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
Considering the nature of the democratic electorate in NV, if someone successfully primaries him that person might very well be as good if not better than him at selling the democrats' programs to a heavily Republican leaning audience. If we can go from someone who votes with the democrats 75% of the time to 85% of the time, that's an improvement.
edited 20th Mar '17 9:39:33 AM by CaptainCapsase
Once again...Feinstein and Carper are right there. There's a cost-benefit analysis to primarying people, just ask Richard Murdouck in Indiana.
Also, just one thing...I am fucking sick of hearing how Obama or Clinton would be 'conservative' in other systems. It's not true. At all. I don't care if Obama made one remark to demonstrate how nuts the Republicans were.
Let's keep in mind that the Senate elections are happening after two years of 100% Republican government, supporting a historically unpopular Republican president. We have a lot of ground to defend, but politically, we have no policy to defend, and that's ultimately more important. I mean, we're defending 22 seats, but 12 of those are in the Northeast, 1 in California, and 2 in Washington, and there will be plenty to attack Trump over in 2018. And after all that, the number of pickups we need is just 3.
"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."The House is also a better barometer re: the president's popularity. If we play our cards right as a party, going into 2018 with Trump's AR in the toilet could translate to a Republican implosion.
The key for the House is actually, to some extent, for bygones to be bygones — we can't turn away Democrats just because they're not urban progressives. Like, in Massachusetts, in the 8th District, which is basically stereotypical working-class Boston (including Southie), Somerville, and the South Shore, the Rep is Stephen Lynch, the son of an ironworker, an old school union lawyer and rep, and a shade more liberal than a Blue Dog, but he's basically the only conservative-ish guy in MA's delegation.
He's the target of a primary campaign by Brianna Wu, a feminist activist, video game developer, and noted target of GamerGate. Her only claim to fame is her cred with millennials in Cambridge and for being a CEO in a tech-related field, which admittedly is big in Massachusetts. But she's running in the 8th, a turf where she knows basically no one, doesn't understand the local culture, and doesn't live in the heart of that district. Lynch, let's be clear, is an oily motherfucker who voted against the ACA, and has had to have progressivism spoon-fed to him like a child over the years, but if he keeps those fucking rubes from voting Republican, he stays.
In conclusion, don't primary Democrats who are a natural fit with the local culture. And since we're all pretty much Democrat-leaning on this thread, I think going forward, it's our responsibility as Democrats to make sure we don't start riling for irresponsible primary campaigns.
edited 20th Mar '17 10:20:28 AM by CrimsonZephyr
"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."![]()
The Dems also have to remind the country that things will not magically get better and resting on laurels is a good way to be defeated in 2020, no matter what happens in 2018. The bar is much higher for Dems to deliver something. GOP voters will show up no matter what.
An aside: The Supreme Court—Round Two: Trump Supreme Court pick Neil Gorsuch faces Senate hearing
Ding!
Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats immediately highlighted abortion and employee rights as key issues.
The Democrats also repeated anger at Republicans for refusing to consider Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee.
But it is unclear whether they will try to block Mr Gorsuch's confirmation.
The hearing began with addresses from the chairman, Republican Chuck Grassley, and ranking Democrat Dianne Feinstein.
Mr Grassley hailed Mr Gorsuch's "exceptional record", saying he had shown unfailing commitment to "the preservation of our constitutional order and the separation of powers".
But Ms Feinstein began by citing the Republicans' block on Mr Obama's nomination of federal appeals court judge Merrick Garland to replace Judge Scalia.
She said she was "deeply disappointed that it is under these circumstances that we begin this hearing".
Senate Republicans, including Lindsey Graham, pointed to a quote by then Judiciary Committee chairman, the Democrat Joe Biden, in 1992 saying then President George HW Bush should not name a nominee to any Supreme Court post until after the upcoming election.
"I don't think any injustice has been done," Mr Graham said.
One ruling by Neil Gorsuch that the Democrats seized on was the case of lorry driver Alphonse Maddin.
He was told to stay in his freezing vehicle for hours after it broke down. After he disobeyed the order he was fired. Judge Gorsuch gave a dissenting ruling on a three-judge panel, writing it was not up to judges to answer whether the employer's decision was "wise or kind".
Republican Senator John Cornyn praised Mr Gorsuch for following the law "where it leads, that's how the rule of law works", whether that meant rulings for employees or employers, or whether they were pro- or anti-government.
Democrat Senator Sheldon Whitehouse said he feared Mr Gorsuch's appointment could lead to another "Republican 5-4 special interest spree".
But Lindsey Graham, although pointing out his well-known opposition to Donald Trump's election campaign, said the president should be praised for picking the "best choice available".
Mr Gorsuch, a judge on the Denver-based 10th US Circuit Court of Appeals, will also be pressed on his role as a Department of Justice lawyer under former President George W Bush from 2005-06.
During that period Mr Gorsuch helped defend the administration's expansive use of aggressive interrogation techniques.
The Democrats' options on opposing Mr Gorsuch are limited.
Republicans control the Senate and they can change the chamber's rules to make it easier to confirm Mr Gorsuch if any attempt is made to block him.
A full Senate vote is expected on 3 April.
Had more people turned out to vote for Hillary instead of sitting on their duffs crying about how the DNC personally assassinated Sanders's campaign every other week, that's precisely what could have happened. A crushing defeat of Trump and heavy reclaim of Washington could have flipped the political spectrum inside-out.
Instead, we're now faced with the threat of the opposite being true. The GOP has an incredible amount of power right now, to the point that remarks like "after the Republicans are thrown into the fire" just sound naive. There's no point planning ahead for after we beat them as if that's something we can just take for granted will happen.
Right now, we are the ones struggling for relevancy in an increasingly fascist world. The Justice Dems are preying on us in a moment of vulnerability. That's the same kind of parasitism that gave the Tea Party power, and the ultimate result of that behavior was Trump.
The last thing the Democrats need is a Trump of our very own.
"Your candidate".
Funny thing, that. As Democrats, Hilary was our candidate. The candidate of the Democratic party. Part of the reason she lost? The number of "Democrats" who refuse to vote for Democratic candidates yet still insist that their voices should control the future of the party.
If Justice Dems want to have even an ounce of respect, the first step is to stop saying shit like "Your candidate." You can't exclude yourself from the party and then demand we hand over the reins.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.![]()
One of the major issues with our two party system is that it forces people who have very, very different political ideologies to be part of the same party if they want any meaningful political agency. It's much easier to stomach a coalition with people you have many disagreements with than to share a political party, leaving pretty much everyone involved upset with internal party politics at all times. There's no prospect of addressing this problem however in the near future, so we'll have to find some way of sharing a party in spite of the differences.
edited 20th Mar '17 11:14:26 AM by CaptainCapsase
Of course, you need to move away from FPTP as well. Canada has multiple parties, but the system basically means that two major parties (the Liberals and the Conservatives) have a lot of factions within them (the right was never getting into power while the Progressive Conservatives and the Reform/Alliance party were competing) and this does lead to tension.
If the US had more than 2 parties....the winner would be the least divided side.
On the other hand, big tents usually (the GOP being a notable exception) tend towards moderate platforms and flexible pragmatism.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.Our Revolution is not the only thing out there you know. There are several groups dedicated to helping democrats regain seats in local and national congresses in swing districts, such as Flippable, Swing Left, and Sister District. They all played a major part in the delaware and Georgia 6th campaigns.
edited 20th Mar '17 11:34:03 AM by megaeliz
I mean it's not even in the other systems.
Obama and Clinton consider themselves fiscal conservative and Third Way Democrats which is a blend of left wing social policies and right wing economic policies.
I really, really hope that the Democrats don't try and utterly blockade any Supreme Court nominee that gets proposed - it's a battle they can not win. The Republicans had the advantage of "It's an election year" (in spite of there being nearly a full calendar year until the new President would be sworn in) - the Democrats would have 4 years until a new Presidential election, and that would guarantee a loss due to overt obstructionism.
Blocking Gorsuch in particular is a fight they can win, though, so long as they prove reasonable should a more palatable candidate be proposed.
"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"

Moreover, when talking about the 2018 midterms, there's far more competitive governorships than there are Republican held senate seats up for grabs; and my expectations for 2018 are thus not particularly high on the federal level.
edited 20th Mar '17 9:31:51 AM by CaptainCapsase