Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 191: Hey Now, You're a Lodestar

(+) Yeah! (+)

Comey letter is probably the single most infuriating part of the 2016 election, which is saying something. Who needs Russia when we can sabotage ourselves
---

When there was an active disinformation campaign to convince people to vote for said third parties instead of one of the candidates that actually stood a chance of winning, and those third party votes can be shown to have tipped the entire electoral college process, it matters.

KamikazePotato posted...

Comey letter is probably the single most infuriating part of the 2016 election, which is saying something. Who needs Russia when we can sabotage ourselves

This is true though. I'm really hoping Chaffetz sees the inside of a jail cell when this is all said and done.

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Inviso posted...

The damage of Bernie was never his voters turning away from Hillary. It was the repeated, damaging rhetoric against her long after Bernie lost his shot at the nomination. Hillary lost because of depressed voter turnout, and I think Bernie's supporters, urged on by the Republicans and Russian trolls, contributed to that depression.

Uh, Clinton got about the same number of votes Obama did in 2012 though. Hillary lost because she couldn't be bothered with the rust belt.

It is stuff like this which annoys me. Bernie endorsed her. She got 89% of his voters. She lost because she ran a lousy campaign.

Hillary focused massively on Pennsylvania and still lost the state, and without Pennsylvania, Michigan/Wisconsin wouldn't have mattered even if she won them. I'm not saying she ran an amazing campaign. It just annoys me that people love to heap everything on her while ignoring that there were a LOT of factors. She lost by a combined 80k votes across three states, so any little thing could've shifted that balance. And I have to imagine that having your primary opponent going hard at you long after he'd been mathematically eliminated from the race (riling up his supporters with the whole "the DNC screwed Bernie, Hillary's the same as Trump" stuff) hurt her, just as her poor campaigning in the northern midwest states, just as the Comey letter, just as general institutional sexism against the idea of a woman leader, just as a bunch of easily exploited flaws in our democratic system were at fault.

ETA: Because re-reading that post seems like I'm putting a lot of blame elsewhere besides Hillary, which is contrary to my point, let me add that Hillary's gaffe about killing coal, no matter how stupidly misinterpretted it was, definitely hurt her. Also, not being able to campaign on her strengths and instead focusing on Trump's negatives was another one. It's a shame that voters need to be treated like children with quick catchphrases to get a point across, but she's been in politics long enough to know that, and she should've had her positions ready to easily explain.
---

Okay so to be clear I am mobile posting so let me state that obviously there is a variety of factors that led to the 2016 result. Not all of them are Clinton's fault or based in reality.

... but some of them are.
---

Is the implication of "Clinton ran a bad campaign" that Trump ran a good campaign? Or were both campaigns bad?
---

Bernie only ever expressed abjact disgust with Trump tbh. Also Bernie could have gone after Clinton so much harder.
---

Kenri posted...

Is the implication of "Clinton ran a bad campaign" that Trump ran a good campaign? Or were both campaigns bad?

Trump ran an amazing campaign. Only thing he did well. He appealed to the right type of people. Sadly.
---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Okay so to be clear I am mobile posting so let me state that obviously there is a variety of factors that led to the 2016 result. Not all of them are Clinton's fault or based in reality.

... but some of them are.

This is fair.

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Uh, Clinton got about the same number of votes Obama did in 2012 though. Hillary lost because she couldn't be bothered with the rust belt.

It is stuff like this which annoys me. Bernie endorsed her. She got 89% of his voters. She lost because she ran a lousy campaign.

This, stated unequivocally like this, is not and misses the big picture

Yeah yeah I am not being nuanced I know.
---

Ok, as long as we're on the same page there.

Also seriously fuck Chaffetz.

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Trump ran an amazing campaign. Only thing he did well. He appealed to the right type of people. Sadly.

If he ran an amazing campaign against Clinton's lousy one, why was the result so close?
---

Kenri posted...

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Trump ran an amazing campaign. Only thing he did well. He appealed to the right type of people. Sadly.

If he ran an amazing campaign against Clinton's lousy one, why was the result so close?

Because Trump is the worst candidate for President since the civil war?
---

How did we even get over to Sanders/Clinton anyway? While I think the primary did do damage to Clinton it's not that high on my "Reasons Clinton lost" list. The margin was super close so even slight damage could be argued that it tipped the scales but like... that's not really where I'd go first. Or second.

This was supposed to be about gatekeeping. When I said I see it from the left wing of the Democratic Party aside from the Clinton stuff which I specified more on (and if I'd known we'd spiral back to 2016 relitigation I'd never have said it) I'm talking stuff like calls to primary Manchin and stuff. That's nuts. Is Manchin way on the right edge of the Democratic Party? Of course. But it's West Virginia! Trump won it by like 247 points. He's the best we're going to get there and it's crazy to try and primary him because he's to the right of most of the party.

That's the kind of stuff I'm talking about. I'm fine with primary challenges but you have to pick and choose your spots. We should be looking at seats that are deep blue yet are represented by people who well... aren't. Gabbard fits this mold which is where this all kind of started. I'm optimistic for AOC, for instance. But when I see calls to primary Manchin or Pelosi (opposite case: she's in a deep blue seat, but she really is progressive and most importantly, effective) I'm just like "whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy"
---

Remind me what Pelosi is effective on!
---

The Pelosi hate is 100% Republican character assassination propaganda (Literally the exact same kind they heaped on Clinton for 30+ years) that some useful idiots fall for and spread among the Democrat supporters.

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Remind me what Pelosi is effective on!

She got the ACA passed in the House. And she keeps the Democrats in line as the opposition party leader.
---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Remind me what Pelosi is effective on!

She got a bunch of members to end their political careers by voting for the ACA. She knew it. They knew it. Hell, she got them to pass a public option. It was the Senate who failed us. With how politically craven most politicians are, getting a bunch of them to make a vote they know will doom them is both ice cold and effective as ****.

She's gotten a bunch of stuff out of Boehner (and a lesser extent Ryan because he has to be careful because this fact is what caused Boehner to lose his Speakership) because even in the goddamn minority Boehner had to come to her to bail him out of the HFC trying to shut down the government or default on the national debt.

She just always delivers the votes. I know this is the Senate, but something like that trainwreck failure to repeal the ACA that ended with McCain sinking it would never have gone down with her.

Also this is totally not important but will bring me a bunch of satisfaction: She'll troll the hell out of Trump. Just by being a woman in power who can thwart his agenda. I'm petty like that.
---

Inviso posted...

Constantly attacking Hillary and her supporters is ideological gatekeeping too, Tony.

If you take gatekeeping to mean something completely different, then yeah.

StealThisSheen posted...

xp1337 posted...

And again, her stance on Assad and chemical attacks is indefensible.

This

I'm kinda baffled how this is somehow an odd stance to have

Its indefensible to question the source of a gas attack that did nothing regular munitions couldnt except turn worldwide eyes onto Syria?

She literally stated that if evidence was found implicating Assad, he should be brought to justice.

I guess with the Iraq and Afghanistan wars being such utter failures, I think a little restraint in other countries is a good thing.
---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Because Trump is the worst candidate for President since the civil war?

Interesting. I think I'd generally consider candidate quality and campaign quality to be related enough that you're not gonna have a terrible candidate run a good campaign, or vice versa.

Admittedly, if I was going to break that generalization, Trump is definitely one politician to do it for.
---

I don't hate her I just wish for more.

Also yeah Trump has 0 bonafides to run the country and he campaigned well.

Anyway Pelosi isn't the worst but I just wish we had a bit more balls. Not literally but you know.
---

Kenri posted...

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Because Trump is the worst candidate for President since the civil war?

Interesting. I think I'd generally consider candidate quality and campaign quality to be related enough that you're not gonna have a terrible candidate run a good campaign, or vice versa.

Admittedly, if I was going to break that generalization, Trump is definitely one politician to do it for.

Honestly, given the horrible trend of average American voters voting for the guy they'd like to have a beer with (instead of the competent person with a vision for how to move America forward), I'd say it's quite easy for a terrible candidate to run an amazing campaign. This is the problem I have with politics in general now. We want politicians (people that are good at pandering to voters to get their votes) to then become effective governors (people that actually craft and implement laws), despite the fact that they're elected in no way due to their governing prowess.
---

A new Repiblican hasn't won the popular vote since 1988!
---

xp1337 posted...

This was supposed to be about gatekeeping. When I said I see it from the left wing of the Democratic Party aside from the Clinton stuff which I specified more on (and if I'd known we'd spiral back to 2016 relitigation I'd never have said it) I'm talking stuff like calls to primary Manchin and stuff. That's nuts. Is Manchin way on the right edge of the Democratic Party? Of course. But it's West Virginia! Trump won it by like 247 points. He's the best we're going to get there and it's crazy to try and primary him because he's to the right of most of the party.

I agree with all of this btw.

A Democrat who shares 75% of your beliefs is far better than a Republican who shares none.

Its a double benefit.

Those middle ground voters whod vote that 75% Dem but not a 100% one, might be convinced to vote for another Dem if their chosen representative tells them
---

I think the most telling thing about the hate/dislike for Pelosi is to compare how she is treated/how people feel about her compared to Schumer (and Reid before him.)

If you're talking about policy they're the ones who have been the cause of most of the failures in either the extent of it or just plain getting it passed and yet they're largely ignored.
---

Okay, so I just saw this, and holy hell Russia is fucked up:

https://twitter.com/LamarWhiteJr/status/1040138113279045632
---

Inviso posted...

Honestly, given the horrible trend of average American voters voting for the guy they'd like to have a beer with (instead of the competent person with a vision for how to move America forward), I'd say it's quite easy for a terrible candidate to run an amazing campaign. This is the problem I have with politics in general now. We want politicians (people that are good at pandering to voters to get their votes) to then become effective governors (people that actually craft and implement laws), despite the fact that they're elected in no way due to their governing prowess.

Personally I just say they're terrible candidates running terrible campaigns voted for by people with bad taste.
---

Switching back to the NY Primary again for moar updatez

80% in. NYT calling AG for James. Hochul has taken the lead over Williams for Lt. Governor and while it's not called it doesn't look good, I'm expecting a call soon. So the future refused to change. =(

But on the bright side the IDC got wrecked which is fantastic news for progressive policy.
---

xp1337 posted...

But on the bright side the IDC got wrecked which is fantastic news for progressive policy.

I'm not up on NY politics at all, but this sounds like a 'hell yeah' sort of thing

Inviso posted...

Honestly, given the horrible trend of average American voters voting for the guy they'd like to have a beer with (instead of the competent person with a vision for how to move America forward), I'd say it's quite easy for a terrible candidate to run an amazing campaign. This is the problem I have with politics in general now. We want politicians (people that are good at pandering to voters to get their votes) to then become effective governors (people that actually craft and implement laws), despite the fact that they're elected in no way due to their governing prowess.

This is a flaw of democracy yeah.

The thing that people should be doing is throwing people out if they do a bad job. But in a vacuum where neither candidate is the incumbent, which happens all the time in presidential elections, yeah it's kind-of hard.

Last time a president lost due to broken promises or bad policies they had implemented in their previous term was Bush Sr. (Due to one broken promise in particular "read my lips: no new taxes").

In the abstract I would like to see term limits removed for president. Cause then you would see presidents voted out when they fucked up (ex after the 2008 financial crash) as opposed to nearly every election being a brand new popularity contest with very few people having first-hand experience with the policy decisions of the candidates.
---

Inviso posted...

Okay, so I just saw this, and holy hell Russia is fucked up:

https://twitter.com/LamarWhiteJr/status/1040138113279045632

Whats fucked up about committing resources to astroturfing state-level elections in a foreign country to maintain your hold over them as a vassal state? Seems pretty normal to me!
---

I disagree with the notion that Trump ran a good campaign. I'd argue the opposite - without backup from Russia and Comey he loses easily, and his win in the electoral college was extremely lucky considering how badly he lost the popular vote. There were also many, many instances throughout the campaign where he hurt his chances of winning by doing something stupid and unnecessary like getting into a slapfight with the Khans. His fanbase may have the ability to lower their standards at the drop of a hat, but he still turned off a ton of people. Like, a Trump who isn't a walking human disaster while still tapping into the Angry White Man vote that FOX has slowly molded the GOP into would probably have won the election easily. Trump won despite the campaign he ran, not because.
---

Reg posted...

xp1337 posted...

But on the bright side the IDC got wrecked which is fantastic news for progressive policy.

I'm not up on NY politics at all, but this sounds like a 'hell yeah' sort of thing

The IDC was a group of 8 NY State Senate Democrats who informally split from the party and caucused with the Republicans. As a result, Republicans have had control of the State Senate since 2010. (At some times in this period the Republicans actually had the majority of seats, but other times Democrats actually did but because the IDC defected the Republicans controlled the chamber)

They were dissolved in 2017 and rejoined the Democrats but there's still this one guy who caucuses with the Republicans (and wasn't part of the IDC!) leading to a 32-31 R control. (Unfortunately that guy won his primary.)

So basically, even though the Democrats have had (and currently do have!) the majority of Senate Seats the Republicans have controlled it since 2010. Obviously this has thwarted much of a progressive agenda despite it being New York

new york politics is ****ing awful

Edit: 6 of the 8 IDC members lost their primary tonight.
---

https://twitter.com/fox4/status/1040361795519541249?s=21

DEVELOPING: Search warrant: Marijuana found in Botham Jeans apartment after deadly shooting bit.ly/2D2fd0u

This is the dude who got shot and killed in his own apartment by the cop who thought it was hers

This is the sort of basic level racist playbook stuff thats been exposed so many times over and over again and yet the media still tries to use it

At least they used a nice picture
---

Jakyl25 posted...

https://twitter.com/fox4/status/1040361795519541249?s=21

DEVELOPING: Search warrant: Marijuana found in Botham Jeans apartment after deadly shooting bit.ly/2D2fd0u

This is the dude who got shot and killed in his own apartment by the cop who thought it was hers

This is the sort of basic level racist playbook stuff thats been exposed so many times over and over again and yet the media still tries to use it

At least they used a nice picture

How is it racist?
---

Nobody take that.
---

Should I bother to explain it to him or not?

I feel like youd have to be living under a rock to genuinely not be aware of the pushback against the medias typical treatment of black victims, but it is Corrik
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Should I bother to explain it to him or not?

I feel like youd have to be living under a rock to genuinely not be aware of the pushback against the medias typical treatment of black victims, but it is Corrik

I don't get how it is racist. The warrant listed what was found.

I tend to believe it was an accident on the information known at the time but being an accident doesn't mean she did not commit a crime. And she shall be punished for it.
---

Corrik, ask yourself: what reason is there to execute a warrant on a murder victim, requested after their death?
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Should I bother to explain it to him or not?

No.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik, ask yourself: what reason is there to execute a warrant on a murder victim, requested after their death?

Well I get the warrant needed to investigate a crime scene

The issue is why is this bullshit being leaked and reported ahead of trial
---

https://twitter.com/taniel/status/1040440729233965061?s=21

10TH (& final) RESULT: John Liu defeats state Sen. Tony Avella in #SD10. Liu is NYC's former comptroller. Avella was a member of IDC, which allied with GOP.

The sixth (6th!) IDC senator ousted tonight. 6 of the 8 IDCers lost.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

6 of the 8 IDCers lost.

A good day.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik, ask yourself: what reason is there to execute a warrant on a murder victim, requested after their death?

Well I get the warrant needed to investigate a crime scene

The issue is why is this bullshit being leaked and reported ahead of trial

The search warrant executed in Jeans apartment at South Side Flats specifically sought fired cartridge casings, fired projectiles, firearms, ballistic vests, keys, evidence of blood, video surveillance systems, and contraband such as narcotics and other items used in criminal offenses

Maybe im reading this incorrectly, but it sounds like they were intentionally searching a murder victims house for contraband?
---

Hypothetically should all those Dems win the seat, what does that make the overall State Senate count?
---

xp1337 posted...

Jakyl25 posted...
6 of the 8 IDCers lost.

A good day.

A good day!
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Hypothetically should all those Dems win the seat, what does that make the overall State Senate count?

Like I said, the IDC dissolved and rejoined the Democrats in 2017. So technically it wouldn't change anything.

Current count is 32 Democrats/31 Republicans but there's a crossover Dem (who won his primary tonight and was never in the IDC) still so control is 32-31 R.

That said, the IDC dissolved under significant pressure following 2016 and did so at a time where because there was still a non-IDC crossover it didn't "matter" so I was always suspicious they'd start backup or otherwise get in the way if they remained and the numbers changed.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik, ask yourself: what reason is there to execute a warrant on a murder victim, requested after their death?

Well I get the warrant needed to investigate a crime scene

The issue is why is this bullshit being leaked and reported ahead of trial

The search warrant executed in Jeans apartment at South Side Flats specifically sought fired cartridge casings, fired projectiles, firearms, ballistic vests, keys, evidence of blood, video surveillance systems, and contraband such as narcotics and other items used in criminal offenses

Maybe im reading this incorrectly, but it sounds like they were intentionally searching a murder victims house for contraband?

Yeah thats really shifty

Maybe she wants to use the old I feared for my life to defend herself and they want evidence he was dangerous and needed to be shot to be subdued
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Hypothetically should all those Dems win the seat, what does that make the overall State Senate count?

From what I've been hearing it makes it pretty likely that single payer heathcare gets through the house and the senate in NY.

The IDC were right wing leaning democrats who would typically vote with republicans to block stuff like that.

The IDC was also, y'know, organized by Andrew Cuomo, who looks like he'll still be governor so....
---

Yeah, I left out Cuomo's part in all this because really the IDC itself is crazy enough. new york machine politics the goddamn worst.

His win was a given though so I had no expectations on that front. And truthfully I don't believe Nixon is qualified so as much as I wanted to protest vote her anyway since I knew it wouldn't matter I couldn't bring myself to do it. Just abstained on that.
---

But yes, it can't be understated how you had times where there were 33 Democrats and 30 Republicans in the Senate but whoops Rs control the chamber by 7 when you factor in who is caucusing with who.

But also this: https://twitter.com/chrislhayes/status/1040420953140981760
---