Mourning in America - Trump Year One: November '16 to

"The boomer generation will die off, and they will be thought off as the worst people ever."

sadly, they are all trying to live to be 200 years old. i keep waiting for them to start getting daily fetal cell injections or something in order to keep the reaper at bay.

covered by the medicare they don't want to pay for

Basically he finds a lot of evidence that if education affected your attitudes about race generally, that has an extremely close parallel with trump support, to the extent that if you control for education affecting your attitudes about race, the effect of education on trump support disappears

(Maybe this is obvious but I had to read it twice to get it)

xpost i can vouch that JacobSanders has an impeccably progressive attitude toward otherwise underrepresented private-press LPs.

JacobSanders do you love free market capitalism and think its potentials limitless if it were only 'truly' free...or are you just trying to deal with the current setup?

― conrad, Saturday, 12 November 2016 14:48 (five days ago) Permalink

i like that the republican governor of massachusetts didn't vote for trump (or anyone) but did go to the voting booth to vote no on pot legalization. he still had to look a LITTLE republican.

he also said he was going to take obama's wait and see attitude with trump. he doesn't like that alt-right guy at all. or trump for that matter.

still, fuck charlie baker imo

To conrad I would say it's a little of both. What frustrates me is our two party system. I know wanting other options is not looking squarely at reality.

Actually, if anyone of you live in Maine, they passed the ranked choice voting amendment, so third parties should do much better there!

would not 'truly free' capitalism allow for monopolies? eliminate child labor laws? absolve environmental disasters? where is the line drawn? who draws it and who would 'interpret' it?

itt: EVERYTHING

I never said I'm for a free market without regulation! I'm pro-union, labor laws, anti-discrimination laws, EPA, DOT, FERC, etc. I thought I said that upthread, maybe not, I'm very poor at explaining myself when it comes to politics. I was mainly talking about health care. When I talk about free market I'm mainly talking about healthy competition. Like when the EpiPen skyrocketed in price. As I understand it there was one company producing it so they could charge whatever they wanted? If I'm failing to understand something, please let me know.

I can't keep up with this thread, but given you guys seem to touching on all of the nations current and hypothetical problems...

https://img.pandawhale.com/post-58335-good-luck-were-all-counting-on-ClLw.gif

Having thought everything over, I think it comes down to blaming Le Tigre for that awful, terrible pro-Clinton song.

word. sorry JacobSanders for jumping to the wrong conclusions!

yeah i haven't been reading this really.all i know is that I fucking hate people that voted for this shithead more and more everyday.

"I'm pro-union, labor laws, anti-discrimination laws, EPA, DOT, FERC, etc."

maybe you should move to france, ya commie!

we have to embrace trump supporters. hug them. take them to our breast. they know not what they do. suffer their annoying children...i mean suffer the children and forbid them not. all that. show them what real christians look like. even though you aren't a christian.

I agree with this piece

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/11/the_democrats_are_already_screwing_up_the_trump_resistance.html

lol scott

I agree with this piece

me too

And also the idea of work and being productive is something that I feel tends to sway people towards Republicanism and conservatism. Like if you simplified the appeals of Bernie and Trump, on the Bernie side, a lot of people were stoked by the idea of getting things for free: education, health care, dismissal of student loan debt, whereas the Trump appeal was, I will give you something valuable to work for.

A little late, and I know we're on the same side wrt the issue, but I feel like something often gets missed in the discourse around education policy: education IS something valuable that you have to work for, even if you don't pay tuition. It's not a consumer good that can be acquired for free when the financial cost is eliminated or socialized.

I agree with the Bouie piece up to a point, but I find it simplistic and useless in terms of actually crafting any kind of winning political strategy. And I also think it's a bit of a strawman to cast Sanders, Warren and Ellison as people who think we should just pretend bigotry doesn't exist and court the Trump base.

I mean the plan this time around was to shout "The people over there are racist and terrible" for the entire campaign and hope it scared the base enough to come out. It failed. So we should double down?

i dunno, he does point to reid's response as a better alternative for how to address the bigotry:

"I have personally been on the ballot in Nevada for 26 elections and I have never seen anything like the reaction to the election completed last Tuesday. The election of Donald Trump has emboldened the forces of hate and bigotry in America."

Reid continues:

"We as a nation must find a way to move forward without consigning those who Trump has threatened to the shadows. Their fear is entirely rational, because Donald Trump has talked openly about doing terrible things to them. …
If this is going to be a time of healing, we must first put the responsibility for healing where it belongs: at the feet of Donald Trump, a sexual predator who lost the popular vote and fueled his campaign with bigotry and hate. Winning the electoral college does not absolve Trump of the grave sins he committed against millions of Americans. Donald Trump may not possess the capacity to assuage those fears, but he owes it to this nation to try."

Reid doesn’t preclude cooperation; this isn’t a call for blockade. What the Nevada senator does, however, is center the fears and concerns of nonwhite Americans. He essentially offers conditional terms: If you work to reduce and repudiate the fear and hate of your campaign, then there is a chance to “move forward.” Otherwise, there are no deals to make. Reid’s statement has all the room you need for a populist message to working-class whites. But it makes that message contingent on buy-in for an inclusive agenda, attuned to the concerns of marginalized Americans. In this vision, the concerns of those Americans are correctly understood as populist concerns, indispensable to the whole.

idk about "crying" over romney's loss but let us never forget the post-election mega-rant youtube woman, discussion beginning here: The Choice of a New Denigration: the US Election Day 2012 Thread

And I also think it's a bit of a strawman to cast Sanders, Warren and Ellison as people who think we should just pretend bigotry doesn't exist and court the Trump base.

also i don't think he portrays them in this way. he writes

"Both Warren and Sanders emphasize that bigotry was part of Trump’s message. But they want to separate the “deplorables” from the larger group of more ordinary Americans who just wanted a change of pace. .... But there’s a problem here, and it’s found in the cast given to Trump’s campaign and Trump’s voters. Both Warren and Sanders describe Trump’s effort as a populist campaign with an almost incidental use of racial prejudice."

he doesn't describe sanders/warren as pretending bigotry doesn't exist. he disagrees with the lack of emphasis that they place on bigotry.

idk about "crying" over romney's loss but let us never forget the post-election mega-rant youtube woman, discussion beginning here: The Choice of a New Denigration: the US Election Day 2012 Thread

― dustalo springsteen (Doctor Casino),

how in hell could you look at that thread and not weep

winter is coming. and after that, something even worse

Rep. Tom Price (R-GA), the chairman of the budget committee, told reporters on Thursday that Republicans are eyeing major changes to Medicare in 2017.

Price, who is being floated as a possible Health and Human Services Secretary in the next administration, said that he expects Republican in the House to move on Medicare reforms "six to eight months" into the Trump administration.

He also noted that Republicans are eyeing using a tactic known as budget reconciliation to make the change. That process allows Republicans to pass bills with a simple majority in the U.S. Senate.

When asked by TPM about timing for changes to Medicare, Price said "I think that is probably in the second phase of reconciliation, which would have to be in the FY 18 budget resolution in the first 6-8 months."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/tom-price-reveals-republicans-eyeing-medicare-overhaul-in-2017

bouie's point is sound but frankly i don't think warren-sanders-ellison expect trump to govern like a working class populist at all. when they meet the reality of what's likely to happen i don't think their position and reid's are going to be different.

one thing to think about: the senate runoff in louisiana

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-11-16/democrats-can-t-write-off-the-last-senate-race-in-louisiana

I agree with this piece

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/11/the_democrats_are_already_screwing_up_the_trump_resistance.html

― Listen to my homeboy Fantano (D-40), Thursday, November 17, 2016 11:59 AM (fifty-three minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i read that yesterday. love bouie and he makes a good academic point that voting with trump or republicans in a sense legitimizes the tactics he used to win the election. however, i'd say unfortunately that that horse has already left the barn -- the tactics were legitimized when the electoral votes came in. and i'm not sure what the implication for lawmakers is realistically supposed to be -- there are going to be plenty of pieces of minor legislation that come along that genuinely are going to help people. are democrats supposed to just refuse to vote for them out of principle?

how do you cut something as popular as medicare without immediately losing the next election?

And also the idea of work and being productive is something that I feel tends to sway people towards Republicanism and conservatism. Like if you simplified the appeals of Bernie and Trump, on the Bernie side, a lot of people were stoked by the idea of getting things for free: education, health care, dismissal of student loan debt, whereas the Trump appeal was, I will give you something valuable to work for.

The idea behind this, what you're calling "Republicanism", came from think tanks and were broadcast over corporate-owned media. This isn't a belief inherent in human nature or the spirit of America. At the dawn of the century Americans joined together and died for better rights and benefits for themselves. During the Great Depression people got their skulls bashed in for what Republicans call the "welfare state" for moochers and takers.

It's a matter of governing philosophy and what people believe. Right now what most Americans believe as being natural was created intentionally over the past few decades, and since corporate interests control just about all of the media in this country, it's the only message that's broadcasted.

Nothing is going to change until these beliefs are challenged and replaced with an alternate governing philosophy, and can somehow reach people (and in this environment, I have no fucking idea how that would happen). So there's really no point in debating this issue until that's dealt with. It'll probably take some kind-of collapse or breakdown in the current order, and Trump definitely isn't that, he exemplifies the current order.

also goole otm. common sense

how do you cut something as popular as medicare without immediately losing the next election?

― ciderpress, Thursday, 17 November 2016 17:58 (twenty-one seconds ago) Permalink

And in the middle of 2018 election season? They won't even get a simple majority. I'm scratching my head at this, unless it's some kind of bargaining strategy or I don't know what the fuck, it makes no sense.

Like I know they are ideologues but they can't be that fucking dumb, but I'm sitting here trying to figure out what the devious plan behind that move is and so far I'm not seeing it. There has to be one, right?

idk, at some point the purpose of being in government has to be getting done the shit you want to get done, not about winning future elections. if they really want to gut medicare, now's the time

it seems like a tough sell to me as does axing ACA, but voters seem more than willing to swallow a bucket of lies, so I wouldn't count on there being consequences if this comes to pass.

I'm counting on nothing, but how do you lie about "we cut medicare"? It's pretty straightforward.

idk, at some point the purpose of being in government has to be getting done the shit you want to get done, not about winning future elections. if they really want to gut medicare, now's the time

― k3vin k., Thursday, November 17, 2016 1:03 PM (three minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

"gutting" it symbolically right before you get swept out of congress and overruled isn't really getting shit done

they won't "cut" it, they'll "strengthen" it

blame the cut on ACA overreach and half the country is like "yep"

@man alive voters bought into a whole suite of absolutely ridiculous lies during the election season, the right wing merely needs to start spreading rumors that cutting medicare was the last gasp of desperation by an outgoing Obama administration or some such absurd lie and people will eat that shit up too.

if I were Paul Ryan, I'd gut Medicare too

right, didn't you realize that ACA fatally hurt medicare and now they need to shoot the patient? Plus, look at how much money they can save, how much taxes they can cut, how much less dependent on government socialism all those old people are, how much this has improved the business of providing health insurance, etc.

hey won't "cut" it, they'll "strengthen" it

exactly. from paul ryan's website:

Medicare is the cornerstone on which all other government health care programs rest. Unfortunately, the deteriorating financial conditions of this program are threatening beneficiary access to its benefits. In their most recent report, the Medicare Trustees projected that the account that funds Medicare’s hospital benefit will be exhausted in 2028. Reports like this illustrate that we can no longer let politicians in Washington deny the danger to Medicare – it is all too real, and the health of our nation’s seniors is far too important. We have to save Medicare to avoid disruptions in benefits for current seniors and to strengthen the program for future generations. - See more at: http://paulryan.house.gov/issues/issue/?IssueID=9969#sthash.Q9GkFX7a.dpuf

they're not cutting it, and they won't stop at merely strengthening it - they are SAVING it!

All of them Trump vogers.

I know what is meant here but my head automatically went to this:

http://cdn.funcheap.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/VOGUE.jpg

they are euthanizing it, along with all those elderly moochers who used it

If the GOP is some kind of brilliant diabolical lie-spreading machine that can convince literally anyone anything then why not just fucking give up? I think that's pretty clearly not the case. Old people vote, they love medicare, and they're not reading Breitbart for news. And "they're cutting your medicare" is a much easier sell than "Well actually we're going to save it due to...*long wonky paragraph*"