US Politics, December 2019: Profound procedural deficiencies

didn't they have to do the same thing for Christine Ford

if trump wins re-election, they're going to try to put the whistleblower on trial for treason, aren't they

Also it’s time for me to repeat my stance against performative “if/when Trump wins in 2020” handwringing. It’s worse than saying nothing. Every time you want to do that you just be giving another dollar to ActBlue instead, or something.

Seriously. If you're that sure Trump is gonna win, do everything you can to win Dem seats in state legislatures, which in their own way matter as much as who's President.

(You know what, also do that if you're not that sure Trump is gonna win.)

i can understand that, but thinking about possible future outcomes is a pretty basic instinct. then again, i suppose one must imagine sisyphus happy

humblebrag but i also believe it's in my capacity to worry about the future and help my favored candidates to win all at the same time, all while making coffee

final point: focusing on the positive outcomes while suppressing negative thoughts has about as much chance as the local "only GOOD news!" start-up newspaper/pamphlet that finds its way into your junk mail every 8-10 years

i guess on that final point it's a little different, because in this case it's like if the "only GOOD news!" start-up had the capability to ban the negative news :D

Also it’s time for me to repeat my stance against performative “if/when Trump wins in 2020” handwringing. It’s worse than saying nothing. Every time you want to do that you just be giving another dollar to ActBlue instead, or something.

― El Tomboto, Friday, December 27, 2019

otm`

xxxpost I don't think Tom's talking about suppressing negative thoughts, because all of us would fail at that. But rather publicly expressing the thought that 2020 is already quite possibly lost, reacting to a negative stimuli that doesn't technically exist yet.

mostly because it can actually spur some folk into hyperanxiety and frankly, if the worst possible outcome does occur, now you've suffered twice.

I think ultimately if the last three years have taught us anything, it's that our ability to predict the future, even with people who act predictably, has been somewhat below average.

though you're good people and I feel your posts are just the understandable exasperation and need to scream into the void that many in this thread feel ,myself included. :)

Only two presidents in my lifetime have lost reelection; incumbency is on his side. But every time I read Sanders, Warren, etc. assuring us "we" can win if we get POC out to vote I think of this thread and how many more times we POC have to save your fucking asses from your own despair.

I think ultimately if the last three years have taught us anything, it's that our ability to predict the future, even with people who act predictably, has been somewhat below average.

Yup, the one upside (if you can call it that) of Trump's election is that more than ever I'm convinced that basically anything is possible.

xpost because while i know those of us ITT aren't really the type, I do know a lot of people who absorb their environments and react to the nihilistic reads by saying "well, guess I shouldn't bother getting involved, it's a lost cause anyway". if enough people say "fuck it, what's the point", it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and then it's "1 for Martin, 2 for Martin"

Alfred otm. the more we embrace the fact that we CAN win, the more likely we'll be spurred to act and turn out ourselves, as well as inspiring others to do the same.

there will be no confident certainty going into election night 2020, no matter what the polls say, and in our case, that's probably for the better.

1) i didn't express anything about 2020 being quite possibly lost. actually, i strongly believe that the democrats - ANY democrat - is going to win. and if we don't, i'll fucking go ballistic and ruin the lives of everyone i know who isn't 100% against trump.

2) still, let it be decreed on ilx: no more negative thoughts about post-2020. got it everyone? we're drawing the line!

in addition, for those of you who drive: no more left turns. you're gonna have to make three right turns in a row from now on, that's just the way it is

my statements on that weren't regarding anything that you wrote, just "in general" in regards to what we often see in this suite of threads from a variety of posters.

in addition, for those of you who drive: no more left turns. you're gonna have to make three right turns in a row from now on, that's just the way it is

― But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Friday, December 27, 2019 2:26 PM bookmarkflaglink

I've seen that episode of Gary Shandling!

also: when political campaigns want to motivate their constituents, they very often bring up the possibility that their opposition is motivated, that they need your dollars now to fend off this malign threat, etc etc. in other words, they're bringing up the possibility that they could lose, and that their opponent could win. of course there's a point where it can go too far and you end up demoralizing instead of motivating. or where motivation slips into despair and apathy. but shit dude, i'm not at that point. i'm just thinking about the future, which is what a fucking cave man does

indeed we do

not @ you neanderthal, just at the general Let's-Not-Talk-About-A-Very-Possible-Outcome rule

No Left Turns is the title of an organizational history of the FBI written from a special agent’s perspective during the dumbest years of Hoover’s reign

SO THANKS A LOT KARL

a rule which a lot of people support, i get it. i am the 1%
xp

shit can a Neanderthal get a loan?

xp

is it good? because i would totally read that!

I have this lovely skull to barter

RIP William Greider (thread)

About a dozen years ago, I got a call from Bill Greider asking if I'd help him find a piece in the Post's archives he had written, "in 73 or 74.", for the book he was working on. "I should know how to do this, but I know you can do it quickly."

— Joe Costello (@ofbyforbook) December 27, 2019

lol, i just realized the context of your post neanderthal! loooool

ok, i'm posting too much and also i'm "at work". i will step back. :) i do hear your points, though, and every time i start despairing about the future (out loud, or more often in my head), i often think about alfred's words about poc having to do emotional labor to keep people like me from shitting my pants and rolling into the river (which is a completely backwards order of operations). and it does help me to toughen up and shut up a little more.

.......but

worrying about the future isn't a switch, it's a two-inch part of my brain stem that i've been working with my therapist to systematically destroy

But every time I read Sanders, Warren, etc. assuring us "we" can win if we get POC out to vote I think of this thread and how many more times we POC have to save your fucking asses from your own despair.

🤔🤔🤔 So appeals to the "white working class" it is, then!

The primary issue is voter suppression not enthusiasm. And both Sanders & Warren are aware of this.

^^ this

(at least, I agree that voter suppression is the A1 priority to address at the moment, not sure abt the rest)

from: karl at work

(suppression is incredibly important to address, but much of it is baked into state law. we can and should be vigilant, call it out, reverse racist legislation by winning state legislatures, and do as much as possible to do outreach to the people that the GOP is trying to suppress. that is a forever war. but in addition to that, we better get a candidate that can create enthusiasm, and that's something that's more tangible and approachable for individuals to do on a personal level with friends/family. it's the old both/and rather than either/or thing)

also is Workday down for everyone or just for me, thank you

Workday's working for me

looks like I missed a clock out at 4:20pm on Tuesday, could you please add one in? thanks so much!

i'm just thinking about the future, which is what a fucking cave man does

cavemen mostly thought about things they could control. when they veered into thinking about things outside of their control, they went insane, invented religion.

sorry for derail but it went like this IMO:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22478.The_Origin_of_Consciousness_in_the_Breakdown_of_the_Bicameral_Mind

That sounds like a King Crimson album title.

haha otm

Featuring 15 minutes of washboard and mellotron

xp

is it good? because i would totally read that!

https://i.imgur.com/N6NxqGb.jpg

sweet dreams

From the same article that photo is from:

Mona Fishman, a singer from the Las Vegas area who performed at the event, has written Trump-themed songs with titles like “Fake News” and “Smells like Soros,” which accuses liberal megadonor George Soros of running a shadow government, a trope widely condemned as anti-Semitic.

Was hoping "Smells Like Soros" was a "Moves Like Jagger" parody, but it actually sounds kind of like Sleigh Bells??
https://soundcloud.com/mona-lidji-fishman/smells-like-soros-smellslikesoros-rock-song-about-george-soros

“Smells Like Jew Spirit” was already taken, I guess: http://www.zeek.net/802beeber/

And Tulsi has gone into pure parody

"I think impeachment, unfortunately, will only further embolden Donald Trump, increase his support and the likelihood that he'll have a better shot at getting elected while also seeing the likelihood that the House will lose a lot of seats to Republicans," Gabbard told the reporter in New Hampshire.

She added that her vote was "not a decision of neutrality" but that she was "standing up for the people of this country and our ability to move forward together."

Gabbard said, "Thinking about what's politically advantageous, whether for me or for my party, does not enter into my mind around these decisions that have really great consequence."

But, fortunately...

https://www.newsweek.com/tulsi-gabbard-impeachment-vote-democratic-primary-1479112

Gabbard said, "Thinking about what's politically advantageous, whether for me or for my party, does not enter into my mind around these decisions that have really great consequence."

Uh didn't she just before that talk about the political ramifications of impeachment?

Lol yes, that was the part that made me lol

worries that she's going to run third party as a spoiler are unfounded IMO because I can't see her peeling away and Dem votes where it matters; she's more likely to pull off Republicans who soured on Trump.

She added that her vote was "not a decision of neutrality" but that she was "standing up for the people of this country and our ability to move forward together."

but this holiday season, in order to stand up for her country, one veteran is standing down by refusing to be neutral and voting present instead

I just want to make it clear to anyone who may have missed it, that Tulsi Gabbard has never been relevant to US national politics. This may become clearer by contemplating AOC's impact, which has been largely at the level of symbolism rather than passed legislation or influence on Congress, and yet AOC's national relevance has been several orders of magnitude greater than Gabbard's.