Support NeoGAF

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

Is the Primary ever going to end in the OT?

And will anyone ever present any evidence that Dems should move further left?

No and No?

Fuck

I'm not sure how people still have the strength for Clinton vs. Sanders arguments.

 

[IAmAnAgnostic]

Holy Jesus, how could we possibly know that in 2016 when we don't know literally any of the events that will happen before the next election

Not only is this not a game it's not a poorly designed one

Of course we can't know for sure, but we can probably think of a few potential candidates? But true, it largely depends on how Trump will do.

 

[excelsiorlef]

I'm not sure how people still have the strength for Clinton vs. Sanders arguments.

I'm far beyond Clinton, she lost, she made mistakes some well meaning, some headscratchers, the end result was that racism is still fucking popular at that probably Barry fucking Goldwater could have gotten elected in 2016....

What I am fighting is the coronation of Sanders as the defacto leader and revisionist bullshit that pretend he was totally going to win the primary, or that he didn't run an aggressively shitty campaign that lashed out at everyone and anyone.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Dems really need to get their act together. I just wonder who'd be the best to take on Trump..

We can't worry about this right now. In fact I'd argue until 2018 ends it's better if we don't a true defacto "leader" of the party

I'd argue that Bush being out of the way and the GOP not really having a clear leader at the top helped them significantly gain ground under Obama. Not having someone on the top can allow state politics to fluctuate and give grass root candidates more room to maneuver because they don't have anyone whose policies reflect on them.

 

[CoffeeJanitor]

Mattis looks to be a good choice

 

[faisal233]

Mattis looks to be a good choice

The concerns about his recent military service is legitimate but pale in comparison to who the next SecDef nominee might be. Maybe Trump will try out some guy that played General in a movie next.

 

[Teggy]

The concerns about his recent military service is legitimate but pale in comparison to who the next SecDef nominee might be. Maybe Trump will try out some guy that played General in a movie next.

Is George C. Scott still alive?

Edit: holy crap he's been dead 17 years.

 

[Pixieking]

Of course we can't know for sure, but we can probably think of a few potential candidates? But true, it largely depends on how Trump will do.

Partially dependent on what Trump will do, but equally as important is what the electorate does, and how they feel. The racists (and the ones who are indifferent to minorities) have won big here, but if there's a groundswell of anti-fascist/anti-racist/pro-feminist/pro-minority support at the grass-roots level, then it changes everything.

This is why a lot of talk should be about how to motivate the Dem base, and how to affect local grass-roots activism. Because arguing about Bernie fucking Sanders doesn't help anyone, but bringing-home the fact that your sister's gay friend won't be able to get married in 5 years will push people into voting Dem.

 

[BSsBrolly]

Partially dependent on what Trump will do, but equally as important is what the electorate does, and how they feel. The racists (and the ones who are indifferent to minorities) have won big here, but if there's a groundswell of anti-fascist/anti-racist/pro-feminist/pro-minority support at the grass-roots level, then it changes everything.

This is why a lot of talk should be about how to motivate the Dem base, and how to affect local grass-roots activism. Because arguing about Bernie fucking Sanders doesn't help anyone, but bringing-home the fact that your sister's gay friend won't be able to get married in 5 years will push people into voting Dem.

I feel like 4 years of Trump will be enough to drive people to the polls in 2020. That should be enough for the damage of his policies to start materializing.

 

[Aaron Strife]

I feel like 4 years of Trump will be enough to drive people to the polls in 2020. That should be enough for the damage of his policies to start materializing.

Unless we nominate another non-unicorn and people sit out because waaaah lesser of two evils I'm going to spam my social media with douche vs. turd pictures isn't that so goddamn profound and original

 

[Aaronology]

I feel like 4 years of Trump will be enough to drive people to the polls in 2020. That should be enough for the damage of his policies to start materializing.

I felt 1 year of Trump's campaign should have been enough to drive people to the polls.

And yet...

 

[kirblar]

I felt 1 year of Trump's campaign should have been enough to drive people to the polls.

And yet...

People don't understand hypotheticals or counterfactuals. Unfortunately.

 

[BSsBrolly]

Unless we nominate another non-unicorn and people sit out because waaaah lesser of two evils I'm going to spam my social media with douche vs. turd pictures isn't that so goddamn profound and original

I think a lot of people saw him speak and just thought there was no way a guy like him could win. Plus Comey, Russia, and the fact Trump had no political record to defend, had a lot to do with him winning.

I felt 1 year of Trump's campaign should have been enough to drive people to the polls.

And yet...

True, but I think he was severely underestimated. He won't be in 2020.

Edit: I am concerned about the media and how they'll handle his bullshit. You know he's going to claim he kept jobs in America. I don't know if they'll actually report the facts...

 

[Mgoblue201]

And they had to stop there, because they got killed at the next election.

Spoiler: Everyone in the past few decades has gotten killed at the next election after getting an eclipse. (except Bush, but 9/11)

The right was galvanized regardless. The Democratic Congress had a fleeting increase in popularity during the lame duck period when they passed the DADT repeal and the unemployment extension instead of being terrified at what tne consequences would be.

I am not arguing that Democrats should shy away from passing as much consequential legislation as they can, but I am arguing against the assertion that Obama did not take the reigns in his first two years. First, as I said previously, Democrats experienced a massive backlash in 2010 because Obama did get so much done, not because he didn't.

Second, and more importantly, there's only so much bandwidth that Congress can deal with. Democrats had as close to a unified government in 2008 that we're likely to see for some time, and still they were very limited in what they could do. Healthcare reform occupied a lot of their time, since they had to appease and assuage all the various interests and opinions involved in the process, and that took away from other things they wanted to do. Maybe Obama should have taken more control of the process, maybe he over-learned the lessons from the Clintons' failures, but he did get healthcare reform passed where all other presidents failed. Plus the stimulus. Plus financial reform. And the Democrats were within an inch of passing cap and trade and an immigration reform bill.

Given the limitations - the faltering economy, the Scott Brown fiasco, the Tea Party movement, the Republican opposition, the need to keep 60 Democrats and independents in line, the possibility that at any time months of work could suddenly unravel - I think that period was very close to the best case scenario for Democrats as was possible, although obviously it still fell a little short. Would it be nice if Democrats had been a little bolder? Of course. Should they learn some lessons from that period? Probably. But there are certain realities that can't be wished away. It's extremely difficult to coordinate the actions of so many different Congressmen to pass meaningful legislation.

 

[PantherLotus]

i just imagine what it would be like if Obama's 2004 political capital was spent on correcting voter suppression, campaign finance reform, and building a bigger bench rather than a half-step toward single-payer. That and parading some wall street suits around in handcuffs a bit. I still have a gut feeling that we're all paying for not prosecuting them to the fullest extent possible.

Obviously if Republicans find the repeal/replace option too difficult -- and they might -- we might still end up with single payer and all this is moot. But imagine that we end up with no Obamacare and none of the above? :|


edit: obviously one might question how any of the above would be possible with the Republicans / Tea Party acting the way they were. Counterpoint: they passed the ACA didn't they?

 

[Erevador]

Mattis looks to be a good choice

Mattis is worshiped by the troops. His selection will be great for morale.

He is an extremely intelligent man, and the very definition of battle-tested.

A reassuring choice.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

i just imagine what it would be like if Obama's 2004 political capital was spent on correcting voter suppression, campaign finance reform, and building a bigger bench rather than a half-step toward single-payer. That and parading some wall street suits around in handcuffs a bit. I still have a gut feeling that we're all paying for not prosecuting them to the fullest extent possible.

Obviously if Republicans find the repeal/replace option too difficult -- and they might -- we might still end up with single payer and all this is moot. But imagine that we end up with no Obamacare and none of the above? :|

Was voter suppression a big issue in 2008? I thought most of that shit came in 2010 after the Tea Party wave, but I was a teenager who wasn't really paying attention back then.

 

[PantherLotus]

Was voter suppression a big issue in 2008? I thought most of that shit came in 2010 after the Tea Party wave, but I was a teenager who wasn't really paying attention back then.

It's basically been a thing since before the Constitution was written...

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

It's basically been a thing since before the Constitution was written...

Fair point. Do you mean reforms like automatic registration and mandatory mail-in ballots? Would that be considered federal overreach?

 

[Cow Mengde]

Is it possible to turn Trumps supporters against him?

I recently saw a tumblr that posts all kind of messages from people who voted for Trump and are now regretting it. Chances are that's still a small percentage, but what if we can get tons of people to blend in to pretend to by Trump supporters, but then also do some internal sabotage on forums, reddit, and social media.

For example, whether Trump's daughter actually supports climate change isn't relevant. We can use it to claim Trump is bowing down to Chinese conspiracy hoax. Post stuff about Trump appointing Wall Street executives in the government. Trump taking back his promise of prosecuting Hillary. Stuff that's actually happening.

Of course we would need a lot of people; people who are smart, and can blend in like a regular Trump supporter, but also sabotage from the inside.

 

[leroidys]

Is it possible to turn Trumps supporters against him?

I recently saw a tumblr that posts all kind of messages from people who voted for Trump and are now regretting it. Chances are that's still a small percentage, but what if we can get tons of people to blend in to pretend to by Trump supporters, but then also do some internal sabotage on forums, reddit, and social media.

For example, whether Trump's daughter actually supports climate change isn't relevant. We can use it to claim Trump is bowing down to Chinese conspiracy hoax. Post stuff about Trump appointing Wall Street executives in the government. Trump taking back his promise of prosecuting Hillary. Stuff that's actually happening.

Of course we would need a lot of people; people who are smart, and can blend in like a regular Trump supporter, but also sabotage from the inside.

This would help them, not hinder them. Spreading FUD, bullshit, and animosity is their game plan. They need a divided and confused public to retain power and accomplish their agenda.

 

[Suikoguy]

Fair point. Do you mean reforms like automatic registration and mandatory mail-in ballots? Would that be considered federal overreach?

Don't need to make them mandatory, but automatic registration and national mail-in ballots should pass any constitutional muster.

 

[Cow Mengde]

This would help them, not hinder them. Spreading FUD, bullshit, and animosity is their game plan. They need a divided and confused public to retain power and accomplish their agenda.

But that's exactly what I'm suggesting. Separate and confuse them. Showing them Trump backing out of his words and spinning it into something more. Like his daughter being bought by the Chinese communists to not take jobs back to America. We could spin this in our own way. We need to spin, and spin it good.

This is the tumblr that I ran into BTW: https://trumpgrets.tumblr.com/

 

[pigeon]

i just imagine what it would be like if Obama's 2004 political capital was spent on correcting voter suppression, campaign finance reform, and building a bigger bench rather than a half-step toward single-payer. That and parading some wall street suits around in handcuffs a bit. I still have a gut feeling that we're all paying for not prosecuting them to the fullest extent possible.

Obviously if Republicans find the repeal/replace option too difficult -- and they might -- we might still end up with single payer and all this is moot. But imagine that we end up with no Obamacare and none of the above? :|


edit: obviously one might question how any of the above would be possible with the Republicans / Tea Party acting the way they were. Counterpoint: they passed the ACA didn't they?

Because he campaigned on the ACA and there was political will to do it.

Frankly, the worst thing Obama will have done leaving office is not communicate well enough about how the ACA is a huge success and the largest transfer program since LBJ, judging by the comments like yours above I constantly see. The saddest part about Obamacare is that it may get repealed before anybody, including people who claim to care about universal healthcare, actually understands what it does.

 

[sazzy]

 

[Mgoblue201]

Because he campaigned on the ACA and there was political will to do it.

Frankly, the worst thing Obama will have done leaving office is not communicate well enough about how the ACA is a huge success and the largest transfer program since LBJ, judging by the comments like yours above I constantly see. The saddest part about Obamacare is that it may get repealed before anybody, including people who claim to care about universal healthcare, actually understands what it does.

I think Obama was hoping that the healthcare exchange would create its own natural constituency that would put pressure on Congress to uphold and even expand the law. Obviously, that hasn't quite materialized. Plus, polarization and the proliferation of misleading or fake news stories make it difficult to communicate the truth effectively.

 

[Kaiterra]

So did we ever find out whether those Office of Government Ethics tweets were meant to be sarcastic or what? The articles I find can't reach a consensus one way or the other.

 

[Plinko]

Did this get posted yesterday?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...2016/12/the_myth_of_the_rust_belt_revolt.html

The Myth of the Rust Belt Revolt

Donald Trump didn’t flip working-class white voters. Hillary Clinton lost them.

1. In the Rust Belt 5, the GOP’s pickup of voters making $50,000 or less is overshadowed by the Democrats’ dramatic loss of voters in that category.

Compared with Republicans’ performance in 2012, the GOP in the Rust Belt 5 picked up 335,000 additional voters who earned less than $50,000 (+10.6 percent). But the Republicans’ gain in this area was nothing compared with the Democrats’ loss of 1.17 million (-21.7 percent) voters in the same income category. Likewise, Republicans picked up a measly 26,000 new voters in the $50–$100K bracket (+0.7 percent), but Democrats lost 379,000 voters in the same bracket (-11.7 percent). The working class is not the only part of this equation. Analysis elsewhere suggests that in states such as Wisconsin, a significant fraction of Democrats’ loss relative to 2012 came from poor districts, and it’s unclear how much voter ID laws affected those numbers.

3. Trump did not flip white voters in the Rust Belt who had supported Obama. Democrats lost them.

Relative to 2012, Democrats lost 950,000 white voters in the Rust Belt 5 (-13 percent). This figure includes a loss of 770,000 votes cast by white men (-24.2 percent). Compare that number to the modest gains Republicans made in terms of white voters: They picked up only 450,000 whites (+4.9 percent).

Democrats also lost the black, indigenous, and other people of color (BIPOC) vote in the Rust Belt 5, with 400,000 fewer voters in this category (-11.5 percent). While disaggregated exi- poll data on BIPOC voters was inconsistently available across the five states we examined, in those places where numbers were available, Democrats saw losses among both black American and Latino voters. Importantly, some of the greatest losses in BIPOC votes were in states such as Ohio and Wisconsin, both of which adopted voter suppression laws beginning in 2012. But even in states with no such laws, such as Pennsylvania, BIPOC turnout was significantly lower this election cycle. In short, more people of color stayed home in the Rust Belt in 2016 than in 2012.

Lots more at the link, but really good information. I don't buy the idea that racism was the main factor in this election like some are trying to say. A factor, yes, but not the main one. If that were the case, these people would have voted for Trump. Instead, they merely didn't vote for Hillary.

 

[Totakeke]

U.S. economy added 178,000 jobs in November; unemployment rate dropped to 4.6 percent

The unemployment rate fell to levels not seen since August 2007, before a bubble in the U.S. housing market began to burst. The fall was driven partly by the creation of new jobs and partly by people retiring and otherwise leaving the labor force. The labor force participation rate ticked down to 62.7 percent last month.

Average hourly earnings declined by 3 cents to $25.89. The decrease pared back large gains seen in October, but over the year, average hourly earnings are still up 2.5 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ember-unemployment-rate-drops-to-4-6-percent/

Yet for all the statistical improvements, tens of millions of workers continue to feel that the recovery has passed them by. Those without skills are relegated to low-paying positions without steady schedules, security and benefits. Breadwinners who once occupied well-compensated manufacturing jobs are unwilling to settle for minimum-wage service jobs.

“There is a bifurcation of the work force,” Mr. Prising of Manpower said. In that sense, the overall average unemployment rate is misleading. People with the right skills who are able to take advantage of the technology revolution, globalization and other shifts in the economy have seen their jobless rates fall below pre-recession levels.

Robert A. Funk, chairman and chief executive of Express Employment Professionals, a staffing agency based in Oklahoma City, said jobs orders picked up last month, which he said was not unusual this time of year.

“Recruiting is a tough issue right now in skilled and semiskilled industries,” he said, mentioning accounting, information technology, call centers, warehousing, and office and professional services.

Mr. Funk said that employers often complained about being unable to find employees with a strong work ethic who met the minimum requirements. “Drug screening is a real challenge in many parts of the country,” he said. “Only 30 percent can pass a drug screen in the state of Washington,” where marijuana is legal.

At the same time, employers have been reluctant to raise wages to a level that might lure back sidelined workers. The result has been that the country has 5.5 million job openings, a near-record level, but anemic labor force participation rates, at least in comparison with previous decades.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/02/business/economy/jobs-report.html

So while there's problem finding semi-skilled and skilled workers, unskilled workers are holding the country hostage. Just awesome.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

There's very little to point at for the crazy Florida GOP turnout other than straight up racism.

 

[Totakeke]

Did this get posted yesterday?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...2016/12/the_myth_of_the_rust_belt_revolt.html






Lots more at the link, but really good information. I don't buy the idea that racism was the main factor in this election like some are trying to say. A factor, yes, but not the main one. If that were the case, these people would have voted for Trump. Instead, they merely didn't vote for Hillary.

 

[Plinko]

There's very little to point at for the crazy Florida GOP turnout other than straight up racism.

But the numbers show that democrats lost more than double the voters that republicans gained in the rust belt. It is obvious that it wasn't the main factor. I saw that Cohn slammed it, but I wasn't quite clear as to why.

If anything needs to be blamed first and foremost, it's Comey.

 

[Roland_Gunner]

So while there's problem finding semi-skilled and skilled workers, unskilled workers are holding the country hostage. Just awesome.

Really weird jobs report. You should not have below 5% unemployment and good but not great jobs growth combined with a shrinking workforce. It looks like an unexpectedly large number of baby boomers are retiring early. Honestly at this point we need more immigration to make up their numbers and not less.

 

[Plinko]

Jacob Kornbluh
‏@jacobkornbluh

.@GersonBorrero says Trump sources told him that Giuliani has already been offered #SecState and he accepted it

Welp.

U.S. economy added 178,000 jobs in November; unemployment rate dropped to 4.6 percent



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ember-unemployment-rate-drops-to-4-6-percent/





http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/02/business/economy/jobs-report.html

So while there's problem finding semi-skilled and skilled workers, unskilled workers are holding the country hostage. Just awesome.

I guess I don't get how to fix this problem. Republican control of government means they're going to be pushing for more traditional education--the education that was to prepare children for manufacturing and industrial jobs that just aren't there any more.

 

[dramatis]

I remember there was a Trump supporter in OT that was very smug about a Romney pick as SecState. Are we sure it's going to be Rudy?

After the election I thought the UK was still worse off than the US, but we're slowly closing the gap here.

 

[Pixieking]

Rudy as SoS? Hahaha...

Sorry, that's just going to create massive diplomatic issues, as well as create more friction between the Republicans who are pro-Trump, and those who are just going along with Trump because he's the PEOTUS.

More and more, I think either there has to be a schism/civil war in the GOP, or they're going to be the very personification of do-anything-say-anything career politicians by the time even the mid-terms hit. Trump is showing how gutless and hypocritical they are.

But the numbers show that democrats lost more than double the voters that republicans gained in the rust belt. It is obvious that it wasn't the main factor. I saw that Cohn slammed it, but I wasn't quite clear as to why.

If anything needs to be blamed first and foremost, it's Comey.

I think Comey has a lot to answer for, but I also think it's something that's case-by-case depending upon State. The Dems did everything they could in Florida, and still lost it, and in AL Trump got more votes than any other nominee in history. Actual racism would be the prime motivating factor in both of these cases, I think. But in the Rust Belt, it would seem to be less overt racism, and more just indifference to minorities (which is still racism, yes, but not the same neo-Nazi balls-to-the-wall racism).

Edit:

David Beard Verified account
‏@dabeard

Indiana jobless rate under Obama, via @SteveRattner

:

 

[Totakeke]

If Rudy news is true.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

He had Romney suck up to him and wine and dine him and then he just picks the random dude he wanted in the beginning, leaving Romney in the dust.

lol

 

[Plinko]

He had Romney suck up to him and wine and dine him and then he just picks the random dude he wanted in the beginning, leaving Romney in the dust.

lol

Seriously, though--who didn't see this coming?

 

[lyrick]

Seriously, though--who didn't see this coming?

Every pick has been from a pool of loyalists and will probably continue to be limited to loyalists.

I thought we already knew that Trump doesn't do dissention.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Seriously, though--who didn't see this coming?

Obviously Romney didn't. He got played.

 

[kess]

But that's exactly what I'm suggesting. Separate and confuse them. Showing them Trump backing out of his words and spinning it into something more. Like his daughter being bought by the Chinese communists to not take jobs back to America. We could spin this in our own way. We need to spin, and spin it good.

This is the tumblr that I ran into BTW: https://trumpgrets.tumblr.com/

People could begin by breaking down the narrative that people are creating for Trump. Some dude from the NYT was on NPR yesterday and was lionizing Trump as a "great communicator." A fifth grade vocabulary with a tortured syntax becomes great only in the context of a sound bite or 140 character limit, and the media feeds into that.

 

[pigeon]

Did this get posted yesterday?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...2016/12/the_myth_of_the_rust_belt_revolt.html






Lots more at the link, but really good information. I don't buy the idea that racism was the main factor in this election like some are trying to say. A factor, yes, but not the main one. If that were the case, these people would have voted for Trump. Instead, they merely didn't vote for Hillary.

In an election where half the electorate voted for a white supremacist, racism is the main factor.

The issue is not that overt white supremacy won some Democrats. It's that it won every Republican as well. All of those people made moral choices.

 

[Pixieking]

People could begin by breaking down the narrative that people are creating for Trump. Some dude from the NYT was on NPR yesterday and was lionizing Trump as a "great communicator." A fifth grade vocabulary with a tortured syntax becomes great only in the context of a sound bite or 140 character limit, and the media feeds into that.

Yeah, the thing is, I think the media are still dancing around what he did.

"Motivation" "Enthusiasm" = Trump was good at getting racist, sexist, misogynistic men (and women who have bought into the "You're a slut/consent isn't a real thing") to go to rallies and voting booths.

"Good Communicator" = Trump knows how to speak to the above. Through ((Capitalists))), framing the left's issues about consent as "being PC", and just mentioning emails, he knows how to speak to an ignorant crowd of deplorables.

It needs the media to start flat-out calling his and his supporters' behaviour what it is. He did sexually assault someone. He is racist. He has said racist things. And his crowd likes all of it.

To be honest, the media just need to start prefacing President Trump with "Racist" and "Pervert".

 

[Teggy]

Time until Trump tweet taking credit for the job numbers...

Also, in what world is Guiliani qualified for State? His entire career is domestic. Confirmation should be fun - lot of dirt is going to be dug up.

 

[Outdoor Miner]

Could see the Rudy thing coming a mile way. Trump is very predictable at the end of the day.

 

[kirblar]

Time until Trump tweet taking credit for the job numbers...

Also, in what world is Guiliani qualified for State? His entire career is domestic. Confirmation should be fun - lot of dirt is going to be dug up.

Trump's campaign has not done a basic vetting process on their noms.

This is going to be an insane confirmation cycle.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Trump's campaign has not done a basic vetting process on their noms.

This is going to be an insane confirmation cycle.

It'll be the first real test of how unified the GOP actually is.

Will they actually deny appointments for not being qualified? We'll have to see.

 

[Grief.exe]

Insurance bailout for what? They're already rich beyond belief.

When they repeal the ACA, they are likely going to keep some of the popular measures such as pre-existing conditions and can stay on parents' plans until 26. With healthcare costs continually ballooning, this has a a chance to cause the industry to death spiral without the mandate.

 

[Anoregon]

It'll be the first real test of how unified the GOP actually is.

Will they actually deny appointments for not being qualified? We'll have to see.

The GOP is going to give Trump everything he wants as long as he abides by a conservative agenda.