Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
That and the democratic base is diverse both in terms of economic backgrounds and demographics. It's far harder to rally people to a cause without common interests, and that's the case with democrats far more often than with Republicans in the present coalitions.
Edit: Incidentally, I'm getting the distinct impression the democrats may be transforming into neocons in opposition to Trump's Nixon-esque Realpolitik approach/in hopes of triangulating those voters and monied interests.
edited 22nd Dec '16 10:53:18 AM by CaptainCapsase
My question about the Snowden thing is how, at this date, he could have much of anything that's still relevant enough for Russian Intelligence to care what he has to say. Unless it's about poking fun at American Intelligence, which oddly enough would not surprise me.
Seems a bit early to be making that kind of a prediction. Still, this next year is probably going to be interesting to watch regarding the Democratic party. Considering that for all the factionalism there may be, I can't really see anyone wanting the party to be less liberal, but who knows what the people actually in the party will do. Guess we can only hope that they take Ellison's advice about the fifty state approach.
edited 22nd Dec '16 11:16:20 AM by AceofSpades
The general strategy of the democratic party historically has been to triangulate vulnerable elements of the opposing coalition after defeats, and triangulating Trump's GOP means gaining the support of neocons and the military industrial complex which seems rather displeased with his new direction for America's grand strategy and for his focus on increasing the efficiency of military spending. Probably also fiscal hawks and supply siders with our luck.
I hope Ellison's advice will be heeded, but I'm not expecting the next few decades to be kind to us, or to the world.
edited 22nd Dec '16 11:26:33 AM by CaptainCapsase
Here's
an NY times article on the problem facing the democrats: their voting base is becoming increasingly concentrated in wealthy urban areas, and is becoming increasingly wealthy. This trend comes means they're increasingly in favor of tax cuts for the wealthy, less in favor of welfare, and so on.
My fear is that democrats are going to turn into a party that is socially left and economically right, the GOP into a party that is economically left, socially right.
edited 22nd Dec '16 11:35:46 AM by CaptainCapsase
Trump transition team has asked for all State Department information about “gender-related staffing, programming, and funding” on Wednesday
. People are naturally panicking.
I obtained a copy of the State Department request, which said each office should include information on all existing programs and activities that “promote gender equality, such as ending gender-based violence, promoting women’s participation in economic and political spheres, entrepreneurship, etc.”
The request did not ask directly for the names of the officials who work on these programs but stated that, in their reports, each office “should note positions whose primary functions are to promote such issues.”
![]()
It's less a summarizaiton and more a data point which could be suggestive of what I'm worried about; the democrats becoming the party of the (cosmopolitan but classist) elite, and the Republicans the party of the working class and the poor. (but only if you're white)
In short I'm worried about the situation where people complaining about how "both sides are equally bad" are more or less correct.
edited 22nd Dec '16 11:41:06 AM by CaptainCapsase
That's how things are now, but the current trends in terms of voters are moving against the current paradigm as the core base of the democrats becomes increasingly wealthy. We'll have to see whether or not Trump lives up to his promises not to defund the social safety net, or at least to allocate the cuts in such a way that white America is not hit particularly hard by it.
Even if he doesn't live up to any of his populist promises, I think it's possible that the democrats continue moving to the right economically simply because of the increase in their base's wealth, while the Republicans do the opposite, and capture increasingly large slices of white Americans from broad economic strata.
edited 22nd Dec '16 12:07:45 PM by CaptainCapsase
That's what's happening in terms of the voting base though, insofar as it's trending steadily upwards in wealth and affluence.
Note that I'm not talking about the present, I'm talking about current trends; the wealthy are increasingly favoring democrats, and that means their interests will become increasingly dominant in regards to the party platform. This also depends on Trump making good on his promises of economic populism.
edited 22nd Dec '16 12:10:30 PM by CaptainCapsase
If that's what ends up happening though, we'll probably have a repeat of the parties essentially switching positions slowly over time, with Republicans becoming the liberal party again. Which, well, weirder things have happened before in politics, even before this year. Libertarians show pretty well that there's not really a widespread appeal of the whole "socially left, fiscally right" position. At least not right now.
And again, I'm not so sure that you can really separate being socially left from being fiscally left. Rich or not, a lot of the current discourse is "people need to put in their fair share." Your fears can be circumvented by keeping that concept in the conversation, in the concept of giving back to the society that gave you so much. (General you.) This is a concept that is much stronger among the left than the right. Wanting to keep one's money doesn't mean you're not wise enough to, you know, agree that taxes are a good thing for everyone.
Yes, and where's the proof you have that being wealthy means they're ceasing to favor welfare programs? In that article, and elsewhere, indicating this is a trend happening right now among democratic voters?
edited 22nd Dec '16 12:11:33 PM by AceofSpades
Once again, that's how things are now; if the democratic voting base is dominated by wealthy cosmopolitan urbanites, the party platform will serve the (percieved) interests of wealthy cosmopolitan urbanites. The cosmopolitan interests are good for everyone, but the wealthy interests are not.
Seriously, if the democrats become the party of economic elites, do you seriously think they won't embrace economic policies that favor economic elites?
edited 22nd Dec '16 12:13:09 PM by CaptainCapsase
I think they're very likely to do that if Trump actually pursues a populist economic agenda, since that will make the wealthy backers of the GOP the easiest segment of the party to triangulate. Politicians are by necessity largely amoral. They will say and do what they must go gain power because without power, they can do nothing.
edited 22nd Dec '16 12:19:17 PM by CaptainCapsase
Captain, we are not asking for you to reassert your guesses, we are asking for you to back them up. You do that a lot, and this is frustrating. That article didn't even come close to saying what you're getting out of it, as far as I can tell.
He's not even addressing the financial industry. He's addressing the wealthy as a whole, and the article was largely about the growing tech industry.
edited 22nd Dec '16 12:15:58 PM by AceofSpades
![]()
They're necessary but bloated to such a huge portion of the economy that some economists are questioning whether they actually are a net benefit to the economy at this point. This also isn't just about the financial sector, but the economic elite in general.
Yes, and the wealthy tech giants gravitate towards libertarian positions; socially left but financially right. If their influence on the party platform and the influence of the financial sector continues to increase, we end up in a position where the democrats basically become libertarians. Note that this trend existed before Trump's election
, and it's entirely plausible in my eyes that circumstances will force his administration to push that trend further and further to remain in power.
edited 22nd Dec '16 12:22:10 PM by CaptainCapsase
So since apparently Trump has been told that he can't blacklist media organisations from the press pool for not kowtowing to him, his team are going for the next best thing.
Eliminate the daily press briefing.
I honestly find that to be significantly less frightening. Not talking to the press at all is an order of magnitude more benign than only talking to media outlets that paint you in a good light.
But, y'know, let's not lower our standards for him and lose sight of the fact that it's still pretty awful.
They'll only talk to media that paints them in a friendly light anyway, and they'll do that by completely bypassing the normal channels for communicating with the press and giving exclusive stories to outlets like Fox and Breitbart.
Edit: On a side note, what I'm worried about happening is more or less what Julian whateverhisname was freaking out about before he got suspended from OTC; the idea that America would once again embrace economic populism, albeit only for the "right" (white males) people. It's just that I'm worried about that happening from the Republican side of the isle as opposed to the democrats. Assuming a future Republican and/or natural cultural trends end up redefining "whiteness" to include Hispanics much like Italian, Greek, and Irish immigrants before them, and the changing demographics of the United States will not be of much use.
edited 22nd Dec '16 12:34:23 PM by CaptainCapsase
Including white (or more white-passing, anyways) hispanics in the definition of whiteness is something I think the GOP will more or less be forced to do at some point. I 'm not sure when the cultural shift towards that will be finalized, but it's happened multiple times before with other groups.
edited 22nd Dec '16 12:39:03 PM by Draghinazzo

Obama continues to be awesome. If I had to pick a non-Muslim to be my head of government/state, Obama would be in my top 5 list if not the very #1.
On a different note, I've realized something that may explain some of the difficulties that Democrats face in marshalling their base into a united front against the GOP. Please correct me if I'm wrong on something.
The liberal mentality of the Democrats, however, by and large discourages letting one's emotions dominate one's thinking, encouraging instead rationality as a standard for making decisions. It also encourages diversity and freedom of competition between ideas, on the basis of letting the propogation of ideas happen depending on their own merits; in fact, that actually evokes the image of a functioning liberal democracy where politicians thrive based on how many voters rally around their set of ideas and proposals for governing the country (i.e. how appealing their idea set is in general). That, unfortunately, allows factionalism to emerge around competing visions of how the Democratic collective should proceed, which if not managed carefully will cause infighting to sap the Party's strength and leave them too divided to counteract their opponents.
edited 22nd Dec '16 10:45:08 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.