Support NeoGAF

[KingK]

Some do. Sure but I wouldn't say that's leftist. But center-left.

I would disagree. If your definition of the center-left is the Democratic party, then the Nordic countries are definitely leftist.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

If someone doesn't know medicare is government-run then yes they are uninformed, probably not stupid, but they just don't have the necessary information required to have an opinion on healthcare.

And if this is the case for the majority of people, then the education/political system has failed and 'democracy' isn't really democracy, it's open to whoever can lie most convincingly.

Your imagining a world that doesn't exist. You should look at how and why people vote the way they do. Its not always ignorance. They have a reason.

There's a lot of political science research on this. The problem isn't information being hidden.

Yes that would be extremely useful, but with the actual facts and policy endorsements that would support working class people. The left needs a huge campaign of agitation and fire/brimstone attitude towards the establishment. Why any so-called progressive or liberal would be opposed to this (when it would benefit them) is beyond me. Msnbc isn't it either, not by a long shot.

Because that's not how liberalism operates. And its not what drives its votes.

Its how the far left/marxism/class above all else does. You want tribal politics and that's how it seems to me you see politics. Most democrats and center-left (this includes democratic socialism) don't operate that way. That's why you can agree on policy on occasion but one sees the other as some evil which is compromising those ideas.

this is the same process with the tea party and republicans.

I would disagree. If your definition of the center-left is the Democratic party, then the Nordic countries are definitely leftist.

They're both center-left. The current political scene is more "socialistic" in Scandinavia and they have parties farther to the left. But the democratic party is center left. I've had this argument multiple times. What happens is you confuse the big tent political parties in the US with specialized parties in Europe. Much fairer comparisons are with more bicameral countries like Spain, the UK and France.

 

[pigeon]

I don't believe you're understanding the nuance of my argument here. I made a visual aid.

Functionally, the end result before Cantor and after is that few if any bills were going to get passed. But, prior to Cantor, there were Republicans who indisputably had signaled they were willing to talk about immigration reform (it's what cost Cantor his seat, remember?), and there were mechanics in place to at least allow relatively (I stress this: RELATIVELY) saner heads prevail so the debt crisis didn't go even further.

Now, we won't even have that. So, whereas in both scenarios we were unlikely to pass bills, in one of these scenarios there was an ember, in the other it has been blown out by a tornado.

Sure, but who cares? The scenario where we actually pass immigration reform is the scenario where Democrats control the House, or where moderate Republicans actually attempt to stage a breakaway from their insane party. That scenario got more likely.

 

[KingK]

They're both center-left. The current political scene is more "socialistic" in Scandinavia and they have parties farther to the left. But the democratic party is center left. I've had this argument multiple times. What happens is you confuse the big tent political parties in the US with specialized parties in Europe. Much fairer comparisons are with more bicameral countries like Spain, the UK and France.

Eh, I guess I can sorta see where you're coming from. If you include the broad spectrum going all the way to Communism as your definition of leftist, then yeah, I guess you could say anything from mixed-economy democratic-socialism up to and including Obama would be center-left. But there is a very real difference along the spectrum between Obama and Bernie Sanders, and I don't think it's really all that useful or descriptive to identify both of them as center-left.

 

[rocketknight]

It's so bizarre that half of our government is just waiting around twiddling their fingers, ready to Do Things, and the other half of our government is infighting about whether to Do No Things or dissolve the government altogether. Everywhere you go, news reports say things like "well, whether we can pass immigration reform depends on the GOP" or "well, whether or not we can not default on our debts for no reason depends on the GOP" with completely straight faces. Like, at this point it's just assumed that Democrats are dutifully sitting at their desks ready to perform the functions of government, and we're all just waiting for Republicans to quit banging blindly on a million typewriters and flinging their own shit around, and this is treated as a totally normal state for our country to be in.

 

[speculawyer]

Will see you during the Cantor/Boehner 2016 run.

Well, my thinking is that there is no way that greedy egotistical jerk would give up his seat. But that is a way he could do it and still be a greedy egotistical jerk.


BTW, I can see how Cantor would lose. I mean really . . . the guy is just a jerk. And can you stand to listen to him for more than a minute or two? That voice he has is quite grating. I think the jerk factor probably really hurt him.

 

[benjipwns]

Eh, I guess I can sorta see where you're coming from. If you include the broad spectrum going all the way to Communism as your definition of leftist, then yeah, I guess you could say anything from mixed-economy democratic-socialism up to and including Obama would be center-left. But there is a very real difference along the spectrum between Obama and Bernie Sanders, and I don't think it's really all that useful or descriptive to identify both of them as center-left.

It really all depends on how one defines "left" and "right" for any of this.

The standard left-right spectrum is incredibly uninformative and nonsensical.

 

[thepotatoman]

McConnel on Warren's Student Loan bill failing in the senate:

"The Senate Democrats' bill isn't really about students at all. It's really all about Senate Democrats," said Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky), on the floor. "They want an issue to campaign on to save their own hides this November."

How many times have they used this framing now? Every single time Democrats do anything popular, this is their response. It's so frustrating to see this excuse pop up every single damn week now.

 

[PhoenixDark]

McConnel on Warren's Student Loan bill failing in the senate:



How many times have they used this framing now? Every single time Democrats do anything popular, this is their response. It's so frustrating to see this excuse pop up every single damn week now.

Is he wrong? The bill includes the Buffet Rule, which we all know republicans will never support under any circumstances. If Warren, Reid, etc were actually interested in passing the legislation they would have at least tried to find a bipartisan way to pay for it. I'm not saying that would have worked, I'm just saying the way this was handled was pure politics for the midterms.

 

[Coriolanus]

Is he wrong? The bill includes the Buffet Rule, which we all know republicans will never support under any circumstances. If Warren, Reid, etc were actually interested in passing the legislation they would have at least tried to find a bipartisan way to pay for it. I'm not saying that would have worked, I'm just saying the way this was handled was pure politics for the midterms.

Yes. Not all things democrats do are fueled solely by political reasons. The same applies for republicans occasionaly, obviously. Warren should be given at the very least the benefit of the doubt on her "true believer" status.

Also when you say "i'm not saying that woulda have worked", we know you're actually saying "that would not have worked".

 

[PhoenixDark]

Yes. Not all things democrats do are fueled solely by political reasons. The same applies for republicans occasionaly, obviously. Warren should be given at the very least the benefit of the doubt on her "true believer" status.

Also when you say "i'm not saying that woulda have worked", we know you're actually saying "that would not have worked".

True believers play politics all the time. Warren has worked with Rand Paul in the senate, we know what it looks like when she wants to pass something. My problem with this bill is that it's set up like a host of other political bills democrats have tried in the past, specifically 2012.

You're right, I doubt this would pass regardless. But I would have liked an actual attempt to pass it by getting a few republicans on board.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Obama explained that he wants to keep the Senate not because Democrats are so perfect, but because Republicans are not a functioning party, “But I got to tell you, I really want to keep a Democratic Senate. And I want to tell you that I want to keep a Democratic Senate not because I think Democrats have a monopoly on wisdom. Sometimes people ask me what would I like for Father’s Day or Christmas or my birthday, and pretty close to the top of my list is usually a loyal and rational opposition.” This drew laughter. He continued, “We want a Republican Party that can function and with which we can negotiate and compromise and help move the country forward. But unfortunately, that’s not what we’re seeing in Washington right now from the Republicans.”

The President said that it’s urgent that Democrats vote because he needs Congressional action — he can’t fix everything from the White House, “On every one of these subjects, whether it’s climate change or minimum wage, I’m taking steps that don’t require congressional action, but we can make a whole lot more progress if we’re voting in the midterms.”

“You got to feel in your gut that this is really important and put everything you got into it. That’s what I’m going to do — despite having told Michelle that I’d already run my last campaign,” he said drawing more laughter. “It turns out I had to tell her I got one more left.”

My man telling it how it is.

 

[Coriolanus]

True believers play politics all the time. Warren has worked with Rand Paul in the senate, we know what it looks like when she wants to pass something. My problem with this bill is that it's set up like a host of other political bills democrats have tried in the past, specifically 2012.

You're right, I doubt this would pass regardless. But I would have liked an actual attempt to pass it by getting a few republicans on board.

They had that. They did not have enough of that, obviously, but they had that. Additionally, and I might be remembering this incorrectly, but wasn't the bill in it's current form already a compromise, with Warren originally seeking a far more vigorous reduction in the interest rates?

I'd say it's more likely that we'll see even more of this sort of thing, what with most republicans being scared shitless after the Cantor development, and wanting to avoid any semblance of compromise for fear of suffering the same fate.

 

[Wilsongt]

Hey guys, are we talking about corporate state that steals and murders regularly but supporting the two parties and their elites will really change things this time as long as we don't rock the boat, it's a Fabian strategy I promise, they're really on our side?

My man telling it how it is.

Excuse maker in chief. Blaming everyone else but himself.

 

[Aaron]

Silly Democrats, trying to do stuff to get reelected. They need to be more like the Republicans, and be actively against doing anything to get reelected. Because if there's so much as a hint they might be for doing actual work, they get replaced by a tea party stooge.

 

[Zona]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/11/obama-cantor-immigration_n_5486448.html
I don't actually believe he was a bigot btw, just a coward and completely unprincipled, he didn't evolve, he just refused to show his real opinion. Obama's "accomplishments" have generally been a result of protests from below, pressure from the left, which is how it often works and that's fine, but it means he isn't responsible for those victories, because he would have avoided them if there was no fire to his feet.

"I agree with you, I want to do it, now make me do it." A leftward swing in this country's never going to happen without widespread pressure from below. The fight for the last 30 years or so has been to keep from swinging even further right then we did. Thanks to increasing demographic changes we finally have a chance to begin dragging the discourse back to the left but it will not and can not happen all at once. And frankly to me the pressure the lefts base, and especially the far-left, exerts has to be more carefully directed and focused then it tends to be. Reading about the protests at the 3rd Summit of the Americas in Direct Action: An Ethnography made me continually shake my head. If you try and achieve everything at once you will get nothing.

If someone doesn't know medicare is government-run then yes they are uninformed, probably not stupid, but they just don't have the necessary information required to have an opinion on healthcare.

We live in the internet age. Almost the sum and total of all human knowledge is available at the press of a button for the majority of the population. Someone who thinks that medicare isn't government run healthcare very likely already holds that belief so strongly that Jesus himself descending on a pillar of light to correct them wouldn't be believed. Human psychology being what it is confirmation bias, echo chambers, willful ignorance, and cognitive dissidence are real things that have unfortunately large effects.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Grimes leading McConnell 49-46 in a new Kentucky poll

https://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/51102/images/KYMagellanToplines.pdf

 

[Wilsongt]

Grimes leading McConnell 49-46 in a new Kentucky poll

https://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/51102/images/KYMagellanToplines.pdf

Skewed.

 

[Plinko]

I think the upcoming split of the GOP because of the Tea Party is going to be the biggest political story of the next decade, if not longer.

You can bet things are already shifting into overdrive behind the scenes because of what happened to Cantor.

Also, who else can't wait for the GOP presidential primaries in 2015/16? These people are going to have to say some INSANE stuff to appeal to the far, far right during the primary.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Skewed.

Well they did poll 26% more dems than republicans.

(I know, I know.)

 

[Wilsongt]

Outgoing Texas Governor Rick Perry compared homosexuality to alcoholism before a San Francisco crowd Wednesday night.

At an event hosted by the non-partisan Commonwealth Club of California, Perry was asked about “reparative therapy,” in which “ex-gay” therapies can supposedly cure homosexuality. The practice has been denounced by the American Psychological Association, but was adopted this month into the Texas GOP platform.


“Whether or not you feel compelled to follow a particular lifestyle or not, you have the ability to decide not to do that,” Perry replied. “I may have the genetic coding that I’m inclined to be an alcoholic, but I have the desire not to do that, and I look at the homosexual issue the same way.”

According to those present, the comment elicited some murmurs from the audience.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Skewed.

But it's likely voters! Based on people who voted in 2010!

That looks pretty dire for McConnell actually.

 

[Avon Barksdale]

So stupid.

 

[Mike M]

Losing McConnell and Cantor in the same election year would be amazing.

 

[Wilsongt]

Losing McConnell and Cantor in the same election year would be amazing.

Congress would be substantially less ugly: One less turtle and someone who constantly looks as if he smelled shit.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Can't wait for punditry inc. Nate Silver to show how McConnell still has an 80% chance of getting re-elected even though his opponent is a point shy of 50 in a Republican-affiliated poll of only people who voted in 2010.

 

[Mike M]

McConnell's face really is abnormally punchable.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

As completely fucked as this is, it's actually an evolution forward for conservatives to not make it all out to be a choice anymore. Give em another 100 years, they'll come around!

 

[AndyD]

As completely fucked as this is, it's actually an evolution forward for conservatives to not make it all out to be a choice anymore. Give em another 100 years, they'll come around!

Indeed. Acknowledging it's genetic and immutable is a huge step forward and completely counter to what many advocate (choice).

 

[Arrowgigantic]

Straight people who believe homosexuality is a choice are always, always, not actually straight.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Boehner on why Cantor lost:

You have to understand, the American people are being squeezed by Obama's policies. The economy is not growing. Incomes aren't growing. We're not creating enough jobs. And two-thirds of America have seen no increase in their wages but their food prices are going up, their gas prices are going up, and their health insurance prices are going up. And so there's a lot of frustration that's out there, and they look to Washington, and wonder why we can't resolve these issues. And they're hard to resolve when you've got a president who won't engage.

So the GOP is losing elections because of Obama? Alrighty.

 

[RustyNails]

Sure, but who cares? The scenario where we actually pass immigration reform is the scenario where Democrats control the House, or where moderate Republicans actually attempt to stage a breakaway from their insane party. That scenario got more likely.

This is exactly what I meant earlier when I said the only difference that mattered is if democrats win the house. They wont, so republicans can play musical chairs all they want.

 

[RustyNails]

But it's likely voters! Based on people who voted in 2010!

That looks pretty dire for McConnell actually.

But what does McConnell's internal polling say? I am thinking he doesn't have an internal polling and instead his campaign manager reads Turtle and the Hare every night before he goes to bed/sea.

 

[Oblivion]

McConnel on Warren's Student Loan bill failing in the senate:



How many times have they used this framing now? Every single time Democrats do anything popular, this is their response. It's so frustrating to see this excuse pop up every single damn week now.

So Democrats don't want to help poor people? Is McConnell implying they're secret Republicans?

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Can't wait for punditry inc. Nate Silver to show how McConnell still has an 80% chance of getting re-elected even though his opponent is a point shy of 50 in a Republican-affiliated poll of only people who voted in 2010.

Silvers official model hasn't even come out. And I pretty much everybody but hopeful thinkers knows McConnell will most likely win. Things have to change. I don't know how they can.

 

[RustyNails]

Cantor's defeat will certainly impact Mitch negatively. Could mean more enthusiasm for Grimes.

 

[speculawyer]

Can't wait for punditry inc. Nate Silver to show how McConnell still has an 80% chance of getting re-elected even though his opponent is a point shy of 50 in a Republican-affiliated poll of only people who voted in 2010.

Well nothing wrong with that kind of analysis. You can disagree with it, it is just a projection.

I think as is, McConnell will most likely win. But there is a chance of some scandal, dumb rape quote, etc. that tips the scale in her favor.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Cantor's defeat will certainly impact Mitch negatively. Could mean more enthusiasm for Grimes.

How?

 

[AntoneM]

True believers play politics all the time. Warren has worked with Rand Paul in the senate, we know what it looks like when she wants to pass something. My problem with this bill is that it's set up like a host of other political bills democrats have tried in the past, specifically 2012.

You're right, I doubt this would pass regardless. But I would have liked an actual attempt to pass it by getting a few republicans on board.

My name is PD, I like to complain about Obama meetting Repulicans half way before even starting negotiations but think that Democrats in the Senate should only pass legislation that Republicans in the House might approve of.

 

[PhoenixDark]

My name is PD, I like to complain about Obama meetting Repulicans half way before even starting negotiations but think that Democrats in the Senate should only pass legislation that Republicans in the House might approve of.

Where did I say Warren should have offered to pay for the bill with social security cuts or something? I said it would have made sense to get a republican co-sponsor and try to come up with some that could actually pass the senate. Would it work? Probably not.

 

[AntoneM]

Where did I say Warren should have offered to pay for the bill with social security cuts or something? I said it would have made sense to get a republican co-sponsor and try to come up with some that could actually pass the senate. Would it work? Probably not.

If republicans wanted to negotiate or debate on it they on it they would have. The problem is they have no counter proposals to give. How are you supposrt to get a bipartisan co-sponsor from a party that doesn't want to change the way things are in the first place? Heck, just making it through the committee is a 1/4 chance.

There literally is no reason to not just draft a bill for free higher education for all since it has as much chance at passing as any change at all. That would be pandering and electioneering.

 

[speculawyer]

Meh. At this point I kinda love hearing them spout the nonsense. It merely cements their position on the wrong side of history. We are over the hump and the end game has already been decided.

I look forward to watching Rick Perry in the clown show known as the GOP presidential primaries!

 

[PhoenixDark]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hillary-gay-marriage-npr-terry-gross

yea...it's time for Hillary to just shut up and let the "news cycle" move on without her for a bit.

 

[RustyNails]

How?

That its a start of something. They threw out the 2nd most powerful Congressman, we can throw out the 2nd most powerful Senator, etc.

At least I hope. I just dont want to see Mitch face for another 6 years. Is it asking too much dammit.

 

[Black Mamba]

WASHINGTON—Looking back on his 13-year tenure in the House of Representatives with reverence, resigning House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) reflected on the long list of accomplishments he had thwarted during his time in office, sources confirmed Thursday. “From obstructing a jobs bill to put Americans back to work in 2011, to derailing gun control measures any time they reached my desk, I feel blessed to have had such an incredible run of preventing productive policies, and even a few pieces of landmark legislation, from ever passing,” said Cantor, explaining that as a young man, he “never would have dreamed” that some day he would be in a position to hinder the entire American lawmaking process and completely neuter dozens of bills. “Of course, I’m disappointed because I thought I had many more years of impeding accomplishments ahead of me, and I’ll be the first to admit that I never quite managed to stall environmental policies as much as I would have liked. But at the end of the day, I’m very proud of how I helped Congress accomplish so little during my time in office.” Cantor added that he took solace that his legacy of hampering federal policy was secure, and trusted that “many, many more” in his party would be inspired to follow in his footsteps.

The Onion, how I love thee.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hillary-gay-marriage-npr-terry-gross

yea...it's time for Hillary to just shut up and let the "news cycle" move on without her for a bit.

Terry Gross is a great interviewer but I'm with Hilary here. It was set up like a trap of a question, and also not all that interesting or pertinent to policy now.

 

[Gotchaye]

Functionally, the end result before Cantor and after is that few if any bills were going to get passed. But, prior to Cantor, there were Republicans who indisputably had signaled they were willing to talk about immigration reform (it's what cost Cantor his seat, remember?), and there were mechanics in place to at least allow relatively (I stress this: RELATIVELY) saner heads prevail so the debt crisis didn't go even further.

Now, we won't even have that. So, whereas in both scenarios we were unlikely to pass bills, in one of these scenarios there was an ember, in the other it has been blown out by a tornado.

But the signalling was in many cases transparently dishonest - it was a strategy which was adopted in order to further the cause of obstruction. Republicans also spent a long time talking about how they would have been happy to come to an agreement on health care reform if Obama had only been willing to talk to them. The Republicans' problem was that they wanted nothing to get done, but they didn't want the general public to think that they wanted nothing to get done*. Cantor's problem was that his base believed him when he made noises about being willing to work with Obama. It wasn't an ember; it was an illusion which Obama spent quite a while wasting effort trying to fan. All that happened with immigration with Cantor's loss is that politics got more honest, and going forward it will be clearer to voters where the parties stand.

*Really, Republican politicians would just like immigration to stop being an issue, and they would be happy to see immigration reform get done if it accomplishes that, but no Republican politician can be seen to vote for an immigration reform proposal that Obama ends up signing.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Terry Gross is a great interviewer but I'm with Hilary here. It was set up like a trap of a question, and also not all that interesting or pertinent to policy now.

It's also something that realistically you can pin on a lot of politicians, including Obama. There was a time where gay marriage was almost universally disapproved of and Democrats would have gained nothing by outwardly supporting it. That is of course terrible and unfair, but that's politics.

 

[speculawyer]

Well . . . I wonder if Iraq is going to take over the headlines?


Of course the GOP is going to blame it all on Obama .. . but does that mean they want us back into Iraq? Yeah, go ahead and run on that platform.

And it Begins . .

Washington (AFP) - The top congressional Republican laid into President Barack Obama Thursday, accusing him of taking a "nap" on Iraq, while a lawmaker called for US air strikes to repel Islamist rebels advancing on Baghdad.

With jihadists capturing several large Iraqi cities, forcing hundreds of thousands of residents to flee, and threatening Baghdad, hawkish Senator John McCain called for "drastic measures" to reverse the tide and said Obama should sack his national security team for failed policies in the Middle East.

"Get a new national security team in place. You have been ill-served," he told Obama in a speech on the Senate floor.

House Speaker John Boehner angrily snapped that the Obama administration has seen the pressure on Iraq's government building for over a year but did little to help authorities there counter the insurgents.

"Now they've taken control of Mosul, they're 100 miles (160 kilometers) from Baghdad," Boehner told reporters.

"And what's the president doing? Taking a nap."

Senate Republican Lindsey Graham, who often joins McCain in his condemnation of Obama foreign policy, bluntly warned that a jihadist takeover in Iraq and neighboring Syria would create a "hell on earth."

http://news.yahoo.com/republicans-blast-obama-over-failed-iraq-policy-164846361.html

But here is the amazing part . . . I start reading the comments and the people seem to agree that we should not waste our blood & money there.

 

[RustyNails]

Can we send Lindsey Graham to go fight in Iraq?