Jump to content
LoreD

Krystal Ball: Debunking the Myth that Bernie Sanders is Unelectable

Recommended Posts

I wouldn't call Sanders "unelectable".  When running against Donald Trump, all the conventional wisdom is disrupted.

 

I watched the second clip with the Biden quotes and I have to say I agree with Biden.  Krystal is the one who doesn't "get it".  Yes, bipartisanship is mostly dead right now.  However, bringing it back is the only way to achieve real and lasting change.  Can Biden do that?  I don't know, but I don't see anyone else even trying.  For me, that alone is sufficient to earn my support.  

 

In our history, the only times we've been able to make real progress is when we've had significant bipartisan support (civil rights, environmental protection, social security, Americans with disabilities, etc.).  On the other hand, single-party actions just get overturned or undermined when the other party takes power.  Look at how the ACA has been treated by Republicans.  Consider what the next Democratic government will do to Trump's tax cuts.  Even if we elect a firebrand progressive President with a clear majority in the House and Senate, whatever single-party actions they take are likely to be stripped away by the next Republican government.  And, yes, there will always be alternating parties in power.

 

When a law is adapted to secure bipartisan support, the opposition's most powerful arguments are taken away.  That makes it much less likely to be overturned in the future.  When a law is created with only the input of one side, it's more likely to result in overreach that will lead to backlash and reversal in the future.

 

The left believes that once Americans get a taste of their policies, they'll never want to go back to the old ways.  They point to policies like Social Security as examples.  I say SS is an example of bipartisanship...not single-party steamroller politics.

 

So, I'm with Biden on this.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/15/2019 at 9:34 AM, Renegade said:

Yes, bipartisanship is mostly dead right now.  However, bringing it back is the only way to achieve real and lasting change.  Can Biden do that?

 

Last night I saw Anderson Cooper interviewing Steven Colbert on CNN. They both got emotional about the deaths in their families. Both has fathers that died at 10 years old. Anderson Cooper's mother died recently. Colbert remarked that his suffering gave him the understanding that others were suffering and thereby brought him closer to people.

 

There are a group of Trump supporters, probably not most of them, but still too many, that would ridicule such sentiments and emotions. I'm talking about KKK, neo-nazis, white supremacists, and their ilk. Even the ones that have achieved prominence like Trump and Steve King. They would dehumanize their opponents and rid themselves of emotion, until killing their opponents evoked only derisive laughter.

 

You can't compromise with totalitarian racist evil.  How could you compromise? ... Pass a bill that is 50% good and 50% evil? Only kill half the people they want dead? Only expel 50% of non-whites?

 

Until the influence of such people is near-zero, bipartisanship can't even be considered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, laripu said:

There are a group of Trump supporters, probably not most of them, but still too many, that would ridicule such sentiments and emotions. I'm talking about KKK, neo-nazis, white supremacists, and their ilk. Even the ones that have achieved prominence like Trump and Steve King. They would dehumanize their opponents and rid themselves of emotion, until killing their opponents evoked only derisive laughter.

 

assuming the minds of everyone who didn't vote Hillary  is a heartless human being  and I wont 

was there ever a time people wanted to vote less ?

we used to have better voter turn outs when we used carrier pigeons to deliver messages

 

over 70% of the population didn't vote for Trump and that 30% is not all bluedoggls cousins

 

don't give up hope yet

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, laripu said:

 

Last night I saw Anderson Cooper interviewing Steven Colbert on CNN. They both got emotional about the deaths in their families. Both has fathers that died at 10 years old. Anderson Cooper's mother died recently. Colbert remarked that his suffering gave him the understanding that others were suffering and thereby brought him closer to people.

 

There are a group of Trump supporters, probably not most of them, but still too many, that would ridicule such sentiments and emotions. I'm talking about KKK, neo-nazis, white supremacists, and their ilk. Even the ones that have achieved prominence like Trump and Steve King. They would dehumanize their opponents and rid themselves of emotion, until killing their opponents evoked only derisive laughter.

 

You can't compromise with totalitarian racist evil.  How could you compromise? ... Pass a bill that is 50% good and 50% evil? Only kill half the people they want dead? Only expel 50% of non-whites?

 

That's quite a leap you made, equating bipartisanship with elected members of the U.S. Congress to "compromise with totalitarian racist evil".    

 

Are you sure you haven't excessively "dehumanized" Republicans? 

 

Both parties want to dehumanize the other to the point where no one needs to listen to what they say or respond to their arguments.  Both sides want to select the absolute most irredeemable element that can be found supporting the other side and make that the public face of the opponent.  

 

I'm sick of it.  I don't want an ideologue, I want dialogue.  I don't want an extremist.  I want someone willing to listen and make common sense compromises.  

 

Both of these 'parties' (the organizations, not the members) live only to gain power.  What do you think they talk about in their meetings?  How to help people?  Oh, no...it's only about how to win elections and sway voters.  How can we make this look bad for the other side?  The main reason they can't/won't compromise is that they're afraid the other side will take credit or they'd lose an issue that helps them 'get out the vote'.  

 

I don't think I've uttered or written a single kind word for President Trump.  But, I really wish the Democrats in Congress would spend as much time trying to pass bipartisan legislation as they have trying to investigate/impeach Trump.  Sure, they've passed lots of bills...that go nowhere because they don't have bipartisan support.  What if they could work with the other side to come up with a compromise?  Maybe it's not as good as what they passed on their own, but maybe it would actually become law and help people.

 

I realize Democrats can't do it by themselves.  It takes two to compromise.  But, I can't control the other side.  I can only try to influence my side.  This is why I support Biden and his call for bipartisanship.  

 

3 hours ago, laripu said:

Until the influence of such people is near-zero, bipartisanship can't even be considered.

 

That's what the true believers say...those that are committed to the cause.  They can't do any good until they wrest total power from the other side.  Until then, all we're going to get are more efforts to divide the country with anger, distrust, and resentment.  

 

I am almost to the point where I absolutely refuse to vote for any Democrat or Republican.  I'm looking for any way to send even the tiniest message to the two main parties.   I'm sick of the partisanship, the fake anger, the misconstrued words, the out of context quotes, the straw men, the outright lies and the rest of the nasty inflammatory tactics both parties use.   

 

I donated to a couple Democrat candidates for President, trying to help them meet the donor requirement for the 3rd debate.  One of them sends me e-mails about what she wants to accomplish (and asks for more money).  The other one tells me how urgent it is that we get rid of the evil Trump (and asks for more money).  I'm really glad I donated to the first one.  The second one, not so much.

 

If the Democratic nominee doesn't make me believe they're willing to have constructive relationships with Republican elected officials in an effort to pursue bipartisan progress, I will vote 3rd party.  It's only one vote, but it's all I can do.   It's not a 'threat', just an attempt to convey my dissatisfaction to the party.  And, no, I don't believe the world will come to an end if Trump serves 4 more years.  I don't want that, but to me his damage is not so severe as that caused by the hyper-partisanship that's choking politics right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, laripu said:

Until the influence of such people is near-zero, bipartisanship can't even be considered.

 

1 hour ago, Renegade said:

That's quite a leap you made, equating bipartisanship with elected members of the U.S. Congress to "compromise with totalitarian racist evil".    

 

Are you sure you haven't excessively "dehumanized" Republicans?

 

I didn't equate them. I wrote about the influence of such people, people who are "totalitarian racist evil".

I think there is plenty of evidence for their influence.

 

Evidence:

  • Few Republican senators have criticized the oppressive conditions under which are held the innocent children of refugee asylum seekers.
  • Few Republican senators have criticized the manner of speech of the president when it comes to Mexicans or Muslims or Africans.
  • Consider all the vile crap that comes out of various Republican grandees, unchallenged.
  • The reason that few Republican senators have criticized these things is that they worry about losing electoral support, or about facing opposition in the primaries.

Therefore: the influence of people who are "totalitarian racist evil" is a strong factor in the behavior of Republican politicians. We can't compromise with that. Moreover, that part of the Republican party won't compromise with Democrats unless Democrats become something vile too. Who would we sell for a compromise?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Renegade said:

And, no, I don't believe the world will come to an end if Trump serves 4 more years.  I don't want that, but to me his damage is not so severe as that caused by the hyper-partisanship that's choking politics right now.

 

Ah, it's coming to an end anyway. They've found plastic in snow in the Arctic.  We're breathing it. We're eating it because it's everywhere in the food chain. And plastic is well-known to contain endocrine disruptors.

 

The Roman Empire was reputed to have fallen due to lead poisoning. With out global pollution, food will continue to be a slightly poison and with global warming, food will become ever more difficult to produce due to desertification.

 

Yeah, so Donald Trump won't kill us. Unless the m-f-er goes nuclear on some hated enemy. ........................Like NYC. (But first he'd insure the f**k out of all his properties. Then oops, that was an accident!  Boom.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, laripu said:

 

Ah, it's coming to an end anyway. They've found plastic in snow in the Arctic.  We're breathing it. We're eating it because it's everywhere in the food chain. And plastic is well-known to contain endocrine disruptors.

 

The Roman Empire was reputed to have fallen due to lead poisoning. With out global pollution, food will continue to be a slightly poison and with global warming, food will become ever more difficult to produce due to desertification.

 

Yeah, so Donald Trump won't kill us. Unless the m-f-er goes nuclear on some hated enemy. ........................Like NYC. (But first he'd insure the f**k out of all his properties. Then oops, that was an accident!  Boom.)

I think you're right about this. We can't be bipartisan when we are faced with a racist Nationalist who basically admits his respect for all the worst dictators in this world. Helsinki wasn't a misstatement by Trump. It was him speaking freely like he does every so often, or should we say, on a daily basis.

And don't forget ---

They want to push through the policy of building natural gas lines all through the Appalachian Trail. They want to do that now when we need to go in the opposite direction. https://prospect.org/article/can-appalachian-trail-block-natural-gas-pipeline

This is long-term stuff. And it is absolutely wrong!

 

Admit it. Climate change is more than real - it's already happened. 

 

And yes, I am worried about what is going on now in Hong Kong. Trump seems to be paving the way for a Beijing crackdown on their democracy.

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2019/06/13/the-rule-of-law-in-hong-kong

 

I want a US government that stands up for the correct principles for all to follow. Diplomacy, decency, and fact based science.

 

Peace!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, TheOldBarn said:

I want a US government that stands up for the correct principles for all to follow. Diplomacy, decency, and fact based science.

 

Yes. Yes!

I could not agree more.

 

"correct principles for all to follow. Diplomacy, decency" = good intentions

 

"fact based science" = intelligence

 

I want a government of good intentions, informed by intelligence.

 

Seems like the executive and Senate are currently exactly the opposite on both counts 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Renegade said:

If the Democratic nominee doesn't make me believe they're willing to have constructive relationships with Republican elected officials in an effort to pursue bipartisan progress, I will vote 3rd party.  It's only one vote, but it's all I can do.

 

So let's imagine what that bipartisan progress will look like

 

Democrat: Single payer healthcare.

Republican: Socialist! (Takes HMO money.)

Democrat: Gun control.

Republican: Stalinist! Nazis did that! (Takes NRA money.)

Democrat: Abortion rights. Marriage equality. LGBT equality in adoption and employment.

Republican: God, Sodom, and Gomorrah! (Takes evangelist money.)

Democrat: Banking regulations to prevent meltdowns.

Republican:  Socialist, Stalinist, Communist! (Takes Wall Street money.)

Democrat: No gerrymandering. No voter disenfranchisement. No purging of electoral rolls.

Republican: States rights! (Audible snickers and backslapping.)

Democrat: Corporations are not people.

Republican: The Supreme Court says they are, you Communist! (More snickers and backslapping.)
 

That's what bipartisan cooperation looks like. That's why third party votes are not helpful.

 

Because they're playing a different game. They're playing to win, not to serve.

 

DnoQTnuXoAEzGaa.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, laripu said:

 

So let's imagine what that bipartisan progress will look like

 

Democrat: Single payer healthcare.

Republican: Socialist! (Takes HMO money.)

Democrat: Gun control.

Republican: Stalinist! Nazis did that! (Takes NRA money.)

Democrat: Abortion rights. Marriage equality. LGBT equality in adoption and employment.

Republican: God, Sodom, and Gomorrah! (Takes evangelist money.)

Democrat: Banking regulations to prevent meltdowns.

Republican:  Socialist, Stalinist, Communist! (Takes Wall Street money.)

Democrat: No gerrymandering. No voter disenfranchisement. No purging of electoral rolls.

Republican: States rights! (Audible snickers and backslapping.)

Democrat: Corporations are not people.

Republican: The Supreme Court says they are, you Communist! (More snickers and backslapping.)
 

 

Your imagination has gone to a dark place.  Look for the bad and you'll find it.  But, look for the good and you can find that too.  Look at what some real elected Republicans are saying.  I know it's not exactly what we want, but it's much more reasonable that what you "imagined".   Perhaps, there might be enough reasonable Republicans that would cross over and vote for helpful (if not perfect) legislation that we could actually make some progress.

 

Here are the issues you mentioned:

 

- Healthcare:  CNN  Republicans have several different ideas.  It's not a uniform and flat 'no' from all Republicans.  

 

- Gun Control:  NPR  Some Republicans are ready to support gun bills with new restrictions

 

- Marriage Equality:  It's legal in all 50 states.  There are a few states trying to reverse that, but there's nothing being put forward in Congress.  Since this is already settled law (in our favor) there's no need to compromise.

 

- Banking Regulations to prevent meltdowns:  Dodd Frank was supported by only 4 Republican senators.  But, without their help, the bill would have been filibustered.  

 

- Gerrymandering:  Democrats may not have done this as often as the Republicans, but they are guilty as well.  Regardless, this is a state issue and not something the President can fix.

 

- Corporations are people:  Again, this isn't something the President can change.    

 

 

Here are a few issues where a Democratic President can affect outcomes through bipartisan effort:

 

- Rebuild Infrastructure:  Both parties want this.  So what's taking so long?  Is it a fight over who gets credit?

 

- Immigration Reform:  Republicans won't vote for anything that doesn't have additional money for border security.  So, why not throw them a bone so we can get better treatment at the border and citizenship for immigrants?

 

- Carbon Emissions/Global Warming:  Some Republicans are moving our way.  "Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tennessee) has called for a 'new Manhattan Project' for clean energy, proposing large-scale investment in carbon capture, electric vehicles, and green buildings (Link). Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) has said he would support legislation to combat climate change with "energy innovation." (Link

 

- Criminal Justice Reform:  There are Congressional Republicans that could be convinced to join a bipartisan effort.  " ...many candidates have been rethinking their stances and supporting laws that would reduce prison time, allow some felons to expunge or seal their criminal records, and even reform federal drug laws. Republicans such as Ted Cruz, Rick Perry, Chris Christie, and Jeb Bush have all spoken out in support of this new Party direction concerning crime."  RepublicanViews.org

 

I'm not trying to tell you that all, most, or even many Republicans can be convinced to support liberal positions.  But, I believe some can.  We have to try.  The alternative is no progress at all.  The alternative is a country that moves farther away from civil discourse and toward civil war.  Have you been following events in Portland?  

 

I want  a President that will work on what's possible and not spend 4 years posturing, tilting at windmills, and inflaming the extremists.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Renegade said:

I want  a President that will work on what's possible and not spend 4 years posturing, tilting at windmills, and inflaming the extremists.  

 

Ok, you write persuasively on this. I like that you provided links and evidence.

 

So here's a link that supports what you wrote too:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/08/ben-howe-evangelical-christians-support-trump/596308/

 

But here's the caveat: as long as the Republicans leadership is playing to win and not to serve, we'll get nowhere. If we want progress, we need to keep the House, and win the presidency and a slim Senate majority. The latter is just possible, although unlikely, I admit.

 

But the presidency is important and the win must be spectacular. Republicans must see evidence that playing to win will be punished by the electorate.

 

If not, they will continue to see playing to win as a winning strategy, and will continue to do it.

 

My wife occasionally says that she feels very sorry for Merrick Garland. There's a man who was sacrificed on the altar the Republican leadership has built.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, laripu said:

My wife occasionally says that she feels very sorry for Merrick Garland. There's a man who was sacrificed on the altar the Republican leadership has built.

 

Absolutely, that was a blatant abuse of power.  They could have at least considered his nomination, held a vote, and tried to explain why he wasn't acceptable.  It would have still been completely unjustified, but at least it would have been within the accepted rules.  What they did is abhorrent to me.  I don't see why it wasn't found unconstitutional.  I also have to say that any move to pack the Supreme Court would be just as bad and two wrongs don't make a right.

 

1 hour ago, laripu said:

Republicans must see evidence that playing to win will be punished by the electorate.

 

Yes.  I want both parties to know this.   I won't give Democrats a free pass just because they're not Republicans.  I realize that Republicans have been leading the destruction of political mores, but Democrats have been following.  It seems that for every dirty trick, once Republicans do it, Democrats answer in kind.  

 

What I suggest is not to 'turn the other cheek' but something more like Judo where, instead of opposing the opponent's attack with an equally violent and dirty counterattack, we would use the opponent's strength against him.  Have you ever watched the old Kung Fu series with David Carradine?  When the big macho cowboys would come at him, fists swinging, he would step aside and give them a little tap that would send them head first into a wall.  I loved that show.

 

It is as you say.  We need to show the people in Washington that we want real solutions, not 'playing to win'.  That's easier said than done.  I'm afraid my one vote doesn't matter much.  Any suggestions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...