Support NeoGAF

[Barzul]

Do you guys think he's still going to be using "Drain the Swamp" and "It's a rigged system!" in 4 years? No one would possibly buy that, right? I mean how is Hilary and debate questions still an issue lol, he really might be deranged.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Do you guys think he's still going to be using "Drain the Swamp" and "It's a rigged system!" in 4 years? No one would possibly buy that, right? I mean how is Hilary and debate questions still an issue lol, he really might be deranged.

In four years, we'll be lucky if he even realizes he isn't running against Hillary anymore.

 

[BoogieWoogie]

Do you guys think he's still going to be using "Drain the Swamp" and "It's a rigged system!" in 4 years? No one would possibly buy that, right? I mean how is Hilary and debate questions still an issue lol, he really might be deranged.

I don't see him making it that long but also, do you really think he'd be for a peaceful transition of power if he lost?

 

[Hubbl3]

Do you guys think he's still going to be using "Drain the Swamp" and "It's a rigged system!" in 4 years? No one would possibly buy that, right? I mean how is Hilary and debate questions still an issue lol, he really might be deranged.

He could blame Obama for all of his failings 4 years from now and his base would still eat it up.

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

Do you guys think he's still going to be using "Drain the Swamp" and "It's a rigged system!" in 4 years? No one would possibly buy that, right? I mean how is Hilary and debate questions still an issue lol, he really might be deranged.

No, which is why he's going to have to come up with something else if he wants to win

You can't run as anti-establishment​ if you are the establishment

 

[Diablos]

Trump might not be Pres in 4 years

 

[NullPointer]

The answers to the debate?

I can't get over just how much of a fucking moron this man is.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Do you guys think he's still going to be using "Drain the Swamp" and "It's a rigged system!" in 4 years? No one would possibly buy that, right? I mean how is Hilary and debate questions still an issue lol, he really might be deranged.

They ran on repeal and replace for 4 election cycles. The base loves nonsense slogans

 

[Deleted member 231381]

So are you proposing that Democrats stop talking about racial issues

Ish. It's a campaign issue when campaigning for the minority vote, it's not a campaign issue when not campaigning for the minority vote. Knowing your audience, basically - same reason you wouldn't campaign on white suburban issues in an audience of black Americans. But this is a relatively minor part.

and stop trying to help minorities, or...?

Absolutely not.

I don't think that what the Democrats say about minorities is, within reason, that important. I think what they have to say to certain communities is. We're talking post-industrial communities. The key points you have to understand is that: they want their communities to persist in some form. They were born out in the sticks. Their parents were born out in the sticks. Their parents' parents were born out in the sticks. Everyone they know, their entire way of life, was built in this community. Telling them to abandon that is like telling you that you'd be better off if you got a job in Sweden. It's probably true, but that's an enormous change. A new language, a new place, a new life - that's probably just not something you want. You're comfortable with your present friends and family and community, even if they're not economically the best option.

That means supporting the continued existing of these communities - at the worst, a slow and gradual managed decline. Jobs leaving these places is inevitable, but the pace at which these jobs leave needs to be allayed - they need to leave at roughly the same pace as which people can feasibly retrain, rather than having 25,000 mining jobs disappear in 2 years, as is the status quo. That might mean subsidising or supporting industries on scaling basis - some sort of bill that provides a tranche of funding with provisions that slowly reduce it over time automatically, giving people the opportunity to make plans with some degree of certainty.

The possibility of continuing to live in these communities while potentially working in cities also needs to be considered. For example, by improving public infrastructure to rural towns - trains, better roads, loosening consumer taxes on gas (in return for increasing it on major companies). Make living in Ruralstown and working in at least Nearby Smallcity more manageable. At the same time, this involves hiring large numbers of construction workers - good jobs that require only moderate skills, a good way of addressing problems at least in the short-run until more serious sticky plasters can be put in place.

Place more legal restrictions on big mega-companies like Walmart. In particular, do as much as possible to allow people to unionise. Encourage it, even - don't tax people on union subs, or allow them to claim it back on tax credits. Offer apprenticeship schemes that allow people to move from low- to high-skilled jobs within the same industry. Apply the same regulatory standard to imports as to domestic goods in terms of the minimum wage required at each part in the labour process and the worker's rights involved - that will repatriate some jobs where foreign countries refuse to meet that standard, and at the very least improve the standard of working rights in others. Aggressively support start-ups and SMEs that mostly hire unskilled labour. Stress the value of in-work benefits - pay some to get some. Offer child support for working parents, for example - it's a good one because it can't go to the undeserving because you need to have work to get it, but it doesn't punish those out of work because given they are out of work they have more time for their children (to an extent).

And you need to really hit the above. They are, by far and away, the biggest part of your message. Don't talk about 'the economy'. I don't know what an economy is. When you talk about GDP and growth, that's your GDP and growth, not theirs. Avoid abstract concepts wherever possible. Talk about the changes to their day-to-day lives that you can bring about. This is what Clinton really missed, I think, because she had at least some of the policies above (not enough), but she didn't run on them, didn't talk about them, they got left to die on her website.

There's a lot you can do that I think would have a lot of draw. Obviously this isn't going to draw every Trump supporter. I'd be surprised if it drew even 10% of Trump supporters. But 10% of Trump supporters switching sides is the Democratic presidency very firmly in the bag, without having to say "fuck minorities" even once.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

"I know these people hate you, Member of a Minority Group, but if we give them money, they won't hate you anymore!"

The gall to suggest this to minorities is staggering.

I poked my head into the brexit thread and things seem to be going swimmingly, now that the UK is up in arms about rocks and the colorcolour of their passports.

NPR has an article up about the possible ramifications for the car insurance industry in a world with self-driving cars.

So yeah, more jobs loss coming this way. Do we also have to consider mechanics and the like?

Absolutely. According to Google (small grain of salt) their cars have never caused an accident. Mechanics won't be that necessary, and also probably aren't qualified to fix these cars entirely anyway.

I've seen some arguments that people won't want to get these cars, but there's no way the insurance on a manual car would be anywhere as cheap as a self-driving car. It'll be like $20 a month for the Google car, $400 a month if you're driving yourself (any insurance on a self-driving car would basically be pure profit).

Edit:

.



Absolutely not.

I don't think that what the Democrats say about minorities is, within reason, that important. I think what they have to say to certain communities is. We're talking post-industrial communities. The key points you have to understand is that: they want their communities to persist in some form. They were born out in the sticks. Their parents were born out in the sticks. Their parents' parents were born out in the sticks. Everyone they know, their entire way of life, was built in this community. Telling them to abandon that is like telling you that you'd be better off if you got a job in Sweden. It's probably true, but that's an enormous change. A new language, a new place, a new life - that's probably just not something you want. You're comfortable with your present friends and family and community, even if they're not economically the best option.

That means supporting the continued existing of these communities - at the worst, a slow and gradual managed decline. Jobs leaving these places is inevitable, but the pace at which these jobs leave needs to be allayed - they need to leave at roughly the same pace as which people can feasibly retrain, rather than having 25,000 mining jobs disappear in 2 years, as is the status quo. That might mean subsidising or supporting industries on scaling basis - some sort of bill that provides a tranche of funding with provisions that slowly reduce it over time automatically, giving people the opportunity to make plans with some degree of certainty.

The possibility of continuing to live in these communities while potentially working in cities also needs to be considered. For example, by improving public infrastructure to rural towns - trains, better roads, loosening consumer taxes on gas (in return for increasing it on major companies). Make living in Ruralstown and working in at least Nearby Smallcity more manageable. At the same time, this involves hiring large numbers of construction workers - good jobs that require only moderate skills, a good way of addressing problems at least in the short-run until more serious sticky plasters can be put in place.

Place more legal restrictions on big mega-companies like Walmart. In particular, do as much as possible to allow people to unionise. Encourage it, even - don't tax people on union subs, or allow them to claim it back on tax credits. Offer apprenticeship schemes that allow people to move from low- to high-skilled jobs within the same industry. Apply the same regulatory standard to imports as to domestic goods in terms of the minimum wage required at each part in the labour process and the worker's rights involved - that will repatriate some jobs where foreign countries refuse to meet that standard, and at the very least improve the standard of working rights in others. Aggressively support start-ups and SMEs that mostly hire unskilled labour.

There's a lot you can do that I think would have a lot of draw. Obviously this isn't going to draw every Trump supporter. I'd be surprised if it drew even 10% of Trump supporters. But 10% of Trump supporters switching sides is the Democratic presidency very firmly in the bag, without having to say "fuck minorities" even once.

These places don't want any of this. Retraining is out, moving is out, working a service job is out. All of this is out. They want their mining jobs to last forever, pay $80K a year with benefits, with no school, training, or certification required.

 

[sazzy]

 

[Deleted member 231381]

"I know these people hate you, Member of a Minority Group, but if we give them money, they won't hate you anymore!"

The gall to suggest this to minorities is staggering.

Poverty is a significant contributor to crime. By reducing poverty, you reduce crime. You would never, ever say to me "I know your husband beat you, domestically abused woman, but if we give him money, he won't beat you any more!". You would be the first to back me in trying to tackle poverty to reduce crime. So why is it you are content to be grossly and offensively disingenuous on this particular topic?

These places don't want any of this. Retraining is out, moving is out, working a service job is out. All of this is out. They want their mining jobs to last forever, pay $80K a year with benefits, with no school, training, or certification required.

I didn't say they should move out or take up service jobs, but thank you for confirming my long-running suspicion you don't actually read my posts.

 

[Barzul]

No, which is why he's going to have to come up with something else if he wants to win

You can't run as anti-establishment​ if you are the establishment

This is exactly my line of thinking. I feel he probably has a core of 30% of the electorate who will believe whatever shit he spouts but that's not enough to win elections. As the incumbent you own whatever issues arise and exist during your term...the thing is I'm not sure he realizes that.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Poor white people don't care that much about being poor as long as there's an even poorer black community under them.

They only start caring about their current situation when poorer black people are now on their level (because the white people moved down).

 

[Maxim726X]

I see the President has just got his daily briefing

Say what you want about Maher, but he was correct last week- He has a bunch of enablers that surround him and feed into his bullshit. Insulated in his own universe, he believes he's the sane person in a world of lies and deceit.

Couple that with a news network and willing lackeys like Hannity, he never has to face the truth about anything.

 

[sc0la]

I see the President has just got his daily briefing

His staff should set up a little TV studio and CCTV to the Oval Office some attractive anchors reading the highlights to his daily intel briefs in between little ego softballs and obama bashing. TV is clearly his preferred ingestion method.

Edit:
They can straight up hire Colbert team for the fake secretly educational commercials in between segments. The country would be remarkably better off.

Trump might not be Pres in 4 years

We can only hope!

I like this reverse diablosing btw. Solbiading. Or something.

 

[nature boy]

Political Polls‏ @Politics_Polls 16m16 minutes ago

Trump Job Approval:
Approve 42%
Disapprove 58%

@Rasmussen_Poll 3/29-4/2

RASSSSSS!

 

[Agent Icebeezy]

These places don't want any of this. Retraining is out, moving is out, working a service job is out. All of this is out. They want their mining jobs to last forever, pay $80K a year with benefits, with no school, training, or certification required.

Success before work is only in the dictionary. They want the easy promise of working 30 years and then getting a pension. As an adjunct instructor for a university for almost 6 years, I see a lot of my students come from downtrodden areas that only had one large company and when the lights went out on that, the town fell into despair. Some get the message, but the overwhelming majority do not.

 

[teiresias]

RASSSSSS!

What's the change from the last?

 

[balladofwindfishes]

They want the easy promise of working 30 years and then getting a pension.

So they want to work for the government. 30 years of steady employment, good benefits, pension, structure.

But they hate those and want them gone and privatized. Where the jobs won't be steady. They won't have good benefits. And they won't have pensions. And likely won't work for 30 years at the same place.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

Poverty is a significant contributor to crime. By reducing poverty, you reduce crime. You would never, ever say to me "I know your husband beat you, domestically abused woman, but if we give him money, he won't beat you any more!". You would be the first to back me in trying to tackle poverty to reduce crime. So why is it you are content to be grossly and offensively disingenuous on this particular topic?

Actually, yes I'd find it equally reprehensible to say that we should reduce domestic violence by trying to get batterers better jobs.

Edit:and this poverty to crime thing you're mentioning isn't apples to apples. I don't believe stealing or selling drugs is immoral, only damaging in a utilitarian sense. Beating a spouse or being a racist are moral problems.

I didn't say they should move out or take up service jobs, but thank you for confirming my long-running suspicion you don't actually read my posts.

You literally mentioned transit to work in cities. They don't want that. They don't want to go anywhere near the gang-invested murder cities to work.

And you are also talking about service jobs when you talk about weening these towns off of the economies they have now. That necessarily implies moving to service jobs as non-service jobs will mostly dry up.

 

[Teggy]

Depending the outlet we are either at 39 or 41 against cloture for Gorsuch.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Success before work is only in the dictionary. They want the easy promise of working 30 years and then getting a pension. As an adjunct instructor for a university for almost 6 years, I see a lot of my students come from downtrodden areas that only had one large company and when the lights went out on that, the town fell into despair. Some get the message, but the overwhelming majority do not.

Being able to get a relatively secure job that didn't require much academic training, only vocational, and offered a certain security was a fundamental part of the American Dream. It wasn't some outlandish prospect; it actually existed. People had these jobs. These jobs are now disappearing, these prospects are disappearing. That represents a fundamental decrease in the quality of life for these people - often into outright poverty.

Your response is to say: they didn't get the message, these days you need to pull yourself up by your own bootstraps.

We're supposed to be the progressive party! We are meant to fight for the existence of these sorts of jobs (not the exact role, but the existence of jobs that can support and sustain a working class - not everyone is suited to academia). But here you are, a stone throw away from accepting the Randian message of: fuck 'em.

I thought we were the progressive party!

 

[BoogieWoogie]

What's the change from the last?

His fighting with the Freedom Caucus maybe? The Right didn't like that shit.

 

[The Technomancer]

Being able to get a relatively secure job that didn't require much academic training, only vocational, and offered a certain security was a fundamental part of the American Dream. It wasn't some outlandish prospect; it actually existed. People had these jobs. These jobs are now disappearing, these prospects are disappearing. That represents a fundamental decrease in the quality of life for these people - often into outright poverty.

Your response is to say: they didn't get the message, these days you need to pull yourself up by your own bootstraps.

We're supposed to be the progressive party! We are meant to fight for the existence of these sorts of jobs (not the exact role, but the existence of jobs that can support and sustain a working class - not everyone is suited to academia). But here you are, a stone throw away from accepting the Randian message of: fuck 'em.

I thought we were the progressive party!

We're supposed to fight to support people, to ensure that no-one is left behind, and to ensure that no-one is wanting of necessities, while making people happier if we can. There's nothing specific about a certain class of job in there. A labor optional future is one that I see ahead of us, one that's within grasp if we can manage to grab it, and one that's far preferable to propping up industries that a.) aren't needed and b.)are actively dangerous

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Depending the outlet we are either at 39 or 41 against cloture for Gorsuch.

Is this good or bad?

 

[Mac_Lane]

Warner is officially a no on cloture for Gorsuch.

41 democrats, here we goooooo.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Actually, yes I'd find it equally reprehensible to say that we should reduce domestic violence by trying to get batterers better jobs.

Or put another way: you are deeply sexist and actively enabling the continued domestic abuse of millions of women by resisting one of the few redresses to their suffering. So much for the progressives!

 

[teiresias]

His fighting with the Freedom Caucus maybe? The Right didn't like that shit.

No, I meant what were the numbers from the last Ras approval poll compared to these?

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Or put another way: you are deeply sexist and actively enabling the continued domestic abuse of millions of women by resisting one of the few redresses to their suffering. So much for the progressives!

You've called out people for less ridiculous posts than this

 

[dramatis]

Somebody page Foffy

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Crab, why are the most racist 35% of people in France just as racist as the most racist 35% of people in the US even though France's welfare system is much more generous?

 

[Deleted member 231381]

You've called out people for less ridiculous posts than this

I have, but my hope is that now Anthrax is understanding what talking with them is like from the other side there might be that moment of epiphany.

 

[nature boy]

What's the change from the last?

Was 50 on March 21st, downwards trajectory ever since.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/prez_track_apr3

-1 since Friday.

 

[Pixieking]

Or put another way: you are deeply sexist and actively enabling the continued domestic abuse of millions of women by resisting one of the few redresses to their suffering. So much for the progressives!

I feel there's a lot of nuance missing here, in this conversation...

Not all problems will be solved by better economics. Some people are racist because they see minorities with better opportunities, and hate them for it. Some people hit their partners because they're angry about a dead-end shitty job.

Equally, some people are just absolute bastards - sociopathic, unempathetic, unsympathetic. Hateful.

Absolving all sexism/racism/abuse due to economics - whilst it would help some situations - is reckless.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Crab's belief that the welfare state will solve bigotry is so strong that this idea technically counts as a religion at this point.

Or a one man cult.

 

[ugaboga232]

Crab, why are the most racist 35% of people in France just as racist as the most racist 35% of people in the US even though France's welfare system is much more generous?

They don't put fluoride in their water. Imagine how bad the US would be without chemtrails and fluoride!

Spoiler

I doubt anyone wants a neuroscience view of the intersection of racism and economic stress but I can offer some theories/evidence on why there is and isn't a connection between economic anxiety and "economic anxiety"

It's dumb is what it is. Racists, bigots, and Nazis are the way they are because it's who they are. Maybe it got engrained in them when they were children, but blaming it on economics absolves them of blame. It excuses the worst in humanity because you can't believe people could be evil without stimuli. Some people are just bastards.

Some people can change, but not everyone is capable of the reflection needed. I mean, we literally just elected someone incapable of self-reflection. It shouldn't be hard to believe there's others like him.

"It excuses the worst in humanity because you can't believe people could be evil without stimuli." Humans can't be ANYTHING without stimuli. I don't wanna open the neuro box here but Crab has the tiniest of points in that chronic stress (both from economic stress and any form of discrimination) wears down the parts of your brain that are supposed to supress/shoot down bad idea's and thoughts. But that doesn't really explain the phenomena of people who aren't that poor off that go for people like trump. It does a better job of explaining middle eastern terrorism and maybe some aspects of gang violence but not the middle class Trump voter.

Trump is a poster child of what happens when you have no superego and are a slave to your id in a very dramatic and obvious way.

Spoiler

I don't think blame really matters when we are talking about societal level things. We are all just meatbags with hardware that leaves much to be desired. Xenophobia and anxiety are somewhat intrinsic to us with some caveats, but couple that with a culture/education of racism from parents/society around you, it can be very unlikely that someone doesn't end up propagating that culture

 

[B-Dubs]

Crab's belief that the welfare state will solve bigotry is so strong that this idea technically counts as a religion at this point.

Or a one man cult.

It's dumb is what it is. Racists, bigots, and Nazis are the way they are because it's who they are. Maybe it got engrained in them when they were children, but blaming it on economics absolves them of blame. It excuses the worst in humanity because you can't believe people could be evil without stimuli. Some people are just bastards.

Some people can change, but not everyone is capable of the reflection needed. I mean, we literally just elected someone incapable of self-reflection. It shouldn't be hard to believe there's others like him.

 

[Crocodile]

Crab's belief that the welfare state will solve bigotry is so strong that this idea technically counts as a religion at this point.

Or a one man cult.

I posted an article last page that specifically addressed this point (welfare vs racism) but he hasn't addressed it. Maybe he missed it?

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

It's the chemtrails people. If we allow poor people to detox by vaping, the world would be cured.

 

[BoogieWoogie]

Warner is officially a no on cloture for Gorsuch.

41 democrats, here we goooooo.

Imagine if Trump fucks up his SC pick and then Tax Reform.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Imagine if Trump fucks up his SC pick and then Tax Reform.

There's no need to imagine, we'll get to see it live.

 

[Mac_Lane]

Imagine if Trump fucks up his SC pick and then Tax Reform.

That'd be fucking amazing. But really, I don't see Gorsuch not getting at least 50 votes after they end up nuking the filibuster.

 

[Maxim726X]

Warner is officially a no on cloture for Gorsuch.

41 democrats, here we goooooo.

So what's the word on the street? I've read in some places that McConnell won't follow through with the nuclear option, but publicly he assures it.

 

[Manmademan]

So what's the word on the street? I've read in some places that McConnell won't follow through with the nuclear option, but publicly he assures it.

If McConnell had the votes for the nuclear option he wouldn't need to be this vocal about democrats falling in line to vote for cloture.

What do you expect him to say? "Well if the democrats filibuster I'm boned?"

 

[Kusagari]

I mean he has to go nuclear, right?

If Gorsuch can't get 60 then nobody Trump nominates is getting 60.

 

[thepotatoman]

Imagine if Trump fucks up his SC pick and then Tax Reform.

Maybe he'll get so fed up he'll stop listening to his advisors and go hard left to work with democrats instead, and then still get nothing done because he can't get any republicans on board.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

That'd be fucking amazing. But really, I don't see Gorsuch not getting at least 50 votes after they end up nuking the filibuster.

Might not have enough votes to remove the filibuster. Only 3 GOP senators can vote no, and quite a lot of long time senators are not big fans of changing procedure.

 

[Manmademan]

Might not have enough votes to remove the filibuster. Only 3 GOP senators can vote no, and quite a lot of long time senators are not big fans of changing procedure.

This. If it was something extremely high profile like tax reform or health care I could see McConnell whipping the votes to blow up the filibuster, but the public doesn't give a shit about supreme court nominations.

 

[thepotatoman]

I mean he has to go nuclear, right?

If Gorsuch can't get 60 then nobody Trump nominates is getting 60.

If he just nominated a Roberts clone, I bet he could find 60. The problem with Gorsuch is that it's not scary enough to democrats if he was to pull him for someone worse, because Gorsuch is already so bad. If Gorsuch ever came to resemble a median vote on the court, the court would be screwed to hell anyway.