Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 315: Defund the Po...

(+) Yeah! (+)

Dancedreamer posted...

Let's set one myth straight: They don't care where the funding comes from. Nobody asks how we're going to pay for our next F-35's that can't fly. Nobody asks how we're going to pay for yet another war in the middle east nobody asked to get into. They don't ask where funding for tax cuts for CEO's so they can buy three more yacht's come from. Or where we're going to get the money for farm subsidies. But suddenly, it's a problem when we want Universal Healthcare. It's only a problem because it cuts into the purse strings of their corporate buddies who want to buy their 6th yacht. "Fiscal Conservative" is a myth. They don't care where the funding comes from. They care whose funding it cuts into. Namely, their billionaire buddies.

I'm talking about VOTERS. Not representatives or senators or whatever. If voters said "we don't care about the funding, tax us more", then there would be no excuse. But your average voter does not want to hear any argument that touches on the possibility of their taxes rising. They may be annoyed at excess military spending, but not as much as I think you want to hear.

---

Inviso posted...

So it couldn't POSSIBLY be that your ideology isn't as popular as you believe it is. The system is just completely rigged and there's nothing you need to do to change and make progressivism more appealing to a wider audience.

I just don't understand why you're SO sure that, if the system was fixed, progressives would take over the Democratic Party. What proof is there that this is the case? Sure, in deep blue areas, yeah, fine. But America is a purple nation, not a blue one.

Are you denying the system is biased/slanted in the direction of those in power? You think Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden had equitable paths in terms of media coverage and party support?

Setting aside the obvious things like Bernies massive grassroots support that dwarfed every other candidate, including the two who ended up on the ticket, my evidence is the our media and culture (minus our war boner) is soooooooooOooooOoooOooo far to the Left of both political parties. Our political system that relies on corporate donations is entrenched in the right wing of politics, and it is so incredibly out of touch with the people its absurd.

You think a political system with a 50% AT BEST participation rate properly conveys the will of the people?

Inviso posted...

But as I've said before, the attitude of progressive supporters far too often comes across as "we're right and we've done nothing wrong in our campaigning; the system is just rigged against us." It prevents any introspection whatsoever and allows the discourse to continue shifting right, because you guys don't act any different from the nonsense of the Green and Libertarian non-parties.

This is an incredible paragraph to say on THIS election, especially considering these things arent exclusive! Bernie made mistakes, I dont think theres a single supporter of his who would tell you different, but we know for a fact that Obama called up the candidates and got them to drop out and rally behind Joe.

Im not saying its a crime or against the rules in anyway, but that is rigging/collusion by the most basic definition. You wanna talk about how they did it because they thought Joe had a better chance, thats fine, but as these polls tighten up before Joes even had a chance to debate, you cant tell me Bernie would be in a worse position as the guy demanding for healthcare before and during an actual fucking pandemic lmao, this was his time.

Also the nonsense of the green and libertarian parties proves the necessity of ranked choice. Its only nonsense because were literally held hostage by the two Party system. It fucking sucks ass and theres no defending it.

---

Inviso posted...

I'm talking about VOTERS. Not representatives or senators or whatever. If voters said "we don't care about the funding, tax us more", then there would be no excuse. But your average voter does not want to hear any argument that touches on the possibility of their taxes rising. They may be annoyed at excess military spending, but not as much as I think you want to hear.

This is a talking point literally perpetuated by lobbyists and the representatives they own.

When you give people healthcare that costs less in taxes than they pay out of pocket, they understand. In countries that HAVE healthcare, its practically a death sentence for a politician to campaign against it! So the shitheads in Britain for example instead subtly make it worse, with their goal of patsies like you taking up their water. Dont be offended, the polling and numbers are not in your favor, just recognize that maybe healthcare is good and worth it.

Tl;dr When you demand they personally sign-off on funding and scaremonger about the cost, yes,
people are against it. When they actually have it, they love it. Every time.

---

Inviso posted...

I'm talking about VOTERS. Not representatives or senators or whatever. If voters said "we don't care about the funding, tax us more", then there would be no excuse. But your average voter does not want to hear any argument that touches on the possibility of their taxes rising. They may be annoyed at excess military spending, but not as much as I think you want to hear.

Voters don't care how it's funded either, until some idiot running for President or some moron in the media decides to ask "How are we going to fund it?" And they ask because they all belong to corporations. You think voters really care about in depth plans? Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump proved they don't. We're only held to a higher standard because we allow ourselves to be. It's time everyone get held to the same standard.

Everyone gets excited about a SPACE FORCE, and somehow... nobody asks "How are we going to pay for it?" Somehow we'll be the only country with a space force, and the only major country to not have Universal Healthcare.

---

I havent eaten today so my temper is short, also Im gonna triple post:

I know I bitch about the Dems a lot, but man do I not want Trump to win.

Literally all I want is to go Nyah hahahaha in every MAGA chuds face, tell them to get fucked and to hold dienda.

This election is way too fucking close for comfort, and if Dems blow it, the I told you so to Dems wont feel nearly as good because of the MAGA crowd and impending apocalypse.

---

It only feels so close because Americans largely vote for parties and not candidates anymore. Hence why undecideds are becoming a smaller and smaller group.

---

Dancedreamer posted...

Voters don't care how it's funded either, until some idiot running for President or some moron in the media decides to ask "How are we going to fund it?" And they ask because they all belong to corporations. You think voters really care about in depth plans? Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump proved they don't. We're only held to a higher standard because we allow ourselves to be. It's time everyone get held to the same standard.

Everyone gets excited about a SPACE FORCE, and somehow... nobody asks "How are we going to pay for it?" Somehow we'll be the only country with a space force, and the only major country to not have Universal Healthcare.

Elizabeth Warren getting annihilated when she has a plan for that IRT everything also proves people dont actually care about the weeds, there is literally no reason for a politician to go there.

---

I pop in for one moment and cause this spat, whoops

I'm willing to accept that I'm wrong about a majority of voters, and Inviso definitely makes a lot of sense here. But I think that a not insignificant amount of people have become radicalized leftward over the last few years, as those on the right have become more obscene and visible with their actions and goals.

Removing fptp wouldn't fix all of our problems, and definitely not on a national level. But i think it would allow for local politicians who are far more left than mainstream dems to win elections that they otherwise wouldn't have. When that happens, I do think we'd see more actionable results that leftists are looking for.

Of course, it is entirely possible that nationally, the center left would create a coalition with the center right, and the far left would be out of the conversation entirely. Would that be much different than the status quo? That's why I think getting rid of fptp gets us nowhere but up (left).

---

No, getting rid of FPTP doesn't fix everything.

That's why we also need to get money out of politics. Our politicians serve corporations more than the people who elect them. And that's not how it should be. We shouldn't be living in an oligarchy who hopes the corporate overlords are benevolent enough not to eat us.

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Setting aside the obvious things like Bernies massive grassroots support that dwarfed every other candidate

He got fewer votes than Biden. That suggests he had less "grassroots support" than at least one candidate.

---

I think Bernie Sanders had all the momentum in the world and went into the 2020 election season as a frontrunner, having gonna himself a ton of name recognition that he didn't have against Hillary. I think that the media, depending on where you get your media from, was just as slanted in favor of Bernie as it was for Biden (if not MORESO, since the media was in LOVE with Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar or ANY other moderate who might be more palatable to an audience than Joe Biden). Hell, you say one paragraph down that "our media is so far to the left of both parties" (spoiler...it really isn't. It might be socially to the left on some issues, but our media is not some liberal monolith that Republicans try to paint it as). So no, I don't think Bernie got hindered by the media any more than Biden did, right up until South Carolina and Super Tuesday turned into a bloodbath.

As for party support, I'll give you that...but at that point, you're basically arguing that Bernie was more popular, yet the party ignored the will of the people to support Biden. I just don't think that's the case. I think the party is more conservative, and the voters largely vote for more conservative candidates (there were just many more of them than there were of liberal candidates, hence the focus on Bernie/Warren as underdogs), so the party was just representing the will of the people.
-----
We've had this discussion before, and you personally have listed Bernie's "mistakes" are a variety of "he didn't attack Biden enough" comments (with, admittedly, one mention of refusing to move away from his stump speech). I'm gonna tell you right now, most voters that didn't go for Bernie don't give a shit that he was too cordial with Biden. They're turned off by other aspects of his campaign, namely the constant attacks and insistence that they don't matter.

Also, I see no reason to believe that Bernie would be doing better than Biden right now in the polls. As much as the Republicans want to paint the who Democratic Party as dangerous socialists, they're having a much tougher time with Biden. With Bernie, I could easily see him being used to fearmonger far more effectively, because he frightens the right-wing voters and simultaneously alienates the aforementioned moderate voters who feel abandoned by radicals on both sides. This is entirely speculation, and again, it relies on voters who you even admit feel disenfranchised and disillusioned by the system to come out in droves, when they never have before. I just don't see it at this time. Maybe in the future, or even the near future, but we need to establish a baseline first, and it's tough to do that when half the country is more than happy with the current Republican Party.
-----

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Tl;dr When you demand they personally sign-off on funding and scaremonger about the cost, yes,
people are against it. When they actually have it, they love it. Every time.

Exactly my point. If we could get this in place, people would probably love it and never want to go back, hence why despite all their blustering, the GOP found themselves unable to repeal the ACA. My argument is that you need to better tailor your message so people vote for you and are willing to put people in power who are going to take that first step and enact those allegedly popular policies. Just saying "This is smart, just sit down and shut up and let us help you" is the same strawman argument that was used against Nancy Pelosi's pushing of the ACA, and it let to a MASSIVE blowout loss for the Democrats in 2010, effectively crippling the Democratic Party administration for the next eight years at least.

---

Not_an_Owl posted...

He got fewer votes than Biden. That suggests he had less "grassroots support" than at least one candidate.

The numbers say youre wrong, it does demonstrate the limits of grassroots support as far as actually winning goes though.

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

The numbers say youre wrong, it does demonstrate the limits of grassroots support as far as actually winning goes though.

Which numbers, precisely?

---

Peace___Frog posted...

Of course, it is entirely possible that nationally, the center left would create a coalition with the center right, and the far left would be out of the conversation entirely. Would that be much different than the status quo?

I'm actually going to argue yes -- assuming this hypothetical of yours.

I think it's reductive to act like the far left is left out of the conversation entirely. I think for a lot of people who aren't as politically tuned in as say, regular posters in a politics topic on a video game forum, they get their cues from the parties and their more prominent politicians (See the spike in support for marriage equality immediately after Obama came out in support of it as an example; it was on the steady rise before, yes, but that announcement caused what was practically an overnight jump in support.)

To that point, the ability of the left to drag the mainstream Democratic party over towards their side, even if it's like pulling teeth and never goes as far as one would want, as well as the prominence of politicans within it like Sanders (yeah, yeah, he counts here he caucuses with them), Warren, AOC, etc. helps people who otherwise not be exposed to those viewpoints to hear them and hear the arguments for them.

In an ideal world the natural counter would be "Okay, but like... they would still exist. They don't need to be part of some group called the Democrats for them and their arguments to be there" and you're absolutely right. But I think you underestimate both how little a lot of electorate pays attention as well as the team sports nature of politics. I think if we snapped our fingers and woke up tomorrow with ranked choice and the parties split into left/Democrats/Never Trumpers/Republicans inertia would have most people - even those who would otherwise be receptive to arguments from Sanders, Warren, AOC, etc. stick with the Democrats just because that's how they identified yesterday.

---

The US system of government is fundamentally biased towards conservatives by it's nature. Everything about it is purposefully a roadblock to progress occuring without it being an overwhelming consensus, something that is nearly impossible when wealthy groups can fund opposition to any idea they don't like. And studies have shown that the US governments actions have no correlation with public opinion. So the idea that voting or voters prove nearly anything about public opinion is completely without merit. The fact is that most people in the US are either partisan, or apolitical, because people in the US don't know anything about politics or ideology and have no way of interaction with it besides being tuning out or picking a team. This means public opinion is incredibly easily manipulated, as most people will make up their minds based on their affiliation, or whatever they heard most recently because they barely pay attention. In a world where people had any idea what they were talking about, there wouldn't be volatile polling in races, people would just know where the candidates stand and their own ideological beliefs and vote accordingly, but we live in a world of goldfish being herded by the wealthy and so it is impossible to say what people believe, when most people do not believe anything coherent at all.

Inviso posted...

Also, I see no reason to believe that Bernie would be doing better than Biden right now in the polls. As much as the Republicans want to paint the who Democratic Party as dangerous socialists, they're having a much tougher time with Biden.

Dude the few Republican friends I have on Facebook literally think Joe and Kamala are MARXISTS lmao, they arent having a tough time with this at all.

Also as far as the media coverage, at this point itd be hard to find it specifically, but I know we all saw it. When Bernie was dominating in the first few races, the media coverage wasnt Bernie versus Trump, it was all Can the Democrats stop Bernie? and then AS SOON as Joe took the lead, they pivoted to Joe in the general.

Can Coronavirus or Bernie Sanders be stopped etc

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Dude the few Republican friends I have on Facebook literally think Joe and Kamala are MARXISTS lmao, they arent having a tough time with this at all.

Also as far as the media coverage, at this point itd be hard to find it specifically, but I know we all saw it. When Bernie was dominating in the first few races, the media coverage wasnt Bernie versus Trump, it was all Can the Democrats stop Bernie? and then AS SOON as Joe took the lead, they pivoted to Joe in the general.

Can Coronavirus or Bernie Sanders be stopped etc

My Republican family members think Bernie just wanted to magically give free stuff to everyone. They've got no legs to stand on with Biden and can pretty much only defend Trump as being treated unfairly.

---

Republicans are trying to run with "Biden is a puppet of AOC who will seize the means of production" but it's by all accounts falling flat with independents because "fucking seriously?"

Biden is a known quantity to basically everyone so it isn't effective outside the cult.

---

GentlemanGamer posted...

The US system of government is fundamentally biased towards conservatives by it's nature. Everything about it is purposefully a roadblock to progress occuring without it being an overwhelming consensus, something that is nearly impossible when wealthy groups can fund opposition to any idea they don't like. And studies have shown that the US governments actions have no correlation with public opinion. So the idea that voting or voters prove nearly anything about public opinion is completely without merit. The fact is that most people in the US are either partisan, or apolitical, because people in the US don't know anything about politics or ideology and have no way of interaction with it besides being tuning out or picking a team. This means public opinion is incredibly easily manipulated, as most people will make up their minds based on their affiliation, or whatever they heard most recently because they barely pay attention. In a world where people had any idea what they were talking about, there wouldn't be volatile polling in races, people would just know where the candidates stand and their own ideological beliefs and vote accordingly, but we live in a world of goldfish being herded by the wealthy and so it is impossible to say what people believe, when most people do not believe anything coherent at all.

Can you link these studies

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Dude the few Republican friends I have on Facebook literally think Joe and Kamala are MARXISTS lmao, they arent having a tough time with this at all.

The thing is, Republicans, like Democrats, kind of don't matter.

---

Inviso posted...

My Republican family members think Bernie just wanted to magically give free stuff to everyone. They've got no legs to stand on with Biden and can pretty much only defend Trump as being treated unfairly.

My Republican neighbors think Biden wants to make this a communist country and will force them to let 100 people move into their house. Don't underestimate the idiocy of Republicans.

ElizeLutus posted...

My Republican neighbors think Biden wants to make this a communist country and will force them to let 100 people move into their house. Don't underestimate the idiocy of Republicans.

I doesn't matter if guaranteed Trump voters buy it. Not that many persuadable voters will.

---

xp1337 posted...

Republicans are trying to run with "Biden is a puppet of AOC who will seize the means of production" but it's by all accounts falling flat with independents because "fucking seriously?"

I still want to live in the reality where this is true. Like... can't the Republicans be telling us the truth for once and AOC is masterfully playing puppet master and controlling everything? That's a Joe Biden I'd be excited for.

---

what are we talking about when we say "the media"?

some of the media in general was in favor of bernie, sure (like the young turks). but the mainstream media definitely wasn't.

---

I always enjoy these discussions from the outside because they inevitably progress to the endpoint of 'America is fucked and theres nothing we can do about it'. People usually start backing off once they realize they're getting to that logical conclusion though.

People are not going to he happy when Biden wins and things only marginally get better. (Admittedly, things will stop getting worse)

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

I doesn't matter if guaranteed Trump voters buy it. Not that many persuadable voters will.

That's the mistake though. Those are the persuadable voters. Non-persuadable voters are people like Sephy.

---

Biden's media coverage was terrible (because Biden was the favorite going in and him falling to Pete/Warren/Bloomberg/etc was an exciting narrative).

Anyway, Cindy McCain:

https://twitter.com/hunterschwarz/status/1295839902567866373

---

Dancedreamer posted...

I still want to live in the reality where this is true. Like... can't the Republicans be telling us the truth for once and AOC is masterfully playing puppet master and controlling everything? That's a Joe Biden I'd be excited for.

The truth is actually that progressives are getting a decent amount (though certainly not all) of the policy they want. What they're not getting any of is the revolutionary tone (which doesn't matter at all, but which I'm convinced some people care about more than the actual policy).

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

The truth is actually that progressives are getting a decent amount (though certainly not all) of the policy they want. What they're not getting any of is the revolutionary tone (which doesn't matter at all, but which I'm convinced some people care about more than the actual policy).

They're already reportedly dropping Public Option, and dropping ending Fossil Fuel Subsidies. Like even if Biden personally supports a public option, there'll probably be dems to block it (like they were before we got watered down Obamacare)


---

LordoftheMorons posted...

The truth is actually that progressives are getting a decent amount (though certainly not all) of the policy they want. What they're not getting any of is the revolutionary tone (which doesn't matter at all, but which I'm convinced some people care about more than the actual policy).

Of course it matters more than the actual policy. If you want big changes, you must change the tone, the feeling, the emotion. Incremental changes to policy actually hurt your cause because they reduce the need for big changes.

Of course you don't want the big changes so you would prefer the incremental policy changes. That just means you have different end goals.

---

KamikazePotato posted...

I always enjoy these discussions from the outside because they inevitably progress to the endpoint of 'America is fucked and theres nothing we can do about it'. People usually start backing off once they realize they're getting to that logical conclusion though.

Tired: America is fucked because one political party has rejected democracy and gone all in on minority rule through maximizing the undemocratic principles written into our constitution.
Wired: Actually that's basically been the history of America.
Inspired: The world is fucked because that stasis means we've completely missed any chance whatsoever to avert the catastrophic worst-case scenarios of climate change and our intermediate-term future will be an unending nightmare of refugee crises as cities and islands are flooded and superstorms become the norm and agriculture is thrown into upheaval.

---

Dancedreamer posted...

I still want to live in the reality where this is true. Like... can't the Republicans be telling us the truth for once and AOC is masterfully playing puppet master and controlling everything? That's a Joe Biden I'd be excited for.

It's not AOC though that's pulling the strings. It's the establishment people like Elizabeth Warren, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Kamala Harris, Hollywood, CNN, the New York Times, John McCain, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, etc.

---

red sox 777 posted...

It's not AOC though that's pulling the strings. It's the establishment people like Elizabeth Warren, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Kamala Harris, Hollywood, CNN, the New York Times, John McCain, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, etc.

Not gonna lie, I'm okay with a zombie cabal.


---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Can you link these studies

https://tinyurl.com/gmpx88s

And here is a pretty good article about the issue, as well.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/02/us-oligarchy-wealthy-billionaires-democracy

I fully expect some kind of rebuttal that the bourgeoisie actually achieve much of what they want, too, but this is less a rebuttal than a confirmation that a country founded by a property owner spurred revolution that was wildly unpopular with the common people seeks to function in the name of those propsperous enough to own property in exclusivity. The working class, for whom concerns are paying the bills next week rather than ensuring every corner has a taco truck, are who completely lack representation in the government.

LordoftheMorons posted...

The truth is actually that progressives are getting a decent amount (though certainly not all) of the policy they want. What they're not getting any of is the revolutionary tone (which doesn't matter at all, but which I'm convinced some people care about more than the actual policy).

How hard do you think the Democratic Party will fight for those things we want?


---

xp1337 posted...

Inspired: The world is fucked because that stasis means we've completely missed any chance whatsoever to avert the catastrophic worst-case scenarios of climate change and our intermediate-term future will be an unending nightmare of refugee crises as cities and islands are flooded and superstorms become the norm and agriculture is thrown into upheaval.

Damn. Didn't think I was going to be out-edgelord'd today.

I mean you're right, but still. Kind of weird to think consider that the apocalypse has already happened, it'll just take a while for all the effects to kick in.

Also I'll believe that moderate Dems implement progressive policies when the votes clear and not a moment before. Promises are worthless.

---

https://www.ibtimes.com/house-speaker-nancy-pelosi-willing-accept-smaller-coronavirus-stimulus-package-3030533?amp=1

Looks like Pelosi is willing to go down to 1.5-1.75 trillion if necessary. Some veiled threats that government will absolutely not be funded Sept 30th without a deal.

---

Tucker Carlson: Michelle Obama wants those who look like her to have dominion over you.

So this is basically a dog air-horn this point, right?

---

big effin' deal
---

Nothing more frustrating to me over the last couple days than the move to accept moving further right and acceptingt right wing aid under the guys of "win now so we can move left later", something that has historically never actually worked.

Fuck compromise. Fuck centrists.

---

social distancing roll call is actually enjoyable to watch

"Delaware

Delaware passes

[silence]

... Delaware passes"

lol kansas

https://twitter.com/samangell2007/status/1295902688283107329
---

i'm out of edits sorry but i gotta post the ohio video for bookmarking purposes

https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1295905319164547072
---

https://politics.theonion.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-upgraded-to-full-dnc-speaking-1844764034

Incredible post from The Onion

---

Corrik7 posted...

Some veiled threats that government will absolutely not be funded Sept 30th without a deal.

I could use another paid vacation :/

---

who gives a shit about the convention?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/senate-made-criminal-referral-trump-jr-bannon-kushner-two-others-n1237155

or https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/senate-intelligence-committee-donald-trump-jr-jared-kushner-stephen-bannon-erik-prince/2020/08/15/a7905a84-def5-11ea-b205-ff838e15a9a6_story.html

Your choice

I don't recall seeing this a few days ago when WaPo's article first came, here nor in general. But you also take one look at this and know that Barr immediately killed this like the piece of shit he is.

really guys as a non-american this roll call is fascinating me
---

Grimlyn posted...

really guys as a non-american this roll call is fascinating me

It's fascinating me too. Rhode Island with their fucking food, islands Americans forget are part of the country almost all the time. They're really leaning into their stereotypes

---

I want a collage of all these later

---

Yeah, I read about that Senate Intel story a few days ago and just sighed. Probably should have posted it but "example #58967 of Barr fucking up the Justice Department in a blatantly partisan manner" just depresses me nowadays.

---