• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2017 |OT2| Well, maybe McMaster isn't a traitor.

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Gotchaye

Member
balladofwindfishes said:
So how did it get that way?

Because it can't be the economic upturn during Reagan's time, because Clinton and Obama both had good economies as well, and even more so for Obama because he took a financial disaster and cleaned it up, putting us back on track.
Click to expand...

I think mostly this isn't reflecting any sort of evaluation of historical performance but is just people's sense of which party cares more about their side of some issue.

Republicans hate terrorists louder and Democrats want to take your guns. The Republicans are the party of responsible fiscal policy and getting government out of the way so that the economy does better. I'm not sure anyone knows much about where the parties are on trade but Trump has certainly been vocally anti- trade deals. Republicans want to cut your taxes and Democrats want to raise taxes on the rich. Democrats are the only ones who even believe in government spending. Trump wants to deport millions of decent people and is a racist. Trump is a crazy person (foreign policy). Democrats are the only ones who believe in education, health care, and the environment. Republicans are much more pro-life than the average American.
 
J

JP_

Banned
nature boy said:
Pew:

C9oQkyLVwAA4nZ1.jpg:large


HELL HAS FROZEN OVER:

C9oRy73XUAECS3x.jpg:large


http://www.people-press.org/2017/04/17/public-dissatisfaction-with-washington-weighs-on-the-gop/
Click to expand...

There's no reason republicans should hold that sense of authority over the economy. Dems need to make an effort to own that.
 
B

Bonen no Max'd

Banned
Gotchaye said:
I think mostly this isn't reflecting any sort of evaluation of historical performance but is just people's sense of which party cares more about their side of some issue.

Republicans hate terrorists louder and Democrats want to take your guns. The Republicans are the party of responsible fiscal policy and getting government out of the way so that the economy does better. I'm not sure anyone knows much about where the parties are on trade but Trump has certainly been vocally anti- trade deals. Republicans want to cut your taxes and Democrats want to raise taxes on the rich. Democrats are the only ones who even believe in government spending. Trump wants to deport millions of decent people and is a racist. Trump is a crazy person (foreign policy). Democrats are the only ones who believe in education, health care, and the environment. Republicans are much more pro-life than the average American.

Democrats want to take your guns
Click to expand...
Oh this too. We covered in my political philosophy that if a party is perceived to "own" a topic more that there is sort of a nonpartisan assumption that they're better on that issue, and by talking about it a lot they can earn that perception. The immigration number surprises me here but otherwise I agree with this a lot too.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
JP_ said:
There's no reason republicans should hold that sense of authority over the economy. Dems need to make an effort to own that.
Click to expand...

Messaging has been horrid for years, and they have been terribly ineffective at countering Fox News/republican slander/lies.

New leadership has me hopeful things are going to change.
 
A

AndyD

aka andydumi
Crocodile said:
Repetition? The only "positive" message the GOP has is about the economy. Say "we want to bring back jobs!" enough times and don't give any other air time to messages like "better healthcare, civil rights, etc." and people will start to believe you? Democrats on the other hand have multiple positive messages so one message doesn't define the party as well?
Click to expand...

And there is some truth to the "bring back jobs" message for those particularly targeted communities. Those poor rural areas that lost coal or manufacturing jobs don't want or can't retrain and move to where new jobs are, so the message resonates with them quite well as for them the immediate local economy is quite literally poor.

We have family in rural Georgia and Alabama, former thriving towns in farming, mining, manufacturing which are now effectively depleted and deserted. Good jobs dried up in the 80s, then your Walmarts moved in in the 90s and 00s and decimated the local grocery, hardware, clothing stores. All that's left is essentially the elderly, pockets of healthcare jobs around a regional hospital, and gas, fast food, an occasional restaurant, attorneys, accountants, funeral homes and that's about it. It's unfortunate, but no administration is likely to make all these towns flourish again. Maybe one here and there, but gone are the days of rural glory.
 
F

Fenderputty

Banned
JP_ said:
There's no reason republicans should hold that sense of authority over the economy. Dems need to make an effort to own that.
Click to expand...

People thought trump would be good for the economey because he's a businessman. Business and Economic acumen are wholly different but often not in the eyes of the voter.
 
B

Bonen no Max'd

Banned
Reading that there might be some negotiations over a carbon tax in the tax reform plans to try and win over Democrats as a measure by Cohn/Tillerson. How do you guys feel about cap-and-trade versus a carbon tax?
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
Bonen no Max'd said:
Reading that there might be some negotiations over a carbon tax in the tax reform plans to try and win over Democrats as a measure by Cohn/Tillerson. How do you guys feel about cap-and-trade versus a carbon tax?
Click to expand...

Carbon tax is slightly better because Cap and Trade struggles when there's an unexpected change in the growth rate (like a recession).

But the carbon tax is dead.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
AndyD said:
And there is some truth to the "bring back jobs" message for those particularly targeted communities. Those poor rural areas that lost coal or manufacturing jobs don't want or can't retrain and move to where new jobs are, so the message resonates with them quite well as for them the immediate local economy is quite literally poor.

We have family in rural Georgia and Alabama, former thriving towns in farming, mining, manufacturing which are now effectively depleted and deserted. Good jobs dried up in the 80s, then your Walmarts moved in in the 90s and 00s and decimated the local grocery, hardware, clothing stores. All that's left is essentially the elderly, pockets of healthcare jobs around a regional hospital, and gas, fast food, an occasional restaurant, attorneys, accountants, funeral homes and that's about it. It's unfortunate, but no administration is likely to make all these towns flourish again. Maybe one here and there, but gone are the days of rural glory.
Click to expand...
This is what people miss when they argue Democrats need to find their footing again in rural areas.

No, we shouldn't just completely blow them off, but the actual, feasible solutions to help these communities aren't going to win you votes. You want your factory job back? Automation makes that impossible. Coal jobs? Same but with green energy becoming cheaper and more efficient, and global warming nipping any desire to return to coal power in the bud.

Trump got to where he is by lying his ass off and facing an opponent who did worse at the margins in these areas than her Democratic predecessors. Dems win in 2020 by a combination of a candidate with less baggage who can win more swing voters and amp up city turnout (in places like Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania), and rural Trump voters staying home or voting third party because Trump didn't deliver his magic pixie dust. You're certainly not going to get a significant number to flip back to the Democrats, because the party isn't going to pursue the inherently flawed strategy of bringing back coal.
 
A

AntraxSuicide

Banned
Aaron Strife said:
This is what people miss when they argue Democrats need to find their footing again in rural areas.

No, we shouldn't just completely blow them off, but the actual, feasible solutions to help these communities aren't going to win you votes. You want your factory job back? Automation makes that impossible. Coal jobs? Same but with green energy becoming cheaper and more efficient, and global warming nipping any desire to return to coal power in the bud.

Trump got to where he is by lying his ass off and facing an opponent who did worse at the margins in these areas than her Democratic predecessors. Dems win in 2020 by a combination of a candidate with less baggage who can win more swing voters and amp up city turnout (in places like Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania), and rural Trump voters staying home or voting third party because Trump didn't deliver his magic pixie dust. You're certainly not going to get a significant number to flip back to the Democrats, because the party isn't going to pursue the inherently flawed strategy of bringing back coal.
Click to expand...

I've always said it; people arguing these "bring back manufacturing" plans are effectively telling people that they're going to make them into Jedi Knights. It's a pure fantasy.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Bonen no Max'd said:
Reading that there might be some negotiations over a carbon tax in the tax reform plans to try and win over Democrats as a measure by Cohn/Tillerson. How do you guys feel about cap-and-trade versus a carbon tax?
Click to expand...

My understanding is that cap and trade IS a carbon tax, just with tradable tax credits.

What distinction are you drawing?

I agree that there are zero Republicans who seem to actually support this idea.
 
C

Cesare Borgia

Banned
Supporting something in abstract and actually voting for something in real life are two entirely different things. There would be virtually no republican support for a carbon tax if it was actually being voted on with a chance of being passed/implemented. Maybe you'd find a New York republican in congress willing to do it but that's about it...and even weak Paul Ryan would probably be able to snuff that out.

It's like the single payer debate. You can find a lot of democrats who say they'd support some form of single payer, but put the bill in front of them with a majority in the senate and a democrat in the White House and they won't do it. I of course and am assuming this majority would not consist of 60 Elizabeth Warrens and Bernie Sanders.
 
T

Tamanon

Banned
I wouldn't be surprised if it's not even a real proposal. Could be the type of stuff floated so you get stories about how you "tried" to be bipartisan.
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
Bonen no Max'd said:
This is what I was reading https://newrepublic.com/article/142009/trump-carbon-tax-look-like

I think the idea is horse trading (get Democrats on board with corporate tax cuts in exchange for a carbon tax), which is why the Schatz tweet says no VAT. I was more curious if there were major differences between the outcomes of cap and trade versus a carbon tax.
Click to expand...

Like Pigeon said, cap & trade is a kind of carbon tax with an incorporated market reallocation element so companies are theoretically even more financially incentivized than normal to reduce carbon emissions in industries where reductions are possible. It's a great plan which fully embraces every espoused Republican ideal barring the one where they fucking hate polar bears.
 
A

AndyD

aka andydumi
Aaron Strife said:
This is what people miss when they argue Democrats need to find their footing again in rural areas.

No, we shouldn't just completely blow them off, but the actual, feasible solutions to help these communities aren't going to win you votes. You want your factory job back? Automation makes that impossible. Coal jobs? Same but with green energy becoming cheaper and more efficient, and global warming nipping any desire to return to coal power in the bud.

Trump got to where he is by lying his ass off and facing an opponent who did worse at the margins in these areas than her Democratic predecessors. Dems win in 2020 by a combination of a candidate with less baggage who can win more swing voters and amp up city turnout (in places like Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania), and rural Trump voters staying home or voting third party because Trump didn't deliver his magic pixie dust. You're certainly not going to get a significant number to flip back to the Democrats, because the party isn't going to pursue the inherently flawed strategy of bringing back coal.
Click to expand...

AntraxSuicide said:
I've always said it; people arguing these "bring back manufacturing" plans are effectively telling people that they're going to make them into Jedi Knights. It's a pure fantasy.
Click to expand...

The thing is you could bring back manufacturing, but it won't be the same products in the same places. It won't be basic labor line assembly of cars and employ thousands out of high school in three shifts, it will be high level engineering and computing and those people are unlikely to be re-trained 50 year olds, but 35 year olds who get planted by the company from out of town or out of country.
 
R

Roland_Gunner

Member
pigeon said:
My understanding is that cap and trade IS a carbon tax, just with tradable tax credits.

What distinction are you drawing?

I agree that there are zero Republicans who seem to actually support this idea.
Click to expand...

The difference is that in a context where carbon usage can be flat to declining cap and trade tends to be a symbolic policy where a carbon tax is always present. The EU cap and trade plan was rolled out in the mid 2000s before the recession hits so its baseline is so high that almost no companies need to worry about it.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
AndyD said:
The thing is you could bring back manufacturing, but it won't be the same products in the same places. It won't be basic labor line assembly of cars and employ thousands out of high school in three shifts, it will be high level engineering and computing and those people are unlikely to be re-trained 50 year olds, but 35 year olds who get planted by the company from out of town or out of country.
Click to expand...
Exactly. You could set up new industry there, absolutely. But that's not what the people living there want. They want their old jobs back. The 35-year-old professionals can find that elsewhere.

I mean, that could still be a worthy investment for the ripple effect, but it does nothing for the immediate need of the 50-year-olds who are out of work and have only known coal or old manufacturing.
 
M

Manmademan

Member
AndyD said:
The thing is you could bring back manufacturing, but it won't be the same products in the same places. It won't be basic labor line assembly of cars and employ thousands out of high school in three shifts, it will be high level engineering and computing and those people are unlikely to be re-trained 50 year olds, but 35 year olds who get planted by the company from out of town or out of country.
Click to expand...

you will never bring back anywhere near the amount of manufacturing jobs high skilled or not, because automation has replaced those and will only continue to accelerate.

american manufacturing still exists, and we make more products here than we ever have- but now it takes 1 high skilled guy and a bunch of robots where it used to take 50 people with high school degrees. And this is only going to get worse.

trying to run on bringing back manufacturing in any meaningful sense as those posters were telling you is a fantasy, full stop.
 
T

Teggy

Member
WTF

FUN TIDBITS FROM ELIZABETH WARREN INTERVIEW, via Victoria McGrane in the Boston Globe:

*On her relationship with Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell after he and the GOP silenced her on the Senate floor: “ ‘I’ve spoken to him, but he has not spoken to me,’ Warren said, laughing in a disbelieving way, shaking her head. ‘I say hello to Mitch every chance I get, and he turns his head.’ ”
Click to expand...
 
S

SpaceCadetKeon

Banned
So my mom came with to Tom Cotton and French Hill's town hall, and she had a headache by the end of it, she was so angry. Tom in particular said a lot of dumb shit.

- He voted to roll back internet privacy rules because it was unfair that Google and Facebook could get your information but ISPs couldn't. (French was busy doing his shitty tele-town hall the night the House voted on it, but he seemed to agree.)

- We should pour more of our money into the military because we've got planes in Iraq and Afghanistan that can't fly and soldiers who need better training.

- "As far as I know, he's still under audit." (When asked why Congress hasn't made Trump release his tax returns).

- He (and French) support Asa Hutchinson's decision to have those 7 executions in such a small time frame, and Tom made special mention of "liberal judges" and "washed-up actors" (Johnny Depp) who were opposed.

- He basically said that the best he can do as an elected official is what people elected him for and what he campaigned on. To the town hall. Dumbass.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
Maxim726X said:
Yeah, I'm sure he had many a constructive conversation with Obama...

It's their platform. Any communication with Democrats = You hate America. He is basically why it's impossible to compromise anymore.
Click to expand...
He would at least talk to Obama. By Warren's comments he literally won't even look at her. It's pathetic.
 
O

Ogodei

Member
Le Pen's been tanking her credibility lately with the Russia appeals, although her overall first round numbers haven't dropped that much.

Melenchon's the wildcard now. A Le Pen v Melenchon second round would be harder to sort out (although for the moderates, Melenchon's "maybe EU" is a sight better than Le Pen's "hell no EU.")
 
A

AntraxSuicide

Banned
AndyD said:
The thing is you could bring back manufacturing, but it won't be the same products in the same places. It won't be basic labor line assembly of cars and employ thousands out of high school in three shifts, it will be high level engineering and computing and those people are unlikely to be re-trained 50 year olds, but 35 year olds who get planted by the company from out of town or out of country.
Click to expand...

Right I agree. Rural people want exactly their grandparent's job with scaled benefits and salary, with no retraining or extra school. It's a fantasy; they want to be Jedi, basically. I'm opposed to running on a message that we have mountains of evidence is pure fantasy; might as well become libertarians.
 
T

teiresias

Member
Zolo said:
Obama was the president. Republicans control the house, senate, and presidency. They don't need to compromise with Democrats.
Click to expand...

Apparently they may need to just to keep the government open and raise the debt limit, because the GOP is not a governance party.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
The Democrats are spineless and worthless in opposing Trump & the GOP
8 9 10 11 12
571
62K
sugarhigh4242 replied
  • Locked
This week in Trump’s America: Week 2 by ThinkProgress
8
3K
stuminus3 replied
  • Locked
Hillary Clinton retweets Slate voter guide calling her most corrupt candidate
3
4K
ModBot replied
  • Locked
Blacklist 2014 - Hollywood's most liked scripts of the year
30
6K
Sho_Nuff82 replied
Top Bottom