The General American Politics Thread

[Patticus]

I don't know if it's just the GOP undergoing some kind of hyper-regressive death throes as a result of Trump winning the primaries, but that is some weapons-grade bile in the Republican platform right there.

I've never been a fan of the Republican Party, but holy fuck... How can it be that, despite the lessons of their last two general election defeats being so resoundingly clear today, they've completely reversed course, ignoring the gigantic warning signs and sirens all around them, and poured on the gas? How is it that, despite the "Gang of 8" and all of the apparent self-awareness regarding how the party should tack back toward the safety of the center-right, the party has instead veered directly toward its far-right fringes?

What the bloody hell is wrong with these people?

[PSI Wind]

Yeah, this basically makes me have no issue in voting for Hilary anymore. The way I see it now is that President is just a title. They hire the Judges and can veto or Executive Power things, sure, but the House, Senate, and/or Judges can still keep them in check.

[Tani Coyote]

1 hour ago, Patticus said:

I don't know if it's just the GOP undergoing some kind of hyper-regressive death throes as a result of Trump winning the primaries, but that is some weapons-grade bile in the Republican platform right there.

I've never been a fan of the Republican Party, but holy fuck... How can it be that, despite the lessons of their last two general election defeats being so resoundingly clear today, they've completely reversed course, ignoring the gigantic warning signs and sirens all around them, and poured on the gas? How is it that, despite the "Gang of 8" and all of the apparent self-awareness regarding how the party should tack back toward the safety of the center-right, the party has instead veered directly toward its far-right fringes?

What the bloody hell is wrong with these people?

It sounds like despite his fairly right-wing rhetoric, Trump still wasn't entirely liked by the conservative branches of the Party. To bridge this gap, he's courting the religious right to keep them as a close base of support. Trump has appealed to working class interests and racism, certainly, but he hasn't really done enough of a job to lure in the other big plank of the party - the WASP types.

The good news is these decisions aren't 100% final. They still need to pass a RNC committee to be presented at the convention. But unless the GOP goes through with the proposed idea of dumping Trump and his ideas, they will most likely pass them, as they are being made in alliance with Trump.

Just as Sanders supporters are stuck with Clinton, the GOP is stuck with Trump. Dumping him now would alienate the huge base of support he built up.

Plus, unlike Sanders, I doubt he's humble enough to endorse the eventual nominee. He's so drunk on his primary victory he will be pissed, and rightly so: while he's an idiot, he won fair and square from all I can tell. It's kind of sad that Trump has been able to ride into the convention on a cloud of populism (the winner take all tendencies aside), whereas Clinton has been tailed since day one of allegations of electoral manipulation.

7 minutes ago, PSI Wind said:

Yeah, this basically makes me have no issue in voting for Hilary anymore. The way I see it now is that President is just a title. They hire the Judges and can veto or Executive Power things, sure, but the House, Senate, and/or Judges can still keep them in check.

The same can be said of the House and Senate of the President. The three groups need to work together to be effective.

The last 6 years we've had a broken government, to show the worst case scenario.

Clinton needs Democratic majorities, and big ones preferably. It's certain that Obama got a lot of his problems because of his skin tone, so I won't be surprised if the GOP causes issues over Clinton's sex unless they are CRUSHED utterly in a few months.

[PSI Wind]

I honestly would rather have another 4 years of almost nothing. That way, at least the Status Quo stays the same for 4 years and we can get better president candidates....hopefully.

[Tani Coyote]

5 minutes ago, PSI Wind said:

I honestly would rather have another 4 years of almost nothing. That way, at least the Status Quo stays the same for 4 years and we can get better president candidates....hopefully.

 

At this point, it's not about the candidates anymore. Trump and Sanders both went outside the box with their ideas, different as they were. Both have forced their Party's platform to radically change for this election, as each one tapped into a base that had never before turned out in such huge numbers.

We are getting a taste of multi-party government, actually. The GOP and Democrats are effectively both two-party coalitions, rather than a single party, at present; they have always been a broad coalition of interests, but the internal differences have become more pronounced this time around. We have to choose which coalition is better.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

4 hours ago, PSI Wind said:

I honestly would rather have another 4 years of almost nothing. That way, at least the Status Quo stays the same for 4 years and we can get better president candidates....hopefully.

Considering how damaging that status quo has been to racial minorities, muslims, and women in regard to things like police violence and no-so-subtle racism, religious bigotry and discrimination, and reproductive rights, among many other problems like excessive gun violence where random people are massacring people in the streets, movie theatres, and fucking churches? ...fuck that.

That Status Quo staying the same for 4 years will risk me getting shot six times by the police that pulled over for a supposedly "broken" taillight. I ain't havin' that shit if there's any chance to do something better.

[Dizcrybe]

I'd rather have the same chances of getting shot in the street by cops than have them increase tenfold.

[Tani Coyote]

I am really hoping that between Trump alienating a lot of the GOP and the various issues the Democratic platform brings to the fore, this will be the most successful political breakthrough since the New Deal coalition formed.

It having been close to a century, a lot of more overt racism has melted away, so there's a good chance of being able to have a social democracy that isn't national socialist when it comes to race relations. Especially given the chance the South won't be a key player (thank God) in the coalition this time around.

Granted, Clinton represents an old elite within the Party, but she only narrowly came out on top (and with some questionable tactics). It's possible we could get a genuinely progressive candidate 8 years from now. America's not quite ready for another social democrat President, but we just might be in our lifetimes.

Now, Sanders has discovered the downfall of democracy. Democratic societies are slow to anger, but their rage is difficult to quell once it's fully unleashed. Despite his endorsement of Clinton and the many compromises Clinton gave, a lot of Sanders supporters remain hostile to the idea of backing her. I understand why he kept his campaign going as long as he did, but it seems a lot of his supporters do not. They have been so thoroughly turned against Clinton they won't support her despite the compromises.

This is quite frankly dumb. One logically supported Sanders over Clinton for where he was different - banking, healthcare, education, etc. - and it stands to reason that Clinton giving a huge chunk of that should be grounds to fall in line behind her. As with all coalitions, support can be withheld in the next election cycle. 2 years isn't that long of a time period to wait; Clinton needs the Sanders vote to effectively govern, and she'd be a fool to not try and pass some of Sanders' ideas.

Seriously. A Sanders backer going for Trump or a third party when Clinton's campaigning for so much of what Sanders was exclusively fighting for is shooting themselves in the foot.

[Milo]

21 hours ago, Raccoonatic Ogilvie said:

http://bipartisanreport.com/2016/07/12/republican-national-committee-adopts-gay-conversion-therapy-into-party-platform-details/

...As the Democratic Party gets ready to adopt the most left-wing agenda in decades, it appears the GOP is going the other direction. Trump is actively courting the religious right based on everything I can find. The net result? Short of not gaining the support of an RNC committee, inclusion of support for conversion therapy will be voted on at the convention next week.

This is just one of many proposals that has passed subcommittees and will be voted on by a final RNC committee before presented to the delegates at the convention.

Other gems passed by the subcommittees include:

-A constitutional amendment that will overturn the Supreme Court's gay marriage decision and leave the issue to each state.

-Teaching the Bible in schools as a historic document.

-Forcing transgender people to use the bathroom associated with the sex they were assigned at birth.

With this shit in play, I don't blame Bernie for endorsing Hillary. This is no longer Hillary vs. Trump. Both parties are showing their status as broad coalitions, and it's progressives versus far right nutjobs.

Aside from the fact that the Bible has nothing to do with American history and can be argued (namely those who aren't religious or don't factor in religious historical books) that it is not a accurate depiction of history; wouldn't having this proposal be a clear infringement on the separation of church and state (at least, in the context of public schools)?

[Tani Coyote]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/13/us/politics/republican-convention-issues.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share&_r=0

More juicy details from within the confines of the RNC.

One key thing we're seeing is a lot of moderate Republicans trying to be inclusive of gays and minorities in the platform language (cuz holy shit, the Democrats are pretty much guaranteed those votes otherwise due to Trump's hamfisted remarks), only for incidents like this to occur:

""An amendment to specifically recognize that gay people are targets of the Islamic State caused a stir among more conservative delegates who said they felt there was no need to single out any one group. As the delegate who offered the amendment, Giovanni Cicione of Rhode Island, argued his case — by saying he believed it was an “innocuous and important” way to tell gay people the Republican Party does not exclude them — another delegate moved to shut off the debate.

Jim Bopp, a delegate from Indiana, said the Republican Party had always rejected “identity politics.” Arguing against the measure, he said, “Obviously, there’s an agenda here.”"

As we can see, universalist thinking is actively undermining any attempts to make the platform more moderate.

Some more policy proposals that have passed pending final committee approval:

1. Women will not be able to serve in combat in the military.

2. Coal is described as clean energy.

3. Pornography will be declared a public health crisis that threatens children.

There is some hope - moderate Republicans managed to get enough signatures to force the Convention to vote on gay rights language. Probably won't amount to much, but it's a sign that the crazies haven't completely taken over the Party apparatus.

8 minutes ago, Gabe said:

Aside from the fact that the Bible has nothing to do with American history and can be argued (namely those who aren't religious or don't factor in religious historical books) that it is not a accurate depiction of history; wouldn't having this proposal be a clear infringement on the separation of church and state (at least, in the context of public schools)?

Well, they're going to try for an amendment overturning the gay marriage decision, so I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to go for clarifying the First Amendment with an amendment as well.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Starting to think there might be a correlation between stupidity and violence - mainly that too much stupid make the less stupid desire to use violence to stop it.

Which is a morbid way of saying my head hurts at how stupid those proposals are. Someone must be paying them big to make such proposals, because good god!

[-Robin-]

It just occurred to me what the weapons ban would look like for the Republican National Convention since its heavily pro-gun, so I found a list.

Since Ohio's an open carry state, all manner of gun weapons are allowed, but things like air rifles and air pistols are not. 

 

They also banned switchblades, nunchucks, pipes, loud speakers, mace, tennis balls, lasers, and CESTUS.

 

 

I'm assuming they expect some big Dark Souls fans to come crash the party or something.

 

http://www.ohio.com/polopoly_fs/1.685951.1464312271!/menu/standard/file/RNC protest restrictions.pdf

[Hyp3hat]

So you can take a gun to a political convention, but not a tennis ball? "Dammit, I was going to kill someone with my monster serve, but I guess I'll have to use a gun, that's not my jam at all."

Trump's got a veep, though http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36800811 

[Nepenthe]

I understand banning stuff like balls or speakers that will cause a disturbance, but what's the point of banning switchblades and nunchuks when probably 90% of the people at any given Republican convention can just blow someone away in a second? No one's going to take a blade to that kind of fight.

[PSI Wind]

You know what? I'm voting for Hilary, but I'm just done. I'm not happy for that decision and honestly I just fucking give up. I'm numb over all this and whoever gets in, I don't even care. With Brexit, ISIS winning with fear, and my families views (Arson, Murder, and Jaywalking, I know), I just am DONE. 

[SenEDDtor Missile]

This really only reinforces my view that the idea of a "sane Republican" is nothing but an oxymoron. Emphasis on the moron.

[Toby]

Ouch.

[Nepenthe]

27 minutes ago, SenEDtor Missile said:

This really only reinforces my view that the idea of a "sane Republican" is nothing but an oxymoron. Emphasis on the moron.

Yeah, let's not do this please. If you wouldn't accept Democrat bashing, then you shouldn't be bashing Republicans like this.

[SenEDDtor Missile]

3 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

Yeah, let's not do this please. If you wouldn't accept Democrat bashing, then you shouldn't be bashing Republicans like this.

Sorry. Spur of the moment.

[Tani Coyote]

Plus, if one looks at the articles in question, there IS a moderate Republican current that is trying to move the platform closer to the center. The attempt to at least give gay people representation on the platform is evidence enough of that.

They're just being overruled because Trump has basically given the keys to all the crazy types in the Party.

The GOP leadership is asserting that it's THEIR platform and Trump is just the candidate, but it goes without saying that they need to make him happy because of the huge numbers he has for himself.

[Patticus]

The undercurrent of moderate views is very likely why the GOP convention will be missing so very many A-list speakers and back-stage players this year - a good portion of the party-at-large wants nothing to do with Donald Trump and the Crazies, or his record high disapproval ratings. If they crash and burn come November, and hopefully they will, then maybe that will generate fresh impetus to oust the lunatics from the warden's office for good, their ideas finally proven electorally suicidal...

Alternatively, the victory of the ultimate establishment figurehead in Clinton could just worsen the whole damn shituation, leading to four more years of poisonous festering anger among the Republicans, and a fresh four years for Sandesian Democrats to reach similar levels of toxic ire (if she doesn't deliver big on some of these platform concessions anyway). That would lead to a very interesting 2020 election, with Clinton perhaps facing a war on two fronts, against both the more left-wing arm of her own party, in addition to a somehow even crazier, even angrier GOP.

Boy, aren't we in for a fun ride.

[Tani Coyote]

You know, it's almost good we have First Past the Post over proportional representation.

Otherwise I could legitimately see the GOP and Democrats both fragmenting after this election, and we'd end up with a four party system. Presumably the moderate GOP (who are more focused on economic liberalism than making the Bible law) would end up allying with the Libertarians.

[Nepenthe]

Trump has selected his running buddy, Mike Pence. The rundown: 12 years in Congress, one of the first to align with the Tea Party, signed a religious freedom bill into Indiana law and has advocated for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, advocates for income and inheritance tax cuts, launched a state-originating expansion of Medicaid in lieu of Obamacare, Koch brother ties. Basically sounds like a Mitt Romney-esque character.

[Rey Skywalker-Ren]

I really wanted Carly to be his running mate but she was the running mate for someone else before they dropped out at the last minute. But this seems promising for me. 

[Nepenthe]

Carly Fiorina is a fucking loon. If you're actually serious about supporting Trump now you actually got real lucky with this pick, although the fact that he's Mitt Romney 2.0 doesn't bode well for the long run considering 1.) Mitt Romney 1.0 couldn't win his last election because he wasn't pure enough, and 2.) He's criticized Trump before.