Support NeoGAF

[Jobbs]

True. But with the Trump administration falling apart will there be any reason not to oppose his every move from this point forward? At this point it seems like a political no brainier to just say, "I don't work with the Kremlin" and vigorously oppose even if it gets you nowhere for a bit.

If the democrats uniformly stood up and embraced a position of total opposition and obstruction and openly refused to work with the republicans on anything and everything on the basis of not wanting to work with the kremlin -- and repeating this everywhere with total discipline -- I guess there are risks involved, but to me that sounds like gold. I wish they had balls.

 

[mozfan12]

Wow. They have this energy, anger, and enthusiasm from their constituents and they are scared to face it. Grow a fucking spine, other than Obama democrats have been historically terrible of really knowing how to work with that enthusiasm.

 

[hodayathink]

Maybe the Democrats should go along with the enthusiasm this time instead of fighting it.

Going along with it runs the risk of alienating some of the conservative Democrats into becoming Republicans (there's a reason why Manchin's name is all over this piece) at a time when Democrats can't afford to lose a single senator. It's not as easy as everyone seems to think it is (if Kander had actually won Missouri, he'd be facing basically the same problems).

 

[soundscream]

You can't filibuster cabinet picks. The Democrats have literally been powerless to stop the GOP from doing any of what it's done since Trump took office.

The number of people who don't understand this simple fact is staggering. Even on GAF, people make it sound like any of what's happened so far could have been stopped by Congressional Democrats.

Guess what? We did have a chance to stop it in November but people stayed home or voted third party.



They did. As it turns out people show their enthusiasm by voting.

We're witnessing people trying to form a Democratic version of the Tea Party, but it wont work because the only place it would be successful is in Democratic states. The geography of Democratic strongholds makes it impossible to dominate the way Republicans can.

 

[B-Dubs]

If the democrats uniformly stood up and embraced a position of total opposition and obstruction and openly refused to work with the republicans on anything and everything on the basis of not wanting to work with the kremlin -- I guess there are risks involved, but to me that sounds like gold. I wish they had balls.

The risks involved are the death of the filibuster and the Democrat's ability to stop anything the GOP is doing. They'll have no qualms about nuking it and ramming everything through if it comes to that.

Wow. They have this energy, anger, and enthusiasm from their constituents and they are scared to face it. Grow a fucking spine, other than Obama democrats have been historically terrible of really knowing how to work with that enthusiasm.

And do what exactly? None of what the GOP has done so far is able to be stopped at all. The Dems have had ZERO POWER TO STOP IT. ZERO. NONE. NADA. NIET. They couldn't do shit.

 

[Killthee]

Manchin said on Tuesday that he isn’t worried about confronting progressive activists back home. “I’m not concerned about it at all. It is what it is. I love people to come and voice their thoughts,” he said.

But he urged progressives to be selective about when and where to speak out.

“If they’re coming to disrupt, make sure they’re going to the people who are opposing what they’re for,” he said.

I'm sure they will.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/

 

[kirblar]

The only reason this is true is because of short-sighted thinking in 2013. The same type of thinking being thrown around now.

There was absolutely nothing stopping the GOP from changing the rules themselves.

Stop trying to respect norms when your opponents don't even respect rules.

 

[Balphon]

There isn't much more Senate Democrats could have done to obstruct Trump's cabinet nominees.

They can try to block Gorsuch but he's going to be confirmed absent something unforeseeable regardless of what they do.

 

[sugarhigh4242]

The only reason this is true is because of short-sighted thinking in 2013. The same type of thinking being thrown around now.

It would be one thing if they used the nuclear option to get a bunch of awesome shit done. Instead (to take the LiberalGAF line) allowed themselves to get played by Republicans for 5 years before using it to get 3 appeals court nominees seated.

Either Democrats don't want to enact any progressive reform (my position) or they're hopelessly terrible at politics. Either way, they have to go.

 

[MrNelson]

lmao joe manchin is worried because he's on the right side of center naturally he's the quoted dude in the article

He still tends to vote with Democrats more often than not. If he were to get primaried for a candidate further to the left then you're guaranteeing that the seat will go to a far right Republican.

 

[midramble]

Reason isn't a populist tactic.

Populism wins votes.

Abandon reason or lose. Pick your poison.

 

[sugarhigh4242]

But I thought neoliberalism was a made up word!

Lol, maybe if you're a Putin apologist

 

[Jobbs]

The risks involved are the death of the filibuster and the Democrat's ability to stop anything the GOP is doing. They'll have no qualms about nuking it and ramming everything through if it comes to that.

Senate leadership on either side don't want the death of the filibuster. They not only know it'll swing back the other way, but they like using obstruction as an excuse to not do things they don't actually want to do (while saying they do want to do them).

I don't think it's going anywhere.. And it it does? So what. Be consistent and let republicans own the whole shit show and all of the fallout of their horrible policies. No excuses (again, this is what Mitch McConnell doesn't actually want and is why we'll keep the filibuster).

 

[kirblar]

They are freaked out at the prospect of a Corbyn meltdown given what's happened in the UK. And they're not wrong to be.

 

[sgjackson]

He still tends to vote with Democrats more often than not. If he were to get primaried for a candidate further to the left then you're guaranteeing that the seat will go to a far right Republican.

oh yeah i totally understand the strategy here, i just find it amusing

 

[water_wendi]

Yeah attack your own party for not doing dumb and/or impossible things. Can't wait for the super majority in 2018...

Here is a town hall where Senator Whitehouse was asked by the crowd why he voted to confirm Pompeo. They werent angry that Whitehouse didnt do the impossible they are angry that he was confirming Trumps horrible appointees. The guy played the amnesia card when the crowd demanded to know if there were any other Trump nominees he would confirm. Bad thing for the senator that they had a printed out list of the rest lol People are angry and rightfully so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AefwYjYkK6s

 

[B-Dubs]

Senate leadership on either side don't want the death of the filibuster. They not only know it'll swing back the other way, but they like using obstruction as an excuse to not do things they don't actually want to do (while saying they do want to do them).

I don't think it's going anywhere.. And it it does? So what. Be consistent and let republicans own the whole shit show and all of the fallout of their horrible policies. No excuses (again, this is what Mitch McConnell doesn't actually want and is why we'll keep the filibuster).

The GOP under Bush? No, they wouldn't risk it. The current GOP? The ones trying to rig the vote and disenfranchise the poor and minorities across the country? The ones who tried to steal an election in North Carolina and then when that didn't work try to strip the incoming Governor of his powers? The GOP that won't even pretend to investigate the biggest political scandal of all time? That GOP? I don't trust them as far as I can throw them.

Except you wind up hurting a lot of people in the meantime and the people mad at you right now will get even more mad because odds are they have no idea how any of this actually works in the first place.

 

[Chichikov]

Not so much:

https://www.cambridge.org/core/serv...-interest-groups-and-average-citizens-div.pdf
https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...-citizensdiv/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B

http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/is-america-an-oligarchy

FYI, this study is not exactly settled science, there were quite a few serious researchers who criticize their methodology and conclusions, though of course there were those who agreed with them.

I don't think anyone is arguing that rich people don't have an outsized influence on American politics (at least I haven't seen a serious argument about that) but there were some pretty serious* arguments why median voters do have influence on policy.

* at least to my unprofessional (and let's be honest, skimming) eye.

I don't want to turn it into a thread about that study, we had a few of them already, but you'll be able to find said criticism with a quick google search, even if you disagree with them, it's worthwhile understanding them.

 

[MrNelson]

oh yeah i totally understand the strategy here, i just find it amusing

Considering the amount of people that are calling for heads because they see a (D) next to a 'Yea' on something Trump related rather than looking at the bigger picture (on some of them at least), it wouldn't have shocked me if you didn't.

 

[LewieP]

I'll never get over framing Sanders as the "far left". He's pretty moderate, and most of his positions are well grounded in conventional economics. He only looks radical when compared to the rest of the political establishment.

 

[Jobbs]

The GOP under Bush? No, they wouldn't risk it. The current GOP? The ones trying to rig the vote and disenfranchise the poor and minorities across the country? The ones who tried to steal and election in North Carolina and then when that didn't work try to strip the incoming Governor of his powers? That GOP? I don't trust them as far as I can throw them.

Except you wind up hurting a lot of people in the meantime and the people mad at you right now will get even more mad because odds are they have no idea how any of this actually works in the first place.

Absolute obstruction worked well for the republicans when the democrats had a charismatic and squeaky clean president in the whitehouse. You're saying democrats shouldn't try it when the GOP has a fucking asshole in office who is associated with putin and everything is a raging dumpster fire? "I refuse to work with the kremlin" is powerful.

Say no to all of it. Don't even associate with this mess and reap the rewards in 2018/2020.

 

[kirblar]

Absolute obstruction worked well for the republicans when the democrats had a charismatic and squeaky clean president in the whitehouse. You're saying democrats shouldn't try it when the GOP has a fucking asshole in office and everything is a raging dumpster fire?

Say no to all of it. Don't even associate with this mess and reap the rewards in 2018/2020.

They're going to fillibuster Gorsuch. They can fillibuster two things - SC nominees, and legislation. And they will do both until either 2019 arrives or McConnell kills it.

Their votes on nominees have been completely ceremonial up until now (Puzder looks like he's in trouble.)

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Absolute obstruction worked well for the republicans when the democrats had a charismatic and squeaky clean president in the whitehouse. You're saying democrats shouldn't try it when the GOP has a fucking asshole in office who is associated putin and everything is a raging dumpster fire?

Say no to all of it. Don't even associate with this mess and reap the rewards in 2018/2020.

We haven't seen anything on the legislative front yet. This is about cabinet votes and there were plenty of GOP votes for Obama cabinet members in 2009.

 

[wandering]

But I thought neoliberalism was a made up word!

When people use it against leftists and progressives instead of free market capitalists, yeah it is

 

[whyamihere]

It would be one thing if they used the nuclear option to get a bunch of awesome shit done. Instead (to take the LiberalGAF line) allowed themselves to get played by Republicans for 5 years before using it to get 3 appeals court nominees seated.

Either Democrats don't want to enact any progressive reform (my position) or they're hopelessly terrible at politics. Either way, they have to go.

wat

Court of Appeals:

Patricia Ann Millett (56-38)
Nina Pillard (51-44)
Robert L. Wilkins (55-43)
John B. Owens (56-43)
Michelle Friedland (51-40) (YOU MIGHT RECOGNIZE THIS NAME FROM RECENT EVENTS)
David Jeremiah Barron (53-45)
Pamela Harris (50-43)

District Courts:

Vince Girdhari Chhabria (58-41)
Gerald Austin McHugh, Jr. (59-41)
Theodore D. Chuang (53-42)
Richard Franklin Boulware II (58-35)
Staci Michelle Yandle (52-44)
Ronnie L. White (53-44)
Randolph D. Moss (54-45)
Victor Allen Bolden (49-46)
Stephen R. Bough (51-38)
Wilhelmina Wright (58-36)
Paula Xinis (53-34)

Unless you mean there were only 3 judges on the DC Court of Appeals, yes, but that's an extremely important court and the filibuster would've been done anyway for cabinet-level positions and these judges this year. As will the filibuster for SCOTUS judges.

 

[B-Dubs]

Absolute obstruction worked well for the republicans when the democrats had a charismatic and squeaky clean president in the whitehouse. You're saying democrats shouldn't try it when the GOP has a fucking asshole in office and everything is a raging dumpster fire?

Say no to all of it. Don't even associate with this mess and reap the rewards in 2018/2020.

I'm saying they:

1. have 0 power to do so
2. not everyone lives in a district or state that will allow that sort of obstruction

You have to understand, part of the reason it worked so well for the GOP is they gerrymandered the fuck out of this country when they came in on the 2010 wave. They created safe seats all over the damn place, the Dems currently don't have that same luxury. Some do, but a lot of them don't. They have to deal with purple or lean-R districts/states. Guys like Manchin are literally the best that can be gotten in states like West Virginia.

When the GOP did it they did it from a position of power. Unfortunately the Dems don't have that luxury.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Not exactly seeing the GOP obstruction in these vote tallies. Now you can argue the merits of the people being nominated being much different but this idea that the GOP just rode the obstruction wave to victory doesn't match the facts when it comes to cabinet members.

https://www.senate.gov/reference/Obama_cabinet.htm

 

[leroidys]

It doesn't have to be this way. We can build a new party if we reject easy solutions and commit to doing real work at the municipal level. Take a look at Kshama Sawant's example in Seattle:

http://www.newyorker.com/news/benja...-minimum-wage-movement-entered-the-mainstream

More recently, she led the effort to get Seattle to divest from Wells Fargo for their support of the Dakota Access pipeline:
http://www.king5.com/news/local/sea...s-fargo-over-dakota-access-pipeline/395337991

She takes credit for this shit, but passing the $15 minimum wage didn't have much to do with her at all. Just this past election we passed a statewide ballot initiative to bump the minimum wage to $13.50, and have mandatory PTO for hourly employees. Also the wells fargo divestment was unanimous.

 

[reckless]

Here is a town hall where Senator Whitehouse was asked by the crowd why he voted to confirm Pompeo. They werent angry that Whitehouse didnt do the impossible they are angry that he was confirming Trumps horrible appointees. The guy played the amnesia card when the crowd demanded to know if there were any other Trump nominees he would confirm. Bad thing for the senator that they had a printed out list of the rest lol People are angry and rightfully so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AefwYjYkK6s

Him and every other democrat could vote against every appointee and it wouldn't matter they would all get confirmed.

 

[Aeriscloud]

Time to grow a backbone and face the voting members of your party.

We need you, and you need us.

 

[water_wendi]

im pretty sure Republicans won in spite of total obstructionism and not because of it. Congressional approval ratings were in the toilet in part because of their ability to do nothing but nothing.

im of the opinion that you should obstruct to the best of your ability any proposal that is not good for the country or a person that is unfit to serve. If they bring forth anything worthwhile then it would be a mistake to oppose it. im not expecting a GOP controlled Congress to put forth anything good for the country so even acting with principles would effectively mean you are going to be fighting nearly everything that comes along on its merit.

Him and every other democrat could vote against every appointee and it wouldn't matter they would all get confirmed.

Thats not an excuse. If they cannot have the courage to do a symbolic vote against people who are clearly not fit to serve then how are they going to be counted on when it really matters?

 

[Chichikov]

While I think that focusing on the cabinet nominations is a bit of a waste of energy, this shit is symbolic at best, I don't mind people getting involved. I don't know if this would have been my focus, but whatever, I can't see it hurting anything and getting into the habit of doing grassroot work and putting some practice reps in it is invaluable.

 

[whyamihere]

I'm sure they will.




https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/

I mean, do you get what those scores mean though? It means that given how their states voted, you'd expect the Senators to vote X amount of times with Trump.

West Virginia went 42.2% for Trump. You'd expect Manchin agree with Trump's cabinet votes 99.6% of the time. He's confirmed 75% of the cabinet members so far. That's 24.6% less than you'd expect given his state. That's the 11th most defiant member of the Senate.

I think that Manchin is pretty bad and he often frustrates me, but what you linked to kind of proves Manchin's point.

 

[Muppet of a Man]

I'll never get over framing Sanders as the "far left". He's pretty moderate, and most of his positions are well grounded in conventional economics. He only looks radical when compared to the rest of the political establishment.

This. Americans and the American political system are both full of shit.

 

[Ostrava]

These people just want to feel as though the party is actually fighting for them. It's not enough to just vote no on a cabinet pick, the DNC leadership is so lost right now

 

[B-Dubs]

These people just want to feel as though the party is actually fighting for them. It's not enough to just vote no on a cabinet pick. The DNC leadership is so lost right now

Literally all they can do is vote no right now. They have no way of stopping anything that's happened so far. If you want them to stop Trump's cabinet from being confirmed then you have no idea how the Senate works.

 

[whyamihere]

Literally all they can do is vote no right now. They have no way of stopping anything that's happened so far.

There's also been only one non-cabinet vote in the Senate so far.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Absolute obstruction worked well for the republicans when the democrats had a charismatic and squeaky clean president in the whitehouse. You're saying democrats shouldn't try it when the GOP has a fucking asshole in office who is associated with putin and everything is a raging dumpster fire? "I refuse to work with the kremlin" is powerful.

Say no to all of it. Don't even associate with this mess and reap the rewards in 2018/2020.

GOP actually had the legal ability to obstruct.... thanks to Democratic voters not giving a shit very much over several mid term elections...


Democrats right now have fuck all power, like zero beyond the filibuster that can be nuked at any moment...

 

[Chichikov]

I'll never get over framing Sanders as the "far left". He's pretty moderate, and most of his positions are well grounded in conventional economics. He only looks radical when compared to the rest of the political establishment.

He's not even a radical when compared to Hillary or Obama.
Seriously, he's slightly to the left the Democratic party consensus, and in practical terms, it's very hard to imagine a bill that would have come from congress that Sanders would've signed but a generic Democrat wouldn't (and vice versa).

 

[Ostrava]

Literally all they can do is vote no right now. They have no way of stopping anything that's happened so far. If you want them to stop Trump's cabinet from being confirmed then you have no idea how the Senate works.

That's why I said feel, the DNC has a problem with marketing themselves, people just don't feel like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are willing to fight the good fight.

 

[reckless]

Thats not an excuse. If they cannot have the courage to do a symbolic vote against people who are clearly not fit to serve then how are they going to be counted on when it really matters?

I mean, it literally doesn't matter and won't change a thing seems like an alright excuse. On votes that actually had any possibility of mattering like Devos he voted no, even though everyone already knew she was getting confirmed.

 

[B-Dubs]

That's why I said feel, the DNC has a problem with marketing themselves, people just don't feel like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are willing to fight the good fight.

That's because they came off of the GOP literally obstructing everything, didn't pay attention to the reality in the Senate, and now expect the exact same from the Dems when it's literally impossible on these votes.

 

[sugarhigh4242]

She takes credit for this shit, but passing the $15 minimum wage didn't have much to do with her at all.

oh ok, there's dozens of local and national stories crediting her, but i'll take your unsubstantiated word for it, friendo.

The cornerstone of Sawant's campaign was her call for a $15 minimum wage, an issue the local press credited her with placing on the city's agenda.

http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/24/news/economy/seattle-marxist-minimum-wage/

If the Seattle City Council passes a $15 wage in the coming months (as appears likely), Sawant will appropriately get credit for coming out of nowhere to commandeer the city’s political agenda.

Who had heard of her before last August*? For that matter, who (aside from Socialist Alternative newspaper subscribers) had a quick jump to a $15 wage on their radar a year ago? Yet the political fear of Sawant’s organizing skill has put a radical economic policy on greased rails. In process-loving Seattle, the minimum wage is happening as quickly as a lightning strike.

http://blogs.seattletimes.com/opini...t-has-already-won-the-seattle-15-wage-debate/

Sawant, a native of India, became the first socialist elected to citywide office in Seattle in decades when she toppled a four-term incumbent in 2013. She quickly played a pivotal role in bringing about Seattle’s $15 minimum wage law, the most aggressive of its kind in any major U.S. city.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/06/kshama-sawant-living-wage_n_7191276.html

Sawant, a socialist activist and part-time economics professor, was one of four people arrested when they stayed in the middle of a street at the protest calling for a $15 minimum wage for all workers at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. According to the Seattle Times, the other people arrested were a cargo handler, a former airport worker and a church reverend.

http://www.commondreams.org/news/20...ant-among-those-arrested-minimum-wage-protest

The group called 15 Now had threatened to force this $15 per hour minimum wage initiative onto the November ballot through an initiative petition drive if the city council did not itself enact a wage increase. The city council, however, pushed by Mayor Murray, enacted its own ordinance to increase the minimum wage. This ordinance satisfied 15 Now activists, who ceased trying to collect signatures for their initiative. 15 Now activists, led by then newly elected councilmember and self-proclaimed socialist Kshama Sawant, said they would not compromise with a minimum wage of lower than $15 per hour or an increase that takes effect for big companies in phases rather than all at once. The activists, however, were satisfied by the council-enacted ordinance that allowed for a three-year phase-in for large businesses.[2][3][2][4]

https://ballotpedia.org/City_of_Seattle_$15_Per_Hour_Minimum_Wage_Initiative_(November_2014)

Sawant is a key voice in all of this. The $15-an-hour wage floor is her signature issue, and she’s on the mayor’s committee. She says she will continue working with the committee to come up with a substantive proposal, but says if that fails, she thinks workers should pursue alternatives such as an initiative.

http://knkx.org/post/group-pushing-15hour-minimum-wage-seattle-plans-file-ballot-initiative-language

http://knkx.org/post/seattle-group-files-15-minimum-wage-initiative

 

[water_wendi]

I mean, it literally doesn't matter and won't change a thing seems like an alright excuse. On votes that actually had any possibility of mattering like Devos he voted no, even though everyone already knew she was getting confirmed.

i can see voting for something that is good for the country or a pick for someone is qualified but in the Whitehouse example he voted for fucking Pompeo. If there was a vote to declare war on Iran, and its impossible for Dems to stop it, would you be okay with them voting for it?

And he voted for Pompeo.. for what? Political favors from the GOP? lol At the expense of his base?

edit:
And you know what even worse than that. When the fallout from these disastrous appointments hit their merely symbolic vote becomes a prediction that they can point to in their favor.

 

[fabricated backlash]

Those aren't Bernie stans. They're members of your own party begging you to grow a backbone!

Which makes the reaction all the more funny. Spinelessly trying to wriggle out of facing the music... just poetic really.

 

[Inuhanyou]

Lol. No corporatists should be spared. Fuck em.

If they can't even take heat about taking a hardline against trump on no compromise issues, fuck em even harder.

 

[Orbis Tabula]

I'm okay with putting some pressure on, as long as people do it effectively. Smart pressure, but yeah, let's hold these people accountable to us.

 

[studyguy]

Yeah grow a backbone Senate dems! What do you mean you can't block a cabinet position when you literally don't have enough votes to block without Republican bipartisan help! Sad!

 

[water_wendi]

Yeah grow a backbone Senate dems! What do you mean you can't block a cabinet position when you literally don't have enough votes to block without Republican bipartisan help! Sad!

So they should vote for people or things that arent good just because their vote wouldnt effect the outcome?

 

[sugarhigh4242]

I'm okay with putting some pressure on, as long as people do it effectively. Smart pressure, but yeah, let's hold these people accountable to us.

What level of pressure could be ineffective at this point?