This means that we'll help those who'll lose their job due to the tariffs, and hopefully weather that storm, hopefully we understand that true strength lies with each other and on the bonds we create, and while we'll never be the greatest warriors we can still be the greatest at taking care of each other (and hockey).
And maybe when we have enough care, we can export it south of the border.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 11:37 AM on February 21 [4 favorites]
Let's be realistic, we are buying time to try to reorganize what we can of our economy to reduce our dependency on US economic exchanges so that the tariffs don't hurt as much as they could when they come. It's not enough time, and geography is against us since we're really a resource economy. We'll strengthen our military but there's no catching up.
I'd say the major thing we have going for us is a renewed sense of unity, and a will to care about each other. This means that we'll help those who'll lose their job due to the tariffs, and hopefully weather that storm, hopefully we understand that true strength lies with each other and on the bonds we create, and while we'll never be the greatest warriors we can still be the greatest at taking care of each other (and hockey).
And maybe when we have enough care, we can export it south of the border.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 11:37 AM on February 21 [4 favorites]
(that's was all the hope I could summon for today, I'm back to gloom mode)
posted by WaterAndPixels at 11:41 AM on February 21
posted by WaterAndPixels at 11:41 AM on February 21
Let's be realistic, we are buying time to try to reorganize what we can of our economy to reduce our dependency on US economic exchanges so that the tariffs don't hurt as much as they could when they come. It's not enough time, and geography is against us since we're really a resource economy. We'll strengthen our military but there's no catching up.
Yup. As I said before, the US is no longer to be trusted. I wouldn't consider them allies in any context anymore. It's really heartening to see the sense of unity WaterAndPixels talks about. It's even more heartening because it sure is shit drowning out the folks up here who sullied Canada's reputation during Covid. Aside from the usual nutters, there is a very very very strong sense of "eff off America." Again, Canadians are unfailingly polite but they do not have the patience for US bullshit. I've never had much interest in patriotism in either country but seeing Canada respond this way has evoked some pride in me. I am glad I am here and I am ready to push back against the US bullying us.
posted by Kitteh at 11:47 AM on February 21 [8 favorites]
Yup. As I said before, the US is no longer to be trusted. I wouldn't consider them allies in any context anymore. It's really heartening to see the sense of unity WaterAndPixels talks about. It's even more heartening because it sure is shit drowning out the folks up here who sullied Canada's reputation during Covid. Aside from the usual nutters, there is a very very very strong sense of "eff off America." Again, Canadians are unfailingly polite but they do not have the patience for US bullshit. I've never had much interest in patriotism in either country but seeing Canada respond this way has evoked some pride in me. I am glad I am here and I am ready to push back against the US bullying us.
posted by Kitteh at 11:47 AM on February 21 [8 favorites]
they actually have been going badly? 25% of the workforce is functionally unemployed (in only part-time work, making a poverty wage),
torokunai2 mentioned it but it's worth being very clear: it's very important to know whether that 25% is historically low, historically normal, or historically high. It would also be important to see if this number is similar among other rich nations or not. the article carefully avoids saying any of this.
posted by BungaDunga at 12:44 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
torokunai2 mentioned it but it's worth being very clear: it's very important to know whether that 25% is historically low, historically normal, or historically high. It would also be important to see if this number is similar among other rich nations or not. the article carefully avoids saying any of this.
posted by BungaDunga at 12:44 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
it's very important to know whether that 25% is historically low, historically normal, or historically high.
That article is nonsense and if you actually go the website the huckster is hucking, and you will see that the number you are touting is the lowest it's been since the guy started counting, and income is rising, and at it's highest ever. According to the huckster's own employment charts and income charts
Also, there's not enough data to say that even if this number is historically low or high, that it's because wages are high enough for people who don't really want to work decide to work, or if they are so low that people who don't want to work have to work. Number of people working is not a particularly valuable number.
So anyone saying that the US is really struggling economically and that's the reason Harris lost is just straight up wrong. Not only that, but they should probably also explain what Trump is going to do to help the people at the bottom of the charts. And if your answer is "on-shore manufacturing", well I hate to break it to you but manufacturing is generally a low-paying job and there are good reasons to on-shore manufacturing that have little to do with economics, like facing crises due to COVID, or potential war, but in terms of improving economic output, it's not a good one.
posted by The_Vegetables at 1:17 PM on February 21 [2 favorites]
That article is nonsense and if you actually go the website the huckster is hucking, and you will see that the number you are touting is the lowest it's been since the guy started counting, and income is rising, and at it's highest ever. According to the huckster's own employment charts and income charts
Also, there's not enough data to say that even if this number is historically low or high, that it's because wages are high enough for people who don't really want to work decide to work, or if they are so low that people who don't want to work have to work. Number of people working is not a particularly valuable number.
So anyone saying that the US is really struggling economically and that's the reason Harris lost is just straight up wrong. Not only that, but they should probably also explain what Trump is going to do to help the people at the bottom of the charts. And if your answer is "on-shore manufacturing", well I hate to break it to you but manufacturing is generally a low-paying job and there are good reasons to on-shore manufacturing that have little to do with economics, like facing crises due to COVID, or potential war, but in terms of improving economic output, it's not a good one.
posted by The_Vegetables at 1:17 PM on February 21 [2 favorites]
Drilling down into this table of the CPI report shows the gory details.
Everybody gets hit with a different part of this basket. Me, I have zero direct exposure to rent, childcare, education, gasoline, electricity.
The $40,000 OTD Tesla I got in 2023 works out to $22K in 2000 dollars (IIRC I paid $30K OTD for my first car then) so doesn't seem all that "inflated" to me.
Day care is only 0.7% of the CPI basket but hits families hard. Rent is the big ticket hit budgets have but the system minimizes it, and like Trudeau said for Canada, the Federal level really has fuck-all to do with it anyway.
https://6abc.com/rent-in-pennsylvania-rental-rate-protections-pa-legislation-politics/14545976/ +10% YOY caps on rents in PA. Feel the socialism.
$5000 in DOGE bucks should solve everything for everyone.
I am really curious what's going to happen to the IRA's expanded cost subsidies for PPACA, whether the GOP is going to make another pass at PPACA itself this term, Section 8 funding, SNAP etc.
This FRED graph shows nominal non-SSA and Medicare social spending is up $200B since 2020 and assumedly on the chopping block. We have a real veil of ignorance blocking our view of how next year is going to go down, that's for sure.
posted by torokunai2 at 1:25 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
Everybody gets hit with a different part of this basket. Me, I have zero direct exposure to rent, childcare, education, gasoline, electricity.
The $40,000 OTD Tesla I got in 2023 works out to $22K in 2000 dollars (IIRC I paid $30K OTD for my first car then) so doesn't seem all that "inflated" to me.
Day care is only 0.7% of the CPI basket but hits families hard. Rent is the big ticket hit budgets have but the system minimizes it, and like Trudeau said for Canada, the Federal level really has fuck-all to do with it anyway.
https://6abc.com/rent-in-pennsylvania-rental-rate-protections-pa-legislation-politics/14545976/ +10% YOY caps on rents in PA. Feel the socialism.
$5000 in DOGE bucks should solve everything for everyone.
I am really curious what's going to happen to the IRA's expanded cost subsidies for PPACA, whether the GOP is going to make another pass at PPACA itself this term, Section 8 funding, SNAP etc.
This FRED graph shows nominal non-SSA and Medicare social spending is up $200B since 2020 and assumedly on the chopping block. We have a real veil of ignorance blocking our view of how next year is going to go down, that's for sure.
posted by torokunai2 at 1:25 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
$5000 in DOGE bucks should solve everything for everyone.
$5000 in DOGE bucks is almost literally impossible, and anyone who's buying into that number in any way hasn't done the basic math.
posted by Gadarene at 3:47 PM on February 21 [2 favorites]
$5000 in DOGE bucks is almost literally impossible, and anyone who's buying into that number in any way hasn't done the basic math.
posted by Gadarene at 3:47 PM on February 21 [2 favorites]
When you have a dictator, anything is possible.
That is the attraction of dictatorships.
posted by torokunai2 at 3:54 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
That is the attraction of dictatorships.
posted by torokunai2 at 3:54 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
Really? DOGE coming up with $1.7 trillion from the cuts its making is possible?
posted by Gadarene at 4:10 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
posted by Gadarene at 4:10 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
$5000 in DOGE bucks is almost literally impossible, and anyone who's buying into that number in any way hasn't done the basic math.
The best part will be the folks they'll blame when someone next year asks where the DOGE bucks checks are.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 4:11 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
The best part will be the folks they'll blame when someone next year asks where the DOGE bucks checks are.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 4:11 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
"Take 20% of DOGE's total savings ($400 billion) and return it to the ~79 million U.S. households that will be net payers of federal income tax* in CY 2025 as a tax-refund check called the "DOGE Dividend."
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/musk-taxpayer-5000-refund/
Apparently this proposal wasn't from the nazi guy directly but the nazi guy boosted it on Xitter. $2T in cuts is of course a stretch goal, but it's mathematically possible.
The instant and permanent recession / Great Depression that would cause would drop interest rates to 0% again, probably saving $500B/yr or so in interest costs I guess.
Lower interest rates would also trigger another 00s style housing boom -> bubble -> bust so maybe the 2020s would play out like the 80s or 90s or 00s.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
posted by torokunai2 at 4:39 PM on February 21
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/musk-taxpayer-5000-refund/
Apparently this proposal wasn't from the nazi guy directly but the nazi guy boosted it on Xitter. $2T in cuts is of course a stretch goal, but it's mathematically possible.
The instant and permanent recession / Great Depression that would cause would drop interest rates to 0% again, probably saving $500B/yr or so in interest costs I guess.
Lower interest rates would also trigger another 00s style housing boom -> bubble -> bust so maybe the 2020s would play out like the 80s or 90s or 00s.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
posted by torokunai2 at 4:39 PM on February 21
Those who remember the past are also condemned to repeat it.
posted by seanmpuckett at 4:42 PM on February 21 [9 favorites]
posted by seanmpuckett at 4:42 PM on February 21 [9 favorites]
As of January 24, his job-approval ratio was 49.7 percent positive and 41.5 percent negative. As of Friday, it’s 48.5 percent positive and 47.0 percent negative,
Trump's Job Approval Rating at 45%;
(and, and)
Congress' Jumps to 29%
posted by clavdivs at 5:14 PM on February 21 [3 favorites]
Trump's Job Approval Rating at 45%;
(and, and)
Congress' Jumps to 29%
posted by clavdivs at 5:14 PM on February 21 [3 favorites]
FWIW I mapped my annual household spending into the BLS's CPI basket, it was a fun exercise to see where my spending departed.
Food was pretty close, Energy was surprising right around 6% of my total budget (even though I don't buy gas), thanks to paying an amortized ~$100/mo on my solar and ~$30/mo for natgas.
CPI basket has 2.3% for Electricity, pull the other one here in California.
New vehicles is 4% of the basket but I can amortize my Tesla at ~10% (15-year service life).
My PITI is $1200 so close to the basket's 35% for OER + maintenance, but the key thing is the PI is fixed and the T rises @ 2%; the last I is the worrisome part)
BLS saying rent is 7.5% of the CPI basket is just perverse. That extends out that rent is 22% of the cost-of-living basket for renters (35% of the population). My rent in California was 22% of take-home in 2006, when rents were pretty cheap and I was making the big bucks.
posted by torokunai2 at 5:58 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
Food was pretty close, Energy was surprising right around 6% of my total budget (even though I don't buy gas), thanks to paying an amortized ~$100/mo on my solar and ~$30/mo for natgas.
CPI basket has 2.3% for Electricity, pull the other one here in California.
New vehicles is 4% of the basket but I can amortize my Tesla at ~10% (15-year service life).
My PITI is $1200 so close to the basket's 35% for OER + maintenance, but the key thing is the PI is fixed and the T rises @ 2%; the last I is the worrisome part)
BLS saying rent is 7.5% of the CPI basket is just perverse. That extends out that rent is 22% of the cost-of-living basket for renters (35% of the population). My rent in California was 22% of take-home in 2006, when rents were pretty cheap and I was making the big bucks.
posted by torokunai2 at 5:58 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
I keep thinking of Ramsay Bolton's GOT character as a metaphor for this current administration: The X is his sigil, wielding a crude cutting device, the flayed man mounted on the X, the dogs as his most trusted companions, his servant Reek.
posted by effluvia at 6:09 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
posted by effluvia at 6:09 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
Mod note: The word 'retard' is considered a slur by many, please avoid using it MetaFilter. It's use accomplishes nothing except hurting and angering members.
Several people contacted me about this comment of mine, noting that 'moron' is also used in the original comment along with 'retard' and that both are slurs. So please be careful with the usage of those words and other similar one's like 'idiot' and 'cretin'. They're all slurs.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:26 PM on February 21 [6 favorites]
Several people contacted me about this comment of mine, noting that 'moron' is also used in the original comment along with 'retard' and that both are slurs. So please be careful with the usage of those words and other similar one's like 'idiot' and 'cretin'. They're all slurs.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:26 PM on February 21 [6 favorites]
"Trump to shut down all 8,000 EV charging ports at federal govt buildings"
Dictators are fuuun!
posted by torokunai2 at 6:33 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
Dictators are fuuun!
posted by torokunai2 at 6:33 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
Not sure if you'll noticed it yet, but the Chief, Joint Chief of Staff just got fired and his replacement is umm, not qualified except that Trump says he's qualified. The Chief of the Navy also got fired for being female. This is going to have some "interesting" repercussions.
Why do I look at the news at night! I need to get better and only check in the mornings.
posted by Art_Pot at 7:24 PM on February 21 [5 favorites]
Why do I look at the news at night! I need to get better and only check in the mornings.
posted by Art_Pot at 7:24 PM on February 21 [5 favorites]
Oh yes, and they also fired all the top military lawyers!
posted by Art_Pot at 7:29 PM on February 21 [3 favorites]
posted by Art_Pot at 7:29 PM on February 21 [3 favorites]
and his replacement is umm, n
"His (Lieutenant General Caine) most recent assignment was as the Director of Special Programs and the Department of Defense special Access Program Central Office at the Pentagon, Arlington, Virginia, where he served as the principal staff assistant and advisor to the Secretary of Defense for all programs protected under special access controls."
now the P̴̯͕̝̂̀ŕ̸̜͍̤͖ĕ̴͔̳s̶̹̉̔͛̚ï̴̝d̵̻͛e̸̘̳̞̽́͠n̵̰̬̄̽̀̕t̸̤̾͐̎̇ gets access to the secrets that he couldn't see in the first place.
posted by clavdivs at 8:47 PM on February 21 [4 favorites]
"His (Lieutenant General Caine) most recent assignment was as the Director of Special Programs and the Department of Defense special Access Program Central Office at the Pentagon, Arlington, Virginia, where he served as the principal staff assistant and advisor to the Secretary of Defense for all programs protected under special access controls."
now the P̴̯͕̝̂̀ŕ̸̜͍̤͖ĕ̴͔̳s̶̹̉̔͛̚ï̴̝d̵̻͛e̸̘̳̞̽́͠n̵̰̬̄̽̀̕t̸̤̾͐̎̇ gets access to the secrets that he couldn't see in the first place.
posted by clavdivs at 8:47 PM on February 21 [4 favorites]
Was I really the only person who saw a toy poodle drifting into a showdown with Cujo?
Maybe? By almost all accounts she beat him in the debate.
posted by kirkaracha at 11:41 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
Maybe? By almost all accounts she beat him in the debate.
posted by kirkaracha at 11:41 PM on February 21 [1 favorite]
The whole thing is so stupid.
After being awake for the last 10 years... If you sat out the election because Harris didn't promise you a pony, because she's too this, not enough that, even because Gaza, you failed the USA. (Not to mention Gaza, or Ukraine, this list goes on... what did you think would happen?)
This was a failure of American voters broadly, who decided boring old normalcy and real world politics were not worthwhile enough when facing an existential fascist threat. If you sat out the election, you will be getting exactly what you deserve. We'll all be getting exactly what you deserve.
posted by 2N2222 at 9:07 AM on February 22 [6 favorites]
After being awake for the last 10 years... If you sat out the election because Harris didn't promise you a pony, because she's too this, not enough that, even because Gaza, you failed the USA. (Not to mention Gaza, or Ukraine, this list goes on... what did you think would happen?)
This was a failure of American voters broadly, who decided boring old normalcy and real world politics were not worthwhile enough when facing an existential fascist threat. If you sat out the election, you will be getting exactly what you deserve. We'll all be getting exactly what you deserve.
posted by 2N2222 at 9:07 AM on February 22 [6 favorites]
Well there’s a winning message.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:28 AM on February 22 [7 favorites]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:28 AM on February 22 [7 favorites]
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1DU2n
blue is personal income from rent taps (left axis)
red is total wages
That $1T gap on the left (between where taps "should" be and where they are now) doesn't seem like much but taxing it away would knock down the deficit 50% (i.e. half that nazi guy's reach goal with DOGE), with a side-effect of also knock down the current $1.1T/yr income expense (since taxes are deflationary and low deficits doubly so)
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1DU3g is an important FRED graph I just found/created.
Income per quintile since 2006! Yeay! I adjusted it for inflation so this all 2024 dollars.
S-Tier income has gone from $185K to $220K since 2006. Winners!
A-Tier $90K -> $100K . . ."solid" 10% gainz
B-Tier $52K -> $54K ... keeping your head above water (as the theme song goes) – as long as you're not renting
The lower two quintile have lost ground, as expected
"Two quintiles" doesn't sound all that significant but it *is* 40% of the people here.
I should start my own yt channel, FFS.
posted by torokunai2 at 10:59 AM on February 22 [3 favorites]
blue is personal income from rent taps (left axis)
red is total wages
That $1T gap on the left (between where taps "should" be and where they are now) doesn't seem like much but taxing it away would knock down the deficit 50% (i.e. half that nazi guy's reach goal with DOGE), with a side-effect of also knock down the current $1.1T/yr income expense (since taxes are deflationary and low deficits doubly so)
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1DU3g is an important FRED graph I just found/created.
Income per quintile since 2006! Yeay! I adjusted it for inflation so this all 2024 dollars.
S-Tier income has gone from $185K to $220K since 2006. Winners!
A-Tier $90K -> $100K . . ."solid" 10% gainz
B-Tier $52K -> $54K ... keeping your head above water (as the theme song goes) – as long as you're not renting
The lower two quintile have lost ground, as expected
"Two quintiles" doesn't sound all that significant but it *is* 40% of the people here.
I should start my own yt channel, FFS.
posted by torokunai2 at 10:59 AM on February 22 [3 favorites]
Income is not as important as wealth regardless.
posted by Gadarene at 11:33 AM on February 22 [3 favorites]
posted by Gadarene at 11:33 AM on February 22 [3 favorites]
2N2222 You're kind of right.
Harris was the obvious choice.
So why did so many centrist voters who voted Biden sit out 2024?
Because being the obvious choice is clearly insufficient.
I agree that in an ideal world it SHOULD be sufficient, but it's not and the Democrats are acting like it is and that all they ever need to do is be marginally better than the very worst person in the world.
2024 was a failure of the Democratic strategists to run a campaign that got enough votes. You, and to a slightly lesser extent I, may think those votes are basically owed to the Democrats out of common decency and a desire not to see the world burn, but the vast majority of Americans self evidently do not agree. And millions of centrist voters who went Biden didn't bother voting in 2024. And that's not because someone said things about Gaza you don't like.
It's because Harris, and her team, failed to articulate a message that got them off their centrist, middle of the road, asses and into the voting booth.
People like you, me, and more or less everyone else here on MeFi have an almost elemental repulsion for Trump. To look at him is to know he's awful, to contemplate his policies, or even listen to him try to articulate them, is to know he's evil and must be stopped. Because we feel that way we think that simply pointing at him and saying "see!" is enough. I think Harris and her team must have felt much the same way.
And I'll say it again: I was personally wrong about Harris' campaign. I thought that by focusing on Trump and his ickiness she was on the right track. I'd have complained bitterly if she'd taken a different approach. And I was 100% wrong. Focusing on how vile Trump is was not the winning approach.
And (assuming we have meaningful elections in the future) it won't be either against Trump or against any Trumpesque figure in the future either.
The Democrats must abandon the idea that all they need to do is be less awful than the worst Republican. They must abandon the idea that all they need to do is say "dude, look at those guys, they're going to burn it all down just for fun" is all it takes to win.
You'd think that given a choice between the burn everything down and cause maximum harm candidate and basically anyone else the voters would turn out in droves for the basically anyone else candidate. But nope, that's not how it works.
I don't like that. You don't like that. But it's the truth, and you can't run elections on fantasies of how things should be.
What scares me is that the Democrats seem to think the lesson isn't "being marginally better than the single worst person in the world isn't enough to win" but rather the lesson is "we can totally coast to victory if we have a cis het white dude as the candidate and toss trans people under the bus".
posted by sotonohito at 11:56 AM on February 22 [6 favorites]
Harris was the obvious choice.
So why did so many centrist voters who voted Biden sit out 2024?
Because being the obvious choice is clearly insufficient.
I agree that in an ideal world it SHOULD be sufficient, but it's not and the Democrats are acting like it is and that all they ever need to do is be marginally better than the very worst person in the world.
2024 was a failure of the Democratic strategists to run a campaign that got enough votes. You, and to a slightly lesser extent I, may think those votes are basically owed to the Democrats out of common decency and a desire not to see the world burn, but the vast majority of Americans self evidently do not agree. And millions of centrist voters who went Biden didn't bother voting in 2024. And that's not because someone said things about Gaza you don't like.
It's because Harris, and her team, failed to articulate a message that got them off their centrist, middle of the road, asses and into the voting booth.
People like you, me, and more or less everyone else here on MeFi have an almost elemental repulsion for Trump. To look at him is to know he's awful, to contemplate his policies, or even listen to him try to articulate them, is to know he's evil and must be stopped. Because we feel that way we think that simply pointing at him and saying "see!" is enough. I think Harris and her team must have felt much the same way.
And I'll say it again: I was personally wrong about Harris' campaign. I thought that by focusing on Trump and his ickiness she was on the right track. I'd have complained bitterly if she'd taken a different approach. And I was 100% wrong. Focusing on how vile Trump is was not the winning approach.
And (assuming we have meaningful elections in the future) it won't be either against Trump or against any Trumpesque figure in the future either.
The Democrats must abandon the idea that all they need to do is be less awful than the worst Republican. They must abandon the idea that all they need to do is say "dude, look at those guys, they're going to burn it all down just for fun" is all it takes to win.
You'd think that given a choice between the burn everything down and cause maximum harm candidate and basically anyone else the voters would turn out in droves for the basically anyone else candidate. But nope, that's not how it works.
I don't like that. You don't like that. But it's the truth, and you can't run elections on fantasies of how things should be.
What scares me is that the Democrats seem to think the lesson isn't "being marginally better than the single worst person in the world isn't enough to win" but rather the lesson is "we can totally coast to victory if we have a cis het white dude as the candidate and toss trans people under the bus".
posted by sotonohito at 11:56 AM on February 22 [6 favorites]
>less awful than the worst Republican
this is an amazingly inaccurate, unfair and frankly irritatingly deceptive picture of the present situation
it certainly applies to I-P thanks to the significant presence of the "Israel Lobby" and other center-right types (like Biden, Fetterman) in the Democrat coalition. They've got money, and media, and cultural salience (e.g. Spielberg).
In most other issues there is a night & day difference between the Dem coalition and the GOP coalition.
In a sane world, Carter, the Clintons, Kerry, Obama, and Biden would be the GOP offerings. We do not live in this sane world, alas.
"Vast Rightwing Conspiracy" / "Basket of Deplorables" is in fact who's driving the GOP train right now.
> that's not how it works
plenty of people want to see it all burn down, yes.
posted by torokunai2 at 1:04 PM on February 22 [1 favorite]
this is an amazingly inaccurate, unfair and frankly irritatingly deceptive picture of the present situation
it certainly applies to I-P thanks to the significant presence of the "Israel Lobby" and other center-right types (like Biden, Fetterman) in the Democrat coalition. They've got money, and media, and cultural salience (e.g. Spielberg).
In most other issues there is a night & day difference between the Dem coalition and the GOP coalition.
In a sane world, Carter, the Clintons, Kerry, Obama, and Biden would be the GOP offerings. We do not live in this sane world, alas.
"Vast Rightwing Conspiracy" / "Basket of Deplorables" is in fact who's driving the GOP train right now.
> that's not how it works
plenty of people want to see it all burn down, yes.
posted by torokunai2 at 1:04 PM on February 22 [1 favorite]
torokunai2 I didn't mean to imply that Harris was merely marginally better than the worst Republican, though I'm far from a fan.
I meant they have that ATTITUDE. And it oozes off the Democratic leadership, you can tell they just don't care about appealing to anyone because in a rational world everyone would vote for them simply by virtue of them not being as bad.
Remember the smug "what are they going to do, vote for Trump" line of thinking about the Palestinian people in Michigan who were voicing their outrage at the way their friends and relatives were being slaughtered in Gaza? Guess what Democratic strategists? They fucking voted for Trump!
The Democrats weren't even trying. And we see similar lack of effort with other traditional Democratic voting groups. LGBT people, Black people, women. The Democrats act like they never have to actually try to appeal to those groups because they've basically got them held hostage by the awfulness of the Republicans. What are they going to do, vote for Trump? We saw how that approach failed with Muslim-American voters, I'm betting it's not doing so well for other minority voters either.
And it's true that the Democrats DON'T have to try as hard to get minority votes because the Republicans really are awful. But there's a difference between "don't have to try very hard" and "not trying at all" or worse "actively alienating".
Again, if we lived in a world of perfect rationality then the Democrats wouldn't have to try, at all. They could just give up campaigning entirely and be confident that they'd get 100% of the vote because the Republican candidate is such a horrible person. I don't disagree with your assessment of either the vileness of the Republicans or the sensibility of voting for a Democrat even if they're not so great.
But it's now empirically proved (twice!) that being the not-Trump candidate isn't the path to automatic victory and that they really do have to reach out and campaign to get the votes of even the people most likely to be hurt by a Trump style candidate.
Look at how angry you are at people who didn't just recognize Trump's awfulness and Vote Blue No Matter Who. Now consider that the Democratic planners are likely even more angry about it. That doesn't bode well for future elections because y'all still haven't learned that just not being awful isn't enough to win.
Winning is going to take real campaigning among the groups Democrats view as theirs by default. And that seems to be a conclusion that's so upsetting among the Democratic elite, and many rank and file Democrats, that it's being avoided. They really, and I mean really, do not want to confront that fact. They'd much rather snark about how those naughty voters who didn't vote like they were supposed to are going to be feeling sorry now.
posted by sotonohito at 1:38 PM on February 22 [6 favorites]
I meant they have that ATTITUDE. And it oozes off the Democratic leadership, you can tell they just don't care about appealing to anyone because in a rational world everyone would vote for them simply by virtue of them not being as bad.
Remember the smug "what are they going to do, vote for Trump" line of thinking about the Palestinian people in Michigan who were voicing their outrage at the way their friends and relatives were being slaughtered in Gaza? Guess what Democratic strategists? They fucking voted for Trump!
The Democrats weren't even trying. And we see similar lack of effort with other traditional Democratic voting groups. LGBT people, Black people, women. The Democrats act like they never have to actually try to appeal to those groups because they've basically got them held hostage by the awfulness of the Republicans. What are they going to do, vote for Trump? We saw how that approach failed with Muslim-American voters, I'm betting it's not doing so well for other minority voters either.
And it's true that the Democrats DON'T have to try as hard to get minority votes because the Republicans really are awful. But there's a difference between "don't have to try very hard" and "not trying at all" or worse "actively alienating".
Again, if we lived in a world of perfect rationality then the Democrats wouldn't have to try, at all. They could just give up campaigning entirely and be confident that they'd get 100% of the vote because the Republican candidate is such a horrible person. I don't disagree with your assessment of either the vileness of the Republicans or the sensibility of voting for a Democrat even if they're not so great.
But it's now empirically proved (twice!) that being the not-Trump candidate isn't the path to automatic victory and that they really do have to reach out and campaign to get the votes of even the people most likely to be hurt by a Trump style candidate.
Look at how angry you are at people who didn't just recognize Trump's awfulness and Vote Blue No Matter Who. Now consider that the Democratic planners are likely even more angry about it. That doesn't bode well for future elections because y'all still haven't learned that just not being awful isn't enough to win.
Winning is going to take real campaigning among the groups Democrats view as theirs by default. And that seems to be a conclusion that's so upsetting among the Democratic elite, and many rank and file Democrats, that it's being avoided. They really, and I mean really, do not want to confront that fact. They'd much rather snark about how those naughty voters who didn't vote like they were supposed to are going to be feeling sorry now.
posted by sotonohito at 1:38 PM on February 22 [6 favorites]
And it's true that the Democrats DON'T have to try as hard to get minority votes because the Republicans really are awful. But there's a difference between "don't have to try very hard" and "not trying at all" or worse "actively alienating".
Now that I see it put like this I can see pretty clearly how a person would conclude that GOP or Dems, neither one is going to let them have a say or give a shit about their needs. From that perspective both parties are about equally racist and all of a sudden those votes are not so captive anymore.
posted by VTX at 11:50 AM on February 23 [1 favorite]
Now that I see it put like this I can see pretty clearly how a person would conclude that GOP or Dems, neither one is going to let them have a say or give a shit about their needs. From that perspective both parties are about equally racist and all of a sudden those votes are not so captive anymore.
posted by VTX at 11:50 AM on February 23 [1 favorite]
Everything just came together in my mind, and I have to say this even though it's largely a repeat of what I said earlier but I see it so clearly now while before it was vague.
The Democratic Party is the political equivalent of the NiceGuy(tm).
Just as the NiceGuy(tm) is outraged that women aren't throwing themselves at him for being "nice" and convinced that the problem is that women just love assholes, so too the Democratic Party is outraged that voters aren't throwing themselves at them for being "nice".
"What do you mean they didn't vote for us, we won't dismantle the government for fun!"
"What do you mean they didn't vote for us, we won't alienate all our allies!"
"What do you mean they didn't vote for us, we won't tear up treaties and alliances!"
And yes, Democratic Party leadership, all that is indeed "nice". But it's the fucking baseline of decent political behavior, it is the minimum possible that a politician can do and not be completely awful in all ways. You have to actually bring something to the table and try to appeal to people.
It's not exactly the same because a person can choose to just not date anyone if the only choices are a NiceGuy(tm) or a total asshole, while in politics you get one or the other no matter what. But there's that vibe, that attitude of outraged entitlement. The Democratic leadership believes it deserves those votes just by virtue of being "nice".
And, again, just to emphasize, the only rational thing to do is to vote Democratic even if they don't try, even if they actively alienate you. Because WTF are you going to do, vote for Trump? But people aren't rational, including me, and since voting is an effort it's pretty easy for a person's emotions to let them rationalize not doing anything.
posted by sotonohito at 12:23 PM on February 23 [7 favorites]
The Democratic Party is the political equivalent of the NiceGuy(tm).
Just as the NiceGuy(tm) is outraged that women aren't throwing themselves at him for being "nice" and convinced that the problem is that women just love assholes, so too the Democratic Party is outraged that voters aren't throwing themselves at them for being "nice".
"What do you mean they didn't vote for us, we won't dismantle the government for fun!"
"What do you mean they didn't vote for us, we won't alienate all our allies!"
"What do you mean they didn't vote for us, we won't tear up treaties and alliances!"
And yes, Democratic Party leadership, all that is indeed "nice". But it's the fucking baseline of decent political behavior, it is the minimum possible that a politician can do and not be completely awful in all ways. You have to actually bring something to the table and try to appeal to people.
It's not exactly the same because a person can choose to just not date anyone if the only choices are a NiceGuy(tm) or a total asshole, while in politics you get one or the other no matter what. But there's that vibe, that attitude of outraged entitlement. The Democratic leadership believes it deserves those votes just by virtue of being "nice".
And, again, just to emphasize, the only rational thing to do is to vote Democratic even if they don't try, even if they actively alienate you. Because WTF are you going to do, vote for Trump? But people aren't rational, including me, and since voting is an effort it's pretty easy for a person's emotions to let them rationalize not doing anything.
posted by sotonohito at 12:23 PM on February 23 [7 favorites]
Yap and yap and yap
Litigate last election
Liberty tree dies
posted by NotAYakk at 11:30 PM on February 23 [1 favorite]
Litigate last election
Liberty tree dies
posted by NotAYakk at 11:30 PM on February 23 [1 favorite]
Not sure where to post this but the University of Pittsburgh suspended PhD admissions for the year, and the University of Pennsylvania reduced PhD slots by one third.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:35 AM on February 24 [5 favorites]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:35 AM on February 24 [5 favorites]
And, again, just to emphasize, the only rational thing to do is to vote Democratic even if they don't try, even if they actively alienate you. Because WTF are you going to do, vote for Trump? But people aren't rational, including me, and since voting is an effort it's pretty easy for a person's emotions to let them rationalize not doing anything.
Here's the problem I have as a person on the left who watches this argument go back and forth. People say stuff like this but there are routinely seats in the Democratic Party apparatus that are elected that go either uncontested or, in some cases, unfilled. There are congressional races that routinely happen without a primary. There are congressional seats that go uncontested. 34.8% of all state legislature seats went uncontested in 2024.
Why isn't someone from the progressives/the left running in every single one of these uncontested primary and general races? You don't have to put any real money into the process. Just using people power to waste the other side's resources fighting a primary or general that they don't want to devote resources to can be enough. Just run on authenticity and standing up for what you believe in. In the case of Democratic members in blue seats a close primary or even general election with no cash committed can put the fear of god into them. In the case of Republican members in red seats it forces them to commit resources to fights they'd rather not spend money on.
The key thing is not to sabotage things with a vote split. Force that primary to be bitter as hell. Bring up every nitpicky complaint. Then when it's all over and we've made our point, make up, do your kumbayas and focus on bringing down the fascists.
Instead of building benches and playing the game we keep going for a Quixote style insurgency campaign and we always lose because everyone against us has played the long game. Despite what current events would have people believe, politics doesn't work top down. At least it doesn't in the long term. There are 340,000,000 people in the US. You ask a question with nuance and you'll get 340,000,001 opinions back. A lot of people are going to have different opinions than us. So we have to play the game, not get mad that the game sucks.
We don't have to like neoliberals, we just need a détente. Stalin, FDR, and Churchill all set their feelings aside to fight Hitler, even after Stalin basically fucked around and found out. They knew that beating the fucking fascists is always the most important goal.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 6:44 AM on February 24 [7 favorites]
Here's the problem I have as a person on the left who watches this argument go back and forth. People say stuff like this but there are routinely seats in the Democratic Party apparatus that are elected that go either uncontested or, in some cases, unfilled. There are congressional races that routinely happen without a primary. There are congressional seats that go uncontested. 34.8% of all state legislature seats went uncontested in 2024.
Why isn't someone from the progressives/the left running in every single one of these uncontested primary and general races? You don't have to put any real money into the process. Just using people power to waste the other side's resources fighting a primary or general that they don't want to devote resources to can be enough. Just run on authenticity and standing up for what you believe in. In the case of Democratic members in blue seats a close primary or even general election with no cash committed can put the fear of god into them. In the case of Republican members in red seats it forces them to commit resources to fights they'd rather not spend money on.
The key thing is not to sabotage things with a vote split. Force that primary to be bitter as hell. Bring up every nitpicky complaint. Then when it's all over and we've made our point, make up, do your kumbayas and focus on bringing down the fascists.
Instead of building benches and playing the game we keep going for a Quixote style insurgency campaign and we always lose because everyone against us has played the long game. Despite what current events would have people believe, politics doesn't work top down. At least it doesn't in the long term. There are 340,000,000 people in the US. You ask a question with nuance and you'll get 340,000,001 opinions back. A lot of people are going to have different opinions than us. So we have to play the game, not get mad that the game sucks.
We don't have to like neoliberals, we just need a détente. Stalin, FDR, and Churchill all set their feelings aside to fight Hitler, even after Stalin basically fucked around and found out. They knew that beating the fucking fascists is always the most important goal.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 6:44 AM on February 24 [7 favorites]
Your Childhood Pet Rock As I noted, people aren't rational. If you expect them to be then you'll both be disappointed and fail at getting them to do what you want.
Now, as it happens, I agree with almost everything you wrote. It's an uphill slog and finding allies and help is going to be difficult by design, look at how the DCCC blackballed the consultants and firms that AOC employed for her primary challenge against Crowley. And yes, they claim they stopped in 2021, after the damage had been done and many had been driven out of business as a penalty for the dire crime of running a primary challenge against a right wing Democrat.
But it's worthwhile and something we need to do even if it is fighing uphill with dozens of supposed allies turning bitter enemies when we try (looking at you Beto, you asshole).
Still, while that's an incredibly worthwhile persuit and one that I strongly encourage everyone on the left to take part in, it doesn't address the problem of Democratic messaging during elections being not all that great (as evidenced by the way they keep losing).
posted by sotonohito at 8:41 AM on February 24 [3 favorites]
Now, as it happens, I agree with almost everything you wrote. It's an uphill slog and finding allies and help is going to be difficult by design, look at how the DCCC blackballed the consultants and firms that AOC employed for her primary challenge against Crowley. And yes, they claim they stopped in 2021, after the damage had been done and many had been driven out of business as a penalty for the dire crime of running a primary challenge against a right wing Democrat.
But it's worthwhile and something we need to do even if it is fighing uphill with dozens of supposed allies turning bitter enemies when we try (looking at you Beto, you asshole).
Still, while that's an incredibly worthwhile persuit and one that I strongly encourage everyone on the left to take part in, it doesn't address the problem of Democratic messaging during elections being not all that great (as evidenced by the way they keep losing).
posted by sotonohito at 8:41 AM on February 24 [3 favorites]
Stalin, FDR, and Churchill all set their feelings aside to fight Hitler, even after Stalin basically fucked around and found out. They knew that beating the fucking fascists is always the most important goal.
And what happened immediately after that? Oh, right, FDR and Churchill turned around and immediately demonized the USSR and started the Cold War! Because liberals hate leftists as much as they hate fascists. And look, i'm no apologist for Stalin, who obviously sucked! But "leftists, please work with us to defeat the fascists so that we can go back to ostracizing and marginalizing you" is not actually a good value proposition!
posted by adrienneleigh at 9:31 AM on February 24 [3 favorites]
And what happened immediately after that? Oh, right, FDR and Churchill turned around and immediately demonized the USSR and started the Cold War! Because liberals hate leftists as much as they hate fascists. And look, i'm no apologist for Stalin, who obviously sucked! But "leftists, please work with us to defeat the fascists so that we can go back to ostracizing and marginalizing you" is not actually a good value proposition!
posted by adrienneleigh at 9:31 AM on February 24 [3 favorites]
And what happened immediately after that? Oh, right, FDR and Churchill turned around and immediately demonized the USSR and started the Cold War! Because liberals hate leftists as much as they hate fascists. And look, i'm no apologist for Stalin, who obviously sucked!
Yeah. That's why it's a détente not an engagement ring.
But "leftists, please work with us to defeat the fascists so that we can go back to ostracizing and marginalizing you" is not actually a good value proposition!
So? That's why it's an alliance of convenience. I'd rather fight a liberal politically than have to fight a fascist physically. I'll do both but I'd rather the former.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:53 AM on February 24 [6 favorites]
Yeah. That's why it's a détente not an engagement ring.
But "leftists, please work with us to defeat the fascists so that we can go back to ostracizing and marginalizing you" is not actually a good value proposition!
So? That's why it's an alliance of convenience. I'd rather fight a liberal politically than have to fight a fascist physically. I'll do both but I'd rather the former.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:53 AM on February 24 [6 favorites]
The reality is that leftist/progressive voices are not going to win national elections on their own. But, and this is the key point, neither are the more centrist democrats. 2020 was razor close, 2016 and 2024 really demonstrate how unmotivated bog standard democratic voters are. The liberals need the progressives and vice versa.
In a different system, formal agreements would be hammered out as compromises to allow some progressive policy wins in exchange for liberal electoral victories. Maybe we need that here, formalized agreements between minor parties/groups and democrats. But! Even with those deals, crossing the wrong red line or touching a third rail means it all blows up.
posted by Slackermagee at 10:41 AM on February 24 [1 favorite]
In a different system, formal agreements would be hammered out as compromises to allow some progressive policy wins in exchange for liberal electoral victories. Maybe we need that here, formalized agreements between minor parties/groups and democrats. But! Even with those deals, crossing the wrong red line or touching a third rail means it all blows up.
posted by Slackermagee at 10:41 AM on February 24 [1 favorite]
The Coup Has Failed [American Prospect]
How the Stupid Coup is Going: Week 5 [Rebecca Solnit]
This morning at HUD's DC offices.
The worm is turning - stay focused.
posted by reedbird_hill at 5:17 PM on February 24 [3 favorites]
How the Stupid Coup is Going: Week 5 [Rebecca Solnit]
This morning at HUD's DC offices.
The worm is turning - stay focused.
posted by reedbird_hill at 5:17 PM on February 24 [3 favorites]
The liberals need the progressives and vice versa.
Correct! But the value proposition the liberals offer to the progressives is, "Shut up and vote for us. Maybe if you shut up and vote for us hard enough, we'll toss you a crumb every now and then. But probably not."
posted by adrienneleigh at 5:20 PM on February 24 [1 favorite]
Correct! But the value proposition the liberals offer to the progressives is, "Shut up and vote for us. Maybe if you shut up and vote for us hard enough, we'll toss you a crumb every now and then. But probably not."
posted by adrienneleigh at 5:20 PM on February 24 [1 favorite]
LONG LIVE THE REAL KING
Note that the real king has two left feet. You might call that typical AI carelessness. It pleases me to think of it as magnificently arch commentary.
posted by flabdablet at 7:10 AM on February 25 [3 favorites]
Note that the real king has two left feet. You might call that typical AI carelessness. It pleases me to think of it as magnificently arch commentary.
posted by flabdablet at 7:10 AM on February 25 [3 favorites]
Correct! But the value proposition the liberals offer to the progressives is, "Shut up and vote for us. Maybe if you shut up and vote for us hard enough, we'll toss you a crumb every now and then. But probably not."
To be fair we don’t actually contest anything or make long term moves as a bloc towards the concrete goal of actual political power. We only wield our power by yelling loudly what we want and taking our ball and going home when we don’t get our way. I’m not surprised a lot of centrists and moderates get pissed off at us all the time because everyone over here thinks organizing a protest is praxis and running for local and state government is futile.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:35 AM on February 25 [2 favorites]
To be fair we don’t actually contest anything or make long term moves as a bloc towards the concrete goal of actual political power. We only wield our power by yelling loudly what we want and taking our ball and going home when we don’t get our way. I’m not surprised a lot of centrists and moderates get pissed off at us all the time because everyone over here thinks organizing a protest is praxis and running for local and state government is futile.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:35 AM on February 25 [2 favorites]
I think MLK had the right idea and put it best:
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:40 AM on February 25 [7 favorites]
One of the greatest problems of history is that the concepts of love and power are usually contrasted as polar opposites. Love is identified with a resignation of power and power with a denial of love. What is needed is a realization that power without love is reckless and abusive and that love without power is sentimental and anemic. Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice. Justice at its best is power correcting everything that stands against love.Without power we can’t do shit. We need to stop being afraid of it, fight for it, and wield it wisely.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:40 AM on February 25 [7 favorites]
A bit more on the HUD sucker proxy from Gizmodo
posted by flabdablet at 7:54 AM on February 25 [1 favorite]
posted by flabdablet at 7:54 AM on February 25 [1 favorite]
Remember, DOGE took over what was the US Digital Service, so DOGE employees included both existing USDS employees and Musk's minions. Today, 21 engineers, data scientists and product managers resigned, "saying they were refusing to use their technical expertise to 'dismantle critical public services.'"
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 8:31 AM on February 25 [7 favorites]
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 8:31 AM on February 25 [7 favorites]
MUSK DOGERS IN THE PROJECT 2024½th CENTURY
HaHAH! Got the drop on you with my disintegrating pistol!
posted by flabdablet at 9:06 AM on February 25 [2 favorites]
HaHAH! Got the drop on you with my disintegrating pistol!
posted by flabdablet at 9:06 AM on February 25 [2 favorites]
"leftists, please work with us to defeat the fascists so that we can go back to ostracizing and marginalizing you" is not actually a good value proposition!
Neither is "leftists, we know we're supporting, funding, and arming a genocide, but pretty please overlook that, while we refuse to do anything to end the genocide and use genocide apologists as campaign surrogates", really. (Harris and the Democratic Party's morally repugnant stance on Gaza cost them the election; not sure why it is that the centrists are never the ones who have to compromise.)
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 9:09 AM on February 25 [2 favorites]
Neither is "leftists, we know we're supporting, funding, and arming a genocide, but pretty please overlook that, while we refuse to do anything to end the genocide and use genocide apologists as campaign surrogates", really. (Harris and the Democratic Party's morally repugnant stance on Gaza cost them the election; not sure why it is that the centrists are never the ones who have to compromise.)
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 9:09 AM on February 25 [2 favorites]
Harris and the Democratic Party's morally repugnant stance on Gaza cost them the election
Bullshit.
posted by grubi at 10:11 AM on February 25
Bullshit.
posted by grubi at 10:11 AM on February 25
Bullshit
Polling on this very issue says otherwise, but keep believing that if it makes you feel better.
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 10:26 AM on February 25 [2 favorites]
Polling on this very issue says otherwise, but keep believing that if it makes you feel better.
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 10:26 AM on February 25 [2 favorites]
29% of voters nationally who voted for Biden in 2020 and cast a ballot for someone besides Kamala Harris in 2024 say “ending Israel’s violence in Gaza” was the top issue affecting their vote choiceand that doesn't even count people who voted for Biden in 2020 but couldn't stomach voting for any candidate in 2024 because of genocide, and stayed home as a result.
Democratic turnout in 2024 was about the same as in 2016. That made it nowhere near as high as in 2020, when the relentless excesses of TFG's previous term had left the reality-based community so furiously sick of the fucker that they would have turned out to vote for the fabled organ-grinder's monkey* just to get rid of him.
The really telling result from that poll, to my way of thinking, is this one:
Even among Biden 2020 voters who did vote for Harris in battleground states, voters by a seven-to-one margin say they would have been more enthusiastic in their support if Harris “pledged to break from President Biden's policy toward Gaza by promising to withhold additional weapons to Israel” rather than less enthusiastic.Seven to one. Among people who did vote for Harris. That's a fuck of a lot of holding your nose and voting against the fascists because there's no better option.
More enthusiastic - 35%
Less enthusiastic - 5%
Make no difference - 59%
So the absolute maximum reduction in Democratic turnout that could possibly have happened had the Party not completely shit itself in fear of the Israel lobby was 5%. Anybody who honestly believes that this would not have been made up several times over by unlocking the votes of those who stayed home because they couldn't bring themselves to vote for genocide has their eyes screwed firmly shut and their fingers wedged firmly in their ears.
*There are plenty of folks who will still claim that that's exactly who they did turn out for, despite the Biden administration having had a red-hot go at reversing a lot of those excesses. I cannot personally recall talking with anybody who was actually pleased to see Biden beat Sanders in the primaries, but that probably says more about the circles I move in than anything else.
posted by flabdablet at 11:38 AM on February 25 [4 favorites]
That poll is complete crap.
That doesn't mean that the Biden administration's policy on Gaza did or didn't affect the election, but it does mean that the poll provides absolutely no information on the subject.
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 12:49 PM on February 25 [3 favorites]
That doesn't mean that the Biden administration's policy on Gaza did or didn't affect the election, but it does mean that the poll provides absolutely no information on the subject.
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 12:49 PM on February 25 [3 favorites]
7. Did the Biden administration’s policy of providing taxpayer-funded weapons to Israel make you [more likely to
vote for Kamala Harris in 2024, less likely], or make no difference?
More likely . . . . . . . . 7%
Less likely . . . . . . . 32%
Make no difference . . . 61%
Totals . . . . . . . . . . 100%
N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .604
9. If Kamala Harris had pledged to break from President Biden’s policy on the following issues, would it have
made you [more or less] likely to vote for Harris, or would it not make any difference?
Asked of those who voted for anyone other than Harris, or did not vote
More likely Less likely
Make no
difference
Immigration at the U.S. border 34% 11% 55%
Inflation in the economy 36% 9% 55%
The federal budget deficit 28% 7% 65%
Providing weapons to Israel 34% 17% 49%
Supporting Ukraine in the Russia-Ukraine war 24% 16% 60%
Abortion access 27% 16% 58%
Healthcare 37% 9% 55%
Fossil fuel production 23% 15% 62%
There are flaws, but it ain't crap .
Also agree that its not conclusive.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 1:36 PM on February 25 [2 favorites]
vote for Kamala Harris in 2024, less likely], or make no difference?
More likely . . . . . . . . 7%
Less likely . . . . . . . 32%
Make no difference . . . 61%
Totals . . . . . . . . . . 100%
N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .604
9. If Kamala Harris had pledged to break from President Biden’s policy on the following issues, would it have
made you [more or less] likely to vote for Harris, or would it not make any difference?
Asked of those who voted for anyone other than Harris, or did not vote
More likely Less likely
Make no
difference
Immigration at the U.S. border 34% 11% 55%
Inflation in the economy 36% 9% 55%
The federal budget deficit 28% 7% 65%
Providing weapons to Israel 34% 17% 49%
Supporting Ukraine in the Russia-Ukraine war 24% 16% 60%
Abortion access 27% 16% 58%
Healthcare 37% 9% 55%
Fossil fuel production 23% 15% 62%
There are flaws, but it ain't crap .
Also agree that its not conclusive.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 1:36 PM on February 25 [2 favorites]
The Frog or the Scorpion: Who Caused the Mess We're In?
posted by jeffburdges at 3:28 PM on February 25 [1 favorite]
posted by jeffburdges at 3:28 PM on February 25 [1 favorite]
it's the water
the thing that i keep asking myself is how are all these people in charge and opposed really going to handle it when the shit hits the fan - however that happens
it won't be over domestic politics although that can go to hell too
it probably can't be avoided or blamed on anything but all of us
no, it's just the water
posted by pyramid termite at 7:30 PM on February 25 [1 favorite]
the thing that i keep asking myself is how are all these people in charge and opposed really going to handle it when the shit hits the fan - however that happens
it won't be over domestic politics although that can go to hell too
it probably can't be avoided or blamed on anything but all of us
no, it's just the water
posted by pyramid termite at 7:30 PM on February 25 [1 favorite]
Appears metafilter ignored the planned medicaid cuts thus far, except for the one mention in the RFK thread.
In brief, they want at least $880 billion in cuts by the Energy and Commerce Committee, while Medicaid spending in 2023 was nearly $872 billion. Also they want a $325 billion increase in defense and border spending. It'll be Medicaid and deficits that pay for their $4 trillion tax cut.
posted by jeffburdges at 2:36 AM on February 26
In brief, they want at least $880 billion in cuts by the Energy and Commerce Committee, while Medicaid spending in 2023 was nearly $872 billion. Also they want a $325 billion increase in defense and border spending. It'll be Medicaid and deficits that pay for their $4 trillion tax cut.
posted by jeffburdges at 2:36 AM on February 26
Appears metafilter ignored the planned medicaid cuts thus far, except for the one mention in the RFK thread.
Yeah because everything coming from the executive branch right now is a series of dumpster fires that need to be put out and the current GOP budget plan execution is morons trying to figure out how to start a fire with flint, tinder, and wet logs and they've only just figured out they need tinder.
Even their own caucus is struggling to stay together on the budget.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 4:21 AM on February 26 [3 favorites]
Yeah because everything coming from the executive branch right now is a series of dumpster fires that need to be put out and the current GOP budget plan execution is morons trying to figure out how to start a fire with flint, tinder, and wet logs and they've only just figured out they need tinder.
Even their own caucus is struggling to stay together on the budget.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 4:21 AM on February 26 [3 favorites]
I could be misunderstanding the Medicaid cuts, but I think they hit blue states (which pushed more expansion) more than red states (who stood on principle (and on the diseased bodies of their voters) and refused the expansion)?
There's a narrative that says all these broke white people in red states are going to rise up against Trump, but man, I don't know, these people have a capacity for self-harm that I don't think the national consciousness really takes into account.
posted by mittens at 4:31 AM on February 26 [3 favorites]
There's a narrative that says all these broke white people in red states are going to rise up against Trump, but man, I don't know, these people have a capacity for self-harm that I don't think the national consciousness really takes into account.
posted by mittens at 4:31 AM on February 26 [3 favorites]
Yup.
Best case is a large number of them stay home on election day in 2026. None will be abandoning the Republican party or Trump. And they damn sure won't be joining any demonstrations or phoning their Congressperson to demand they stop voting for Trump's crap.
And that's the best case. The entire right wing noise machine will be telling them anything bad is the fault of the Democrats because reasons and they'll believe it.
posted by sotonohito at 5:05 AM on February 26
Best case is a large number of them stay home on election day in 2026. None will be abandoning the Republican party or Trump. And they damn sure won't be joining any demonstrations or phoning their Congressperson to demand they stop voting for Trump's crap.
And that's the best case. The entire right wing noise machine will be telling them anything bad is the fault of the Democrats because reasons and they'll believe it.
posted by sotonohito at 5:05 AM on February 26
I don't know, these people have a capacity for self-harm that I don't think the national consciousness really takes into account.
They would shit their pants if a Black person was forced to smell it.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 6:08 AM on February 26 [5 favorites]
They would shit their pants if a Black person was forced to smell it.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 6:08 AM on February 26 [5 favorites]
On the Gaza poll, as I explained in the earlier linked post, the problem is not the questions you cited, but the many previous questions, such as do you agree that "The $18 billion in weapons the U.S. provided to Israel over the last year, funded by taxpayer dollars, would be better spent lowering costs and supporting Americans dealing with inflation and struggling to afford basics like housing and healthcare."
This is called priming.
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 7:27 AM on February 26 [3 favorites]
This is called priming.
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 7:27 AM on February 26 [3 favorites]
Priming works for campaigners too.
posted by flabdablet at 7:59 AM on February 26 [2 favorites]
posted by flabdablet at 7:59 AM on February 26 [2 favorites]
On the Gaza poll, as I explained in the earlier linked post, the problem is not the questions you cited, but the many previous questions, such as do you agree that "The $18 billion in weapons the U.S. provided to Israel over the last year, funded by taxpayer dollars, would be better spent lowering costs and supporting Americans dealing with inflation and struggling to afford basics like housing and healthcare."
This is called priming.
Not sure why you think people might actually support genocide if not asked questions like that, really. The fact remains that Gaza was an issue for enough voters that it cost Harris the election; certainly cost her Michigan (where she lost by 80K votes) and Wisconsin (where she lost by 29K votes), and probably Pennsylvania as well (where she lost by 120K votes).
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 8:03 AM on February 26 [1 favorite]
This is called priming.
Not sure why you think people might actually support genocide if not asked questions like that, really. The fact remains that Gaza was an issue for enough voters that it cost Harris the election; certainly cost her Michigan (where she lost by 80K votes) and Wisconsin (where she lost by 29K votes), and probably Pennsylvania as well (where she lost by 120K votes).
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 8:03 AM on February 26 [1 favorite]
>Not sure why you think people might actually support genocide if not asked questions like that, really.
The problem is that a poll that does priming poorly reflects reality. It generates a significant bias in the results in a direction that can be controlled by the pollsters. So you can't conclude that the results actually reflect facts about the electorate - they reflect facts about the electorate if given a constrained media diet biased in one direction then immediately asked a question, which isn't what an election is.
The second problem when relying on polls with priming is that they are evidence that the polling organization itself is intending to bias the results. As releasing polls is not generally mandatory, when you want to send a message with a poll of your choice, what you do is generate more than one poll with more than one sampling strategy, priming questions, timing, etc. After generating a half-dozen or even dozens of polls, you pick the one that sends the message you want, and release it.
So the "margin of error is +/- 12% 19 times out of 20", if you repeat a poll 20 times and pick the one you most want, ends up being the *least* expected error in the results, instead of the most.
And because you are also tweaking other parameters beyond just "a different sample" with a goal in mind (maximizing a message), you can push the percentages over another few points. Like, do you or do you not correct for party idenification? Both are reasonable; you analize all of your polls both ways and choose the one that sends the message you want. You can do the same for various demographic and historical facts (past voting, gender, sex, socio-economic status, etc).
While they are all reasonable and real things to correct for, the ability to pick which you correct for and which you don't lets you p-hack your values to produce outputs you want. To avoid this, you need to pre-commit to whatever correcting factors (either by releasing the same pattern of polls with the same factors, or somehow pre-publishing what you will release).
To this end, this means when you run into a poll that does show definite signs of priming or from a less than reputable polling company or heck, almost any private poll, you really can't trust the values as more than a hint. Drawing concrete conclusions from it is a mug's game; it is propoganda, not data.
posted by NotAYakk at 8:19 AM on February 26 [3 favorites]
The problem is that a poll that does priming poorly reflects reality. It generates a significant bias in the results in a direction that can be controlled by the pollsters. So you can't conclude that the results actually reflect facts about the electorate - they reflect facts about the electorate if given a constrained media diet biased in one direction then immediately asked a question, which isn't what an election is.
The second problem when relying on polls with priming is that they are evidence that the polling organization itself is intending to bias the results. As releasing polls is not generally mandatory, when you want to send a message with a poll of your choice, what you do is generate more than one poll with more than one sampling strategy, priming questions, timing, etc. After generating a half-dozen or even dozens of polls, you pick the one that sends the message you want, and release it.
So the "margin of error is +/- 12% 19 times out of 20", if you repeat a poll 20 times and pick the one you most want, ends up being the *least* expected error in the results, instead of the most.
And because you are also tweaking other parameters beyond just "a different sample" with a goal in mind (maximizing a message), you can push the percentages over another few points. Like, do you or do you not correct for party idenification? Both are reasonable; you analize all of your polls both ways and choose the one that sends the message you want. You can do the same for various demographic and historical facts (past voting, gender, sex, socio-economic status, etc).
While they are all reasonable and real things to correct for, the ability to pick which you correct for and which you don't lets you p-hack your values to produce outputs you want. To avoid this, you need to pre-commit to whatever correcting factors (either by releasing the same pattern of polls with the same factors, or somehow pre-publishing what you will release).
To this end, this means when you run into a poll that does show definite signs of priming or from a less than reputable polling company or heck, almost any private poll, you really can't trust the values as more than a hint. Drawing concrete conclusions from it is a mug's game; it is propoganda, not data.
posted by NotAYakk at 8:19 AM on February 26 [3 favorites]
they reflect facts about the electorate if given a constrained media diet biased in one direction then immediately asked a question, which isn't what an election is
That's exactly what an election is.
posted by flabdablet at 8:21 AM on February 26 [2 favorites]
That's exactly what an election is.
posted by flabdablet at 8:21 AM on February 26 [2 favorites]
a constrained media diet biased in one direction
You mean like mainstream US news media pushing pro-Israel propaganda? That kind of "constrained media diet"? GTFO.
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 8:31 AM on February 26 [1 favorite]
You mean like mainstream US news media pushing pro-Israel propaganda? That kind of "constrained media diet"? GTFO.
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 8:31 AM on February 26 [1 favorite]
We've honestly no idea what'd happe in Harris openly opposed Israel's genocide during her campaign: AIPAC etc might kill her campaign through Democrat aligned media. Senior Democrats might've campaigned for Trump, like Jeffries, Clinton, Pelosi, or even Biden himself. Her larger donners might've pulled out, but maybe she'd still win on a shoestring budget. In fact, even milder Trump-ists might've voted Harris, over dislike for foreign adventures. We'll only know this once someone powerful enough tires defending Gaza.
We do know several true statements though: Neoliberal policies have steadily worsened the economic situation and class struggle for many Americans. Harris needed to differentiate herself from Biden and many Americans' economic problems, but instead Harris pushed "more of the same".
If otoh Harris had defended Gaza, this would repredsented a huge breake from Biden, so then people would've beleived progressive economic claims, which could've won or lost her the election. Instead, Democrats beleived she had a shot by simply not being Trump.
Anyways, I raised the medicaid issue here because of the political ramifications:
First, we'd several posts that claim Democrats have merely exploited the of Row vs Wade for electoral gains, while dong little about the underlying problem. I'd expect Democrats treat Medicaid similarly.
Second, after medicaid dies, poor American would end up seeking more care at ERs under EMTALA, which raises total costs. If patients cannot pay, then hospitals recoup costs by charging everyone more. Already hospitals are worse in poor neighborhoods, but one could imagine some larger scale effort to transport emergency patients in poor neighborhoods to ERs richer neighborhoods. It doesn't solve the problem, but it impacts cost distribution and quality of care.
posted by jeffburdges at 9:40 AM on February 26
We do know several true statements though: Neoliberal policies have steadily worsened the economic situation and class struggle for many Americans. Harris needed to differentiate herself from Biden and many Americans' economic problems, but instead Harris pushed "more of the same".
If otoh Harris had defended Gaza, this would repredsented a huge breake from Biden, so then people would've beleived progressive economic claims, which could've won or lost her the election. Instead, Democrats beleived she had a shot by simply not being Trump.
Anyways, I raised the medicaid issue here because of the political ramifications:
First, we'd several posts that claim Democrats have merely exploited the of Row vs Wade for electoral gains, while dong little about the underlying problem. I'd expect Democrats treat Medicaid similarly.
Second, after medicaid dies, poor American would end up seeking more care at ERs under EMTALA, which raises total costs. If patients cannot pay, then hospitals recoup costs by charging everyone more. Already hospitals are worse in poor neighborhoods, but one could imagine some larger scale effort to transport emergency patients in poor neighborhoods to ERs richer neighborhoods. It doesn't solve the problem, but it impacts cost distribution and quality of care.
posted by jeffburdges at 9:40 AM on February 26
Senior Democrats might've campaigned for Trump, like Jeffries, Clinton, Pelosi, or even Biden himself
this is such an absurd and nonsensical hypothetical that I don't even know where to begin, really. If those "senior Democrats" really love Israel that much more than America, their party deserved to lose.
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 12:28 PM on February 26 [1 favorite]
this is such an absurd and nonsensical hypothetical that I don't even know where to begin, really. If those "senior Democrats" really love Israel that much more than America, their party deserved to lose.
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 12:28 PM on February 26 [1 favorite]
Hospitals still aren't correctly staffed after COVID, and many are in financially precarious positions. Losing Medicaid won't just mean people going to the ER, it means their local ER may close and they'll have to travel even further away. But that doesn't just suck for patients--hospitals can be big employers in their communities, so this will mean more people out of work as well.
Just...it would be nice if we could get something right, as a country, about healthcare. Just once. This is one of those topics that drives me crazy because common sense, economics and politics all line up to point at one extremely simple answer, but we seem determined as a nation to ignore that answer.
posted by mittens at 12:32 PM on February 26 [6 favorites]
Just...it would be nice if we could get something right, as a country, about healthcare. Just once. This is one of those topics that drives me crazy because common sense, economics and politics all line up to point at one extremely simple answer, but we seem determined as a nation to ignore that answer.
posted by mittens at 12:32 PM on February 26 [6 favorites]
Note that as always the right is framing taking services away from poor white people as saving those services from undeserving minorities.
Just as with Reagan's welfare queen, we all know the race of the mythic Medicare cheat Trump invokes to disguise his Medicare cuts as "ending corruption".
There's a bunch of white people out there who are perfectly willing to suffer as long as they think it means a Black person will suffering more.
posted by sotonohito at 2:51 PM on February 26 [8 favorites]
Just as with Reagan's welfare queen, we all know the race of the mythic Medicare cheat Trump invokes to disguise his Medicare cuts as "ending corruption".
There's a bunch of white people out there who are perfectly willing to suffer as long as they think it means a Black person will suffering more.
posted by sotonohito at 2:51 PM on February 26 [8 favorites]
I sure wish all the commenters here who know exactly what the democrats ought to have done in every situation and campaign would put that energy into local organizing and campaigning. Failure would be unthinkable.
posted by Salamandrous at 5:27 PM on February 26 [7 favorites]
posted by Salamandrous at 5:27 PM on February 26 [7 favorites]
I sure wish all the commenters here who know exactly what the democrats ought to have done in every situation and campaign would put that energy into local organizing and campaigning
If I did that it would be for a socialist candidate, not a Democrat; I have no interest at this point in giving any of my time or energy to a party so fully co-opted by billionaire donors and AIPAC, sorry. I'll vote for Democratic candidates against fascists, but that's it.
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 5:43 PM on February 26 [1 favorite]
If I did that it would be for a socialist candidate, not a Democrat; I have no interest at this point in giving any of my time or energy to a party so fully co-opted by billionaire donors and AIPAC, sorry. I'll vote for Democratic candidates against fascists, but that's it.
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 5:43 PM on February 26 [1 favorite]
If I did that it would be for a socialist candidate, not a Democrat; I have no interest at this point in giving any of my time or energy to a party so fully co-opted by billionaire donors and AIPAC, sorry. I'll vote for Democratic candidates against fascists, but that's it.
Maybe start running socialist candidates in primaries or uncontested seats? 🧐
Just don't run under a socialist banner. Call them something dumb like the "Common Sense Party" so that raging boomers can feel like it's ok to vote for vaguely socialist policies like back in the New Deal day. Make sure to keep any necessary progressivism colorblind on the surface with tropes like "we're going to get things to the people who really need them" so that racist af white people can assume Black people won't benefit.
If it's all just vibes now we might as well use vibes to trick people into voting socialist.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:12 AM on February 27 [5 favorites]
Maybe start running socialist candidates in primaries or uncontested seats? 🧐
Just don't run under a socialist banner. Call them something dumb like the "Common Sense Party" so that raging boomers can feel like it's ok to vote for vaguely socialist policies like back in the New Deal day. Make sure to keep any necessary progressivism colorblind on the surface with tropes like "we're going to get things to the people who really need them" so that racist af white people can assume Black people won't benefit.
If it's all just vibes now we might as well use vibes to trick people into voting socialist.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:12 AM on February 27 [5 favorites]
Maybe start running socialist candidates in primaries or uncontested seats? 🧐
Just don't run under a socialist banner. Call them something dumb like the "Common Sense Party" so that raging boomers can feel like it's ok to vote for vaguely socialist policies like back in the New Deal day.
This already happens. There's the "Working Families Party," and also DSA mostly runs candidates as Dems. Sometimes it works out and you get a socialist council member or congressman like Greg Casar or Richie Floyd and sometimes you get a rug pull like the Nevada State Democratic Party and Byron Brown.
posted by tofu_crouton at 10:42 AM on February 27 [3 favorites]
Just don't run under a socialist banner. Call them something dumb like the "Common Sense Party" so that raging boomers can feel like it's ok to vote for vaguely socialist policies like back in the New Deal day.
This already happens. There's the "Working Families Party," and also DSA mostly runs candidates as Dems. Sometimes it works out and you get a socialist council member or congressman like Greg Casar or Richie Floyd and sometimes you get a rug pull like the Nevada State Democratic Party and Byron Brown.
posted by tofu_crouton at 10:42 AM on February 27 [3 favorites]
If I did that it would be for a socialist candidate, not a Democrat; I have no interest at this point in giving any of my time or energy to a party so fully co-opted by billionaire donors and AIPAC, sorry. I'll vote for Democratic candidates against fascists, but that's it.
I mean, this sounds great. Much better in every way than backseat quarterbacking for candidates you don't even like long after the elections are over.
posted by Salamandrous at 3:07 PM on February 27 [1 favorite]
I mean, this sounds great. Much better in every way than backseat quarterbacking for candidates you don't even like long after the elections are over.
posted by Salamandrous at 3:07 PM on February 27 [1 favorite]
sometimes you get a rug pull like the Nevada State Democratic Party and Byron Brown.
Yeah, this is the problem: Democrats, at least the party insiders, hate actual progressives and socialists way more than they hate Republicans. When socialist candidates run as Democrats, the Democratic Party does borderline-illegal shit to fuck them over.
posted by adrienneleigh at 4:07 PM on February 27 [6 favorites]
Yeah, this is the problem: Democrats, at least the party insiders, hate actual progressives and socialists way more than they hate Republicans. When socialist candidates run as Democrats, the Democratic Party does borderline-illegal shit to fuck them over.
posted by adrienneleigh at 4:07 PM on February 27 [6 favorites]
Yeah, this is the problem: Democrats, at least the party insiders, hate actual progressives and socialists way more than they hate Republicans. When socialist candidates run as Democrats, the Democratic Party does borderline-illegal shit to fuck them over.
There's two sides to this coin because of the way party politics in the US is basically decentralized mob rule in a loosely organized fashion.
Party insiders can fuck over primary winners by not disbursing campaign funds to the winners. This is shitty but not unexpected. Let's face it. A lot of the people who donate to the Democratic party are shitty people. There's just very few not-shitty people that give a lot of money to leftist political causes and you need more and more money and resources the further up the ladder you go. People power can fill in a lot of the gaps but not all of them. People power can't get on the airwaves to the median voter.
The institutionalists are obviously worried about the donors not coming back if they start giving away the donations of lawyers and car dealerships to socialists so fuck us I guess?
The other side of the coin is that when socialists take over the party apparatus the candidates can also refuse to deal with the state party apparatus. This happened in NV when the DSA took it over. The Reid machine basically didn't do them any favors, transferring what cash they had on hand from donors out to a lifeboat county party to help fund the Senate race but more critically, the DSA candidates didn't actually do anything with the power.
Here, straight from the horse's mouth of the Las Vegas DSA:
And this is the rim of the coin. A lot of socialist organizations have plenty of stuff for making noise, but not for generating other resources needed to run an actual campaign. You can't mutual aid your way out of the situation because the money is flowing out of the community. My personal thought is that socialists need to start founding worker co-operatives, most likely in creative and knowledge economy industries, and direct the profits from these industries into politics. Creative and knowledge economy businesses aren't that expensive to start, they do things that can't easily be commoditized, and they can be done remote teams including people with disabilities. It brings money into the community which it so desperately needs and lets us develop war chests for campaigns and setting up other similar operations in other states.
I realize this is like 20+ year planning stuff but we need to start investing in ourselves otherwise we're just going to set ourselves up to fail over and over.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:01 PM on February 27 [6 favorites]
There's two sides to this coin because of the way party politics in the US is basically decentralized mob rule in a loosely organized fashion.
Party insiders can fuck over primary winners by not disbursing campaign funds to the winners. This is shitty but not unexpected. Let's face it. A lot of the people who donate to the Democratic party are shitty people. There's just very few not-shitty people that give a lot of money to leftist political causes and you need more and more money and resources the further up the ladder you go. People power can fill in a lot of the gaps but not all of them. People power can't get on the airwaves to the median voter.
The institutionalists are obviously worried about the donors not coming back if they start giving away the donations of lawyers and car dealerships to socialists so fuck us I guess?
The other side of the coin is that when socialists take over the party apparatus the candidates can also refuse to deal with the state party apparatus. This happened in NV when the DSA took it over. The Reid machine basically didn't do them any favors, transferring what cash they had on hand from donors out to a lifeboat county party to help fund the Senate race but more critically, the DSA candidates didn't actually do anything with the power.
Here, straight from the horse's mouth of the Las Vegas DSA:
Ready to be mobilized, we awaited instructions. The instructions never came. Nor, indeed, did any real communication. We openly acknowledge our part in allowing the relationship to fall flat. We deferred to the people who’d actually won these offices, naively expecting them to think of us as partners in organization and mobilization. After the election, Left Caucus also fell off in attendance and capacity; as is so often the case when a big campaign ends, all but a few major players scattered when a new project didn’t present itself.The thing about a lot of the institutional people who work in the party apparatus, as shitty as they are, they are consistent and actually do things to cultivate the relationships and resources necessary to run a political campaign. Nobody who was elected in the takeover apparently wanted to do any of it, little alone have a clue on what to do or even have a vague strategy. The DSA slate squandered so many community resources that in 2024 the whole lot of them out got turfed out for a unity slate. The DSA candidates expected to inherit a well oiled machine but, as shitty as they are, the institutionalist people and their connections are the gears that make that well oiled machine turn. You need to have a plan for replicating that when you do seize power because the afore mentioned lawyers and car dealerships sure as hell aren't going to do you any favors.
And this is the rim of the coin. A lot of socialist organizations have plenty of stuff for making noise, but not for generating other resources needed to run an actual campaign. You can't mutual aid your way out of the situation because the money is flowing out of the community. My personal thought is that socialists need to start founding worker co-operatives, most likely in creative and knowledge economy industries, and direct the profits from these industries into politics. Creative and knowledge economy businesses aren't that expensive to start, they do things that can't easily be commoditized, and they can be done remote teams including people with disabilities. It brings money into the community which it so desperately needs and lets us develop war chests for campaigns and setting up other similar operations in other states.
I realize this is like 20+ year planning stuff but we need to start investing in ourselves otherwise we're just going to set ourselves up to fail over and over.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:01 PM on February 27 [6 favorites]
imho if the socialists can't defeat sclerotic Democratic Party machines then they certainly aren't going to be able to defeat the larger enemies, so they might as well get good at the former
posted by BungaDunga at 8:28 AM on February 28
posted by BungaDunga at 8:28 AM on February 28
Tim Burke:
"that Democrats picked Slotkin—the second-most supportive of Trump's agenda (after Fetterman) in the Dem Senate caucus—to give the "Democratic response" is a true panic moment"
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 8:37 AM on February 28 [2 favorites]
"that Democrats picked Slotkin—the second-most supportive of Trump's agenda (after Fetterman) in the Dem Senate caucus—to give the "Democratic response" is a true panic moment"
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 8:37 AM on February 28 [2 favorites]
« Older HMAS Protector, bought for just 10 pounds, now a... | Time is running out to find out what happened in... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by ssg at 7:41 PM on February 19 [25 favorites]