Support NeoGAF

[Poodlestrike]

Can you imagine if they get to a point where they just repeal the medical device tax or something.

I honestly thought that was repealed a long time ago, Franken and Klobuchar are both against it (medical device manufacturing is MN's biggest industry).

God that would be incredible. All this fighting for that.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Can you imagine if they get to a point where they just repeal the medical device tax or something.

I honestly thought that was repealed a long time ago, Franken and Klobuchar are both against it (medical device manufacturing is MN's biggest industry).

At this point, who knows where it'll end up. I tend to think it'll be a bit more watered down by the time it reaches Trump's desk because Insurance companies are going to light up phone lines trying to make sure this doesn't pass. It's a nightmare for them if the skinny repeal happens

 

[eBay Huckster]

Eh, that's a fair criticism. I'm sure it does no good, but when you're stuck in a highly conservative office, sometimes you just feel like screaming into the void even if you know it won't scream back.

Plus I mean, it could lead to some constructive stuff. "Hey I know you're frustrated about politics but here's some stuff to read" or even "hey yeah stuff sucked but here's what can be done."

I guess the action item on me is to know what I can bring but honestly, I don't. I have no clue what I can even add to politics outside of keeping informed and voting. And stuff sucks today, too.

fwiw, i'm saying that's more productive than constantly shitting your pants over someone who hasn't been relevant to progressive goals beyond fundraising since november

 

[dramatis]

By the way, I have finally gotten around to reading Thomas Piketty's famous Capital in the 21st Century, and it's amusing that a Frenchman can, with all his data, easily point out the unique aspect of examining the American economic condition. Like with Tocqueville, perhaps there's something the French are capable of seeing clearly within the American culture that some Englishmen are quite blind to.

Although the American Revolution established the republican principle, it allowed slavery to continue for nearly a century and legal racial discrimination for nearly two centuries. The race question still has a disproportionate influence on the social question in the United States today.

This complex and contradictory relation to inequality largely persists in the United States to this day: on the one hand this is a country of egalitarian promise, a land of opportunity for millions of immigrants of modest background; on the other it is a land of extremely brutal inequality, especially in relation to race, whose effects are still quite visible. (Southern blacks were deprived of civil rights until the 1960s and subjected to a regime of legal segregation that shared some features in common with the system of apartheid that was maintained in South Africa until the 1980s.) This no doubt accounts for many aspects of the development—or rather nondevelopment—of the US welfare state.

 

[pigeon]

I think you could fairly say that they're too dumb to weight their own interests. The tangible benefits of white supremacy for a family in West Virginia making less than the poverty line with both parents working are pretty small compared to how hard the Republicans screw them in every other area.

Yeah, but what does "tangible" matter? Man does not live by tangibility alone. They cast the votes they cast because they make a cost-benefit analysis and white supremacy, hatred of gay people, etc. all play major roles in that analysis despite their lack of tangible benefits. Ignoring that and saying "you're just being dumb not to vote for the Democrats" is the classic liberal condescension we used to talk about.

They're not being dumb to vote for culture war, they're deciding that they prefer culture war to health care, and casting a vote on that basis. That's certainly not a decision the rational economic human would make, but no humans are that.

 

[Autodidact]

yeah she tweeted about it (which I guess are statements in this modern political era)

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen‏ @RosLehtinen 3h3 hours ago
No American, no matter their sexual orientation or gender identity, should be prohibited from honor + privilege of serving our nation #LGBT

I appreciate her objection, but she also exemplifies one of my points about Moderate Darlings. Though not horrible as far as Republicans go, she'll likely limit her opposition to some harsh words on Twitter; she and the majority of Republicans will make no moves to counter Trump's bigotry. A Democrat in that seat would be just as supportive of LGBT rights but might actually do something about them.

When Chris Van Hollen ran for the House in 2002, he faced Moderate Darling Connie Morella - pro-choice, pro-LGBT, voted against the Clinton impeachment, etc. His campaign against her amounted to, "I like Connie, you like Connie, she's a great person. But she keeps the Republican leadership in power and enables them to hurt this country." That statement echoes my sentiments about Moderate Darlings: I'd always rather have a Democrat in the seat. (Morella, by the by, voted for Hillary.)

 

[whyamihere]

Re: Trans ban. Beyond how odious it is.

I actually think it's a really poor reading of the electorate to think THIS is a line to draw in the sand in 2017. It's not 2004. A lot of Obama -> Trump voters are for LGBT rights. A lot of Romney -> Trump voters are for LGBT rights. This might rally *a* base, but certainly not the coalition that drove Trump into power.

It's very pedestrian.

 

[Autodidact]

Re: Trans ban. Beyond how odious it is.

I actually think it's a really poor reading of the electorate to think THIS is a line to draw in the sand in 2017. It's not 2004. A lot of Obama -> Trump voters are for LGBT rights. A lot of Romney -> Trump voters are for LGBT rights. This might rally *a* base, but certainly not the coalition that drove Trump into power.

It's very pedestrian.

The Banality of Evil?

 

[GoldenEye 007]

Re: Trans ban. Beyond how odious it is.

I actually think it's a really poor reading of the electorate to think THIS is a line to draw in the sand in 2017. It's not 2004. A lot of Obama -> Trump voters are for LGBT rights. A lot of Romney -> Trump voters are for LGBT rights. This might rally *a* base, but certainly not the coalition that drove Trump into power.

It's very pedestrian.

You'd be surprised at the amount of conservatives that are now suddenly shitting on trans veterans and soldiers...

 

[Futurevoid]

Re: Trans ban. Beyond how odious it is.

I actually think it's a really poor reading of the electorate to think THIS is a line to draw in the sand in 2017. It's not 2004. A lot of Obama -> Trump voters are for LGBT rights. A lot of Romney -> Trump voters are for LGBT rights. This might rally *a* base, but certainly not the coalition that drove Trump into power.

It's very pedestrian.

Its more meat for his base as he wages his little war with Sessions. He'll get the god bless you from the bigots who love him and hopefully "soft land" the eventual firing of Sessions which he knows will be unpopular.

 

[pigeon]

Re: Trans ban. Beyond how odious it is.

I actually think it's a really poor reading of the electorate to think THIS is a line to draw in the sand in 2017. It's not 2004. A lot of Obama -> Trump voters are for LGBT rights. A lot of Romney -> Trump voters are for LGBT rights. This might rally *a* base, but certainly not the coalition that drove Trump into power.

It's very pedestrian.

I think it fits with Trump's general game plan, though. His goal is not necessarily to win votes, it's to legitimize hate. This provides aid and comfort to the remaining Americans who do discriminate and attack trans people, and tells them they have a power base. It will lead to more violence against trans people, and allow people who believed they had to hide their discomfort with trans people to just let it rip.

 

[whyamihere]

You'd be surprised at the amount of conservatives that are now suddenly shitting on trans veterans and soldiers...

Do you believe there's a mass swell of Obama -> Trump voters who are now back in Trump's camp after him announcing his ban on Trans servicemen and women?

 

[Poodlestrike]

Yeah, but what does "tangible" matter? Man does not live by tangibility alone. They cast the votes they cast because they make a cost-benefit analysis and white supremacy, hatred of gay people, etc. all play major roles in that analysis despite their lack of tangible benefits. Ignoring that and saying "you're just being dumb not to vote for the Democrats" is the classic liberal condescension we used to talk about.

They're not being dumb to vote for culture war, they're deciding that they prefer culture war to health care, and casting a vote on that basis. That's certainly not a decision the rational economic human would make, but no humans are that.

Mmm, fair. I suppose it's a question of phrasing, I would say that the non-tangible benefits of white supremacy have made them too stupid to accurately weigh the costs, but I can agree with your way of putting it.

 

[Autodidact]

How many people insisting we respect John McCain the Maverick Hero Soldier Patriot also support the ban on transgender troops? I'd like to see a Venn diagram.

 

[whyamihere]

I think it fits with Trump's general game plan, though. His goal is not necessarily to win votes, it's to legitimize hate. This provides aid and comfort to the remaining Americans who do discriminate and attack trans people, and tells them they have a power base. It will lead to more violence against trans people, and allow people who believed they had to hide their discomfort with trans people to just let it rip.

I guess what's bumping me is his aides say he's doing this as a naked political move to put Rust Belt Dems on the defensive when that's actually a really bad plan.

 

[pigeon]

Mmm, fair. I suppose it's a question of phrasing, I would say that the non-tangible benefits of white supremacy have made them too stupid to accurately weigh the costs, but I can agree with your way of putting it.

I understand where you're coming from but I think it's an error to suggest that being driven by intangible concerns is stupidity. Lots and lots of people are primarily driven by intangible concerns. Love and hate are intangible concerns!

 

[pigeon]

I guess what's bumping me is his aides say he's doing this as a naked political move to put Rust Belt Dems on the defensive when that's actually a really bad plan.

Oh, yeah, his aides are always saying dumb shit to try to spin whatever crazy thing Trump did as part of a master plan.

 

[whyamihere]

I understand where you're coming from but I think it's an error to suggest that being driven by intangible concerns is stupidity. Lots and lots of people are primarily driven by intangible concerns. Love and hate are intangible concerns!

Intangible my ass!

 

[Bronx-Man]

Today is a nightmare in American politics. I'm just seething right now but I don't even know how to fight this.

 

[Wilsongt]

Venezuela, the Phillipines, and the US should be plastered over the history books in the future and have papers written about them on how not to vote for idiots and despots in the future.

 

[Drkirby]

How many people insisting we respect John McCain the Maverick Hero Soldier Patriot also support the ban on transgender troops? I'd like to see a Venn diagram.

Not sure how a Venn Diagram will help, but here you go

 

[GoldenEye 007]

Do you believe there's a mass swell of Obama -> Trump voters who are now back in Trump's camp after him announcing his ban on Trans servicemen and women?

I'm not convinced Obama -> Trump voters have left in enough number yet in the first place. But I don't know in general. It certainly riles up the military first, patriotism base given a lot of comments. Likely no, those people were always going to be with Trump anyway.

Edit: So the aides justification being referenced is dumb, I think. But they're always dumb.

 

[Gotchaye]

Yeah, but what does "tangible" matter? Man does not live by tangibility alone. They cast the votes they cast because they make a cost-benefit analysis and white supremacy, hatred of gay people, etc. all play major roles in that analysis despite their lack of tangible benefits. Ignoring that and saying "you're just being dumb not to vote for the Democrats" is the classic liberal condescension we used to talk about.

They're not being dumb to vote for culture war, they're deciding that they prefer culture war to health care, and casting a vote on that basis. That's certainly not a decision the rational economic human would make, but no humans are that.

I don't think this is really right. Very few people are actually thinking that they're voting for worse health care policy in exchange for better culture war policy.

It's affinity fraud. Many people genuinely trust Trump to be better for their health care and jobs and all that. They don't see themselves as having to make any sort of tradeoff -- they're getting better health care policy and better culture war policy. Where they're going wrong is that they're not able to figure out the likely effects of putting each party in charge of health care policy (though this isn't really about stupidity -- very few people are personally competent to do this). They don't know anything about health care policy, and they more-or-less recognize this. So they're looking (consciously and not) for other signs that a politician is looking out for them. Meanwhile they feel very confident in their views on culture war policy -- they know exactly what the right answers are and any decent person will agree with them. So then when Republicans prove that they have their heads on straight with respect to the culture war, these voters reason that it makes sense to trust them on health care.

 

[IggyChooChoo]

Well then what's to worry about (aside from the usual shitshow)?

The fact that Rand Paul has now abandoned his "clean repeal" stage and is open to negotiation, for one. There is really no reason he would not vote to cut Medicaid. I know everyone believes he's a coward who's secretly guarding his left, but I think his hate for the poor parasites and the state will win out in the end.

 

[Poodlestrike]

I understand where you're coming from but I think it's an error to suggest that being driven by intangible concerns is stupidity. Lots and lots of people are primarily driven by intangible concerns. Love and hate are intangible concerns!

Being motivated by an intangible isn't stupid in and of itself, but cutting your own legs out from under you because of one is, imo. Like, there's a whole suite of "love makes you stupid" type sayings. The same is certainly true of hate.

Romeo and Juliet were morons, is what I'm saying.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

I wonder if Mcmaster and mattis found out about trans ban on twtter.

 

[shem935]

Intangible my ass!

y do u do dis?

 

[BlastProcessing]

Mmm, fair. I suppose it's a question of phrasing, I would say that the non-tangible benefits of white supremacy have made them too stupid to accurately weigh the costs, but I can agree with your way of putting it.

It can be eye opening to discover just how much people value their prejudices. Many people will harm themselves and their family in exchange for preserving their heritage. They can imagine a world where things turn around for them economically. A better life is always one good break away. The idea of social change scares the shit out of them. Once those things change, they never go back.

 

[whyamihere]

I'm not convinced Obama -> Trump voters have left in enough number yet in the first place. But I don't know in general. It certainly riles up the military first, patriotism base given a lot of comments. Likely no, those people were always going to be with Trump anyway.

Edit: So the aides justification being referenced is dumb, I think. But they're always dumb.

There are no Obama -> Trump voters who aren't going to vote for Debbie Stabenow only because she supports trans people in the military.

 

[metalslimer]

How many people insisting we respect John McCain the Maverick Hero Soldier Patriot also support the ban on transgender troops? I'd like to see a Venn diagram.

John McCain can bluster all he wants. I'll never forgive his decrepit ass for bawling his heart out why gay people can't serve openly

 

[watershed]

Intangible my ass!

I so wish Interstellar didn't take this turn. The father-daughter love story was far more effective.

 

[TumblingHippo]

People trying to say this Trans ban in the military is a "distraction" tactic feels disingenuous to Trans people, as if they're denying that being hateful isn't like, a main tactic of this admin or something.

It's like people want to shield themselves from a darker truth, that people sometimes just do evil things for the sake of being evil.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

The fact that Rand Paul has now abandoned his "clean repeal" stage and is open to negotiation, for one. There is really no reason he would not vote to cut Medicaid. I know everyone believes he's a coward who's secretly guarding his left, but I think his hate for the poor parasites and the state will win out in the end.

Cutting Medicaid appears to be the clear drawn line for the Senate.

 

[kirblar]

People trying to say this Trans ban in the military is a "distraction" tactic feels disingenuous to Trans people, as if they're denying that being hateful isn't like, a main tactic of this admin or something.

It's like people want to shield themselves from a darker truth, that people sometimes just do evil things for the sake of being evil.

Yup.

I really liked what Wonder Woman went for message-wise in trying to undercut the "love will save everything" concept/trope with the reality of human nature.

 

[Poodlestrike]

It can be eye opening to discover just how much people value their prejudices. Many people will harm themselves and their family in exchange for preserving their heritage. They can imagine a world where things turn around for them economically. A better life is always one good break away. The idea of social change scares the shit out of them. Once those things change, they never go back.

Yeah. What I'd argue from there is that that (the perspective you're accurately outlining) is stupid, because that kind of change can be adapted to. It's mostly internal, and we're great at changing our worldview to deal with that sort of disruption. Cancer, significantly harder to adjust to.

People trying to say this Trans ban in the military is a "distraction" tactic feels disingenuous to Trans people, as if they're denying that being hateful isn't like, a main tactic of this admin or something.

It's like people want to shield themselves from a darker truth, that people sometimes just do evil things for the sake of being evil.

The idea that the bad guys in charge have some complex evil plan is comforting, because complex plans can be fought, disrupted, etc. If they're just opportunistically looking for ways to cause harm that's scary as hell 'cause there's a lot less that can be done to stop it.

 

[whyamihere]

People trying to say this Trans ban in the military is a "distraction" tactic feels disingenuous to Trans people, as if they're denying that being hateful isn't like, a main tactic of this admin or something.

It's like people want to shield themselves from a darker truth, that people sometimes just do evil things for the sake of being evil.

I mean they're on record saying this is a naked political calculation to putting Rust Belt Dem senators on the defensive.

It's hurtful, shocking, naked opportunism, and stupid politics all in one.

 

[kirblar]

Yeah. What I'd argue from there is that that (the perspective you're accurately outlining) is stupid, because that kind of change can be adapted to. It's mostly internal, and we're great at changing our worldview to deal with that sort of disruption. Cancer, significantly harder to adjust to.

As a whole, we are. But these are individuals, and many refuse to adapt (your rich CA types like Steve Bannon) or cannot (those that grow up in a monolithic isolated white town for decades and literally have no idea how to interact w/ those who aren't like them.)

 

[BlastProcessing]

People trying to say this Trans ban in the military is a "distraction" tactic feels disingenuous to Trans people, as if they're denying that being hateful isn't like, a main tactic of this admin or something.

It's like people want to shield themselves from a darker truth, that people sometimes just do evil things for the sake of being evil.

It's a tactic that he drifted from a bit. Now that he sees his numbers with his base sagging, he will return to it. Trump ran on two things. Making the lives of his supporters better and making the lives of his supporters enemies worse. He can't deliver on the former so he will double down on the latter.

It's going to get more evil and more gross the more desperate he gets for a "win".

 

[sangreal]

That strategy won't work. By passing and celebrating this bill - and by having Trump talk about it INCESSANTLY - they take ownership of whatever happens.

Yup, that is my take as well. The message that gets out will be that they repealed obamacare. When premiums go up, or insurers pull out the GOP will own it

 

[IggyChooChoo]

Cutting Medicaid appears to be the clear drawn line for the Senate.

Well, let's hope the guy named after Ayn Rand's has more fear of the Kentucky left than love for cutting the welfare state. If we get away with just a skinny repeal I will breathe a sigh of relief.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

This probably helps Trump in... Utah I guess?

I don't see another state where this gives Trump a boost and there are several that would hate Trump more after this.

Just evil.

 

[whyamihere]

takes that age poorly dot tumblr dot com

@ZaidJilani
Hillary's wars are made up? lol. Also trump is pro lgbt

@kelleyraleigh
Im more afraid of not having basic human rights for LGBT, women's rights & a bad enviro than ur made up Hilary war https://twitter.com/rawstory/status/725701316702511108

 

[Bronx-Man]

People trying to say this Trans ban in the military is a "distraction" tactic feels disingenuous to Trans people, as if they're denying that being hateful isn't like, a main tactic of this admin or something.

It's like people want to shield themselves from a darker truth, that people sometimes just do evil things for the sake of being evil.

People are usually too privileged to recognize that or optimistic to the point of blinding themselves.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Well, let's hope the guy named after Ayn Rand's has more fear of the Kentucky left than love for cutting the welfare state. If we get away with just a skinny repeal I will breathe a sigh of relief.

If they get Rand on board with cutting Medicaid, they end up losing senators.

Also I don't think Rand Paul actually wants to ruin his home state.

Everyone is latching onto the first bill they could find that didn't cut Medicaid. I do expect some sticker shock on Friday when the CBO announces 20% increases in premiums though, so we'll have to see where this develops.

Know though, that this bill has only gotten more watered down with time. It's not gotten worse.

 

[metalslimer]

I mean they're on record saying this is a naked political calculation to putting Rust Belt Dem senators on the defensive.

It's hurtful, shocking, naked opportunism, and stupid politics all in one.

That was just an unnamed official who I don't think had any idea this was coming. It also makes no sense as the issue will be like 15th in the next election and wouldn't likely come up in lower level races

 

[Futurevoid]

People trying to say this Trans ban in the military is a "distraction" tactic feels disingenuous to Trans people, as if they're denying that being hateful isn't like, a main tactic of this admin or something.

It's like people want to shield themselves from a darker truth, that people sometimes just do evil things for the sake of being evil.

It's hard to ignore blatant politicking when you see it.

https://twitter.com/MorganABC11/status/890219587568119809

BREAKING: Just got off the phone w/ @FtBraggNC re: transgender ban. Officials tell me they've received no official directive from WH. #abc11

Though I'll say that calling out such politicking and appreciating the very real repercussions of transgender troops being used to push forward horrible policy are not mutually exclusive and I've made no effort to minimize what the reality of said policies are.

Just as acknowledging the political advantage in making immigrants the "other" shouldn't take away from the awful truth of what Trumps policies are doing to destroy immigrant families in this country right now.

We can walk and chew bubblegum at the same time I guess is what I'm saying.

 

[Cesare Borgia]

Re: Trans ban. Beyond how odious it is.

I actually think it's a really poor reading of the electorate to think THIS is a line to draw in the sand in 2017. It's not 2004. A lot of Obama -> Trump voters are for LGBT rights. A lot of Romney -> Trump voters are for LGBT rights. This might rally *a* base, but certainly not the coalition that drove Trump into power.

It's very pedestrian.

Is it about rallying the base? Could just be a bully under pressure (Obamacare repeal drama, Sessions, Mueller, Russian sanctions, etc) striking out the only way he knows how.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

Trans Ban seems like a transparent attempt to distract the media and pump Trump's base.

And look, less Russia news today.

Bannon is good at this, although he doesnt have a lot to work with in Trump.

 

[pigeon]

takes that age poorly dot tumblr dot com

I went to this link but it was just a redirect to Zaid Jilani's entire twitter feed, weird

 

[whyamihere]

Anyways, if this is true (which, like, just go with me) it's so stupid.