-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
2020 Democratic Presidential Primary | OT | Hickenlooper makes it to the debate
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
No offense taken. What I meant was if he would be able to push through his more progressive ideas in such a divisive political world, not that I'm against his ideas (I'm at least somewhat of a fan to be sure).
If we don't take the Senate we're going to deal with obstructionism from Republicans anyway, this is how I see it. I, for one, am not going to accept 4-8 years of "compromise" here (read: right-shifting), so if we assume that losing the Senate means a lameduck Dem president, then I'm going to all in on a radical Dem pres + Dem Senate.
"Bipartisanship" is dead for me.
I don't understand the conclusion you've reached. You seem to suggest without a Dem Senate then it is largely a wash, but doesn't a more radical (to use your word) Presidential candidate reduce the chance of a Dem Senate?
And veteran.
Which, in addition to being (at least in my mind, considering I'm a service member) a plus -- because I get the impression he's not one to commit troops on a whim -- it blunts at least some portion of possible (wrongheaded and disgusting) questions about his "commander in chief" qualities due to his sexuality. Dude led sailors in Afghanistan; that counts for a lot.
I agree about not accepting more centrism. While I'm not particularly informed somebody like Cory Booker seems like a poor choice in that regard, as does Beto possibly. A few years ago universal healthcare seemed like a pipe dream that Bernie was holding onto, but now it's slowly becoming more common for Dems. I guess what I don't know is whether Bernie has ideas that even with a slight Dem majority in Congress might be difficult to pass. If that makes sense?
See, the context you're talking about is that they're better at not having a deficit than the republicans, which is a low bar. You can look at how Europe handled 2008 vs the U.S.(One did stimulus, the others cut back drastically) to see what I mean by austerity.
Democrats, as block, get the spending half of keynesian economics, and that's it. They're federalists.
Interesting: Beto O'Rourke is eschewing the early states to hit all the places where Dems lost to Trump in 2016. Like he's already running a general election.
CW was that he'd eat into Bernie, but this seems like a subtweet of Joe Biden.
Seth A. RichardsonVerified account @SethARichardson
NEWS:@BetoORourke is coming to NE Ohio on Monday. Part of a swing including Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. https://www.cleveland.com/politics/...-visit-northeast-ohio-monday-sources-say.html …
CW was that he'd eat into Bernie, but this seems like a subtweet of Joe Biden.
Seth A. RichardsonVerified account @SethARichardson
NEWS:
So after George Wallace, Jerry Brown, Giuliani, and Hillary Clinton all squandered very large leads to Carter, Bill Clinton, McCain and Obama by not contesting early states enough, Beto is going to spring from 5th place to 1st by not focusing on early states.
Whether we get a Dem senate will come down to the downticket Democratic strategizing in 2020. The idea that we put forward a more moderate Dem president and more moderate Dem Senators in tandem so they work together is pretty gross to me, not concerning you directly but in a general sense. I don't like it. I understand why people feel like it's desirable (avoid Trump 2020 at all costs), but to me Trump is a symptom of America's problems and not the cause. It's vital that that the next president be able to push forward very progressive welfare policies and not halfass it in the name of "bipartisanship".
At its core, I believe Bernie's policies will be popular once implemented. You see how Republicans have an uphill battle with killing ACA (and they're trying their best) and they can't even touch Medicare. I believe that if Bernie can sneak in a Medicare expansion during a brief window when we have executive + legislative, it'll be harder for GOP to roll it back. People hate losing stuff when they have it, this is my critical political assumption going forward.
Shoot for the stars, then 'settle for less' is better than settling for less from the outset imo. Yes, Bernie will face resistance even from a Dem congress. This is why I don't like "centrism". But I don't think the solution here is to run on "centrism", because that's just giving up before you started.
The 2022 wave if a dem wins 2020 worries me, because a lot of libs might go "ok Trumps gone byeee" and then they wont vote, leaving the door open for a republican retaking of the house
A lot of time between now and the primaries. Seems like a play to eat up the media cycle (and/or a middle finger to Trump).
Starting to go off track but:
https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2013/03/27/profitability-the-euro-crisis-and-icelandic-myths/
SocialistERA turned me on to this dude and he's convinced me that austerity is bad and Keynesianist devaluation (or stimulus spending) doesn't work either. That is, when we recovered (if we truly recovered, Roberts pushes the idea of a "Long Depression"), it is due to externalities of being America and not because either perspective "works".
https://thenextrecession.wordpress....covery-the-long-depression-and-pax-americana/
I'm going to be ringing alarm bells the entire time believe you me.
That's all I can do, that and hope for the best.
I wasn't comparing U.S. devaluing vs Europe austerity, though. The U.S. reaction to the recession was massive spending. So your Iceland comparison is not really relevant. And, technically Keynesian economics says to spend during recessions. Austerity during recessions is anti-keynesian and more in line with classical economics.
https://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/06/23/g-20-agenda-us-stimulus-vs-eu-austerity/
I understand what you meant, but that graph was the main one I could find to reinforce my point: Orthodox Keynesianism is not "left" enough for me now, that's where I stand. It might've been "left" in the 80s, but now we're in the era of post-Keynesianism or MMT (which I do not personally believe in but AOC draws from it in her work with the GND).
well a lot of the masterminds behind Bernie's 2016 campaign are working for him now
I'm also not a fan of MMT.
I'm aware of MMT. MMT is basically supply-side economics for the left and focuses on devaluing. And it's still rooted in Keynesian economics, it just handwaves the problems with spending into oblivion. Which is honestly what mainstream democrats USUALLY do so it's not a change.
Additionally, the response that MMT would have to the 2008 recession would have been exactly the same as Obama's response.
It's true, and I honestly think we can and should deploy MMT right now for GND projects, but I don't think it's a long-term solution.
The long-term solution will always be, for me, dismantling capitalism. MMT or stimulus spending or devaluation or quantitative easing or whatever are bandaids, and we need bandaids sometimes, but we shouldn't mistake the bandaid for the cure.
There's a lot of minute by minute coverage in here. Beto does seem to be a bit sloppy right now because it seems he made a last minute decision. But this is a marathon that lasts months. Beto's stamina is absurd. He will be traveling all over the place livestreaming 6 hours a day once he's in full gear. In a week none of the details of the first day will be remembered.
You shouldn't mistake a variety of things that need adjustments depending on various economic situations for band-aids. Honestly though MMT is the status quo but this time with a fairy tale to excuse spending without limit.
Kirblar, may he rest in peace in Banned heaven, argues that the cyclical collapse of economies is a feature, not a bug, of capitalism. I am irrevocably opposed to this point of view, and so any reactive policy that seeks to "get through recessions as quick and painlessly as possible" instead of preventing them in the first place is, to me, a "bandaid". If you're also of the idea that cyclical downturns are inevitable and must be accepted, then you probably agree with Kirblar more than you do with me.
And I'll probably call you a filthy centrist for it!
Cyclical collapse of economies is to be excepted no matter what the system. You're not gonna have eternal growth or even eternal stagnation. Things will always collapse no matter how your society is structured, even if it's entirely controlled by robots.
*Shrug* I suppose having the opinion that infinite stability is impossible is centrist extremism.
This is exactly what's going to happen. Trump's '16 win got a lot of filthy casuals to get more active politically. A lot will go back to sleep once Trump is gone.
This is where we diverge. I think eternal stagnation or at least long-term (eternal is overselling it) stagnation is possible. Stagnation has kind of a bad connotation to it, let's call it "equilibrium" or "stability" as you suggested. I do think stability is impossible under modern capitalism (which assumes and necessitates unlimited growth), or that if it's possible it's of an undesirable form (a permanent proletariat underclass), but not necessarily under hypothetical forms of socialism. This enters the realm of pure ideology rather than economic theory though so I'm not going to try to convert you here.
Societies have stagnated before, but in such a way that most of the material burden of stagnation is placed on the shoulders of the working class/proletariat. I seek a kind of equality-oriented stagnation, which looks to be impossible under capitalism but possible under socialism.
Bernie's whole plan for getting things past the Senate has always hung on the GOP being able to act in good faith. A "million person march on Washington" only works if the other side is willing to play ball. So it's kinda silly to give him a pass on this kind of thinking when we don't others.
I don't even understand what this even means. Is this shade on Kamala Harris or Cory Booker? If so, that's ridiculous. The onus IS on the white man to condemnn white terrorism. The white man should be harder.
Michael Roberts is great. man people here have good tastesStarting to go off track but:
https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2013/03/27/profitability-the-euro-crisis-and-icelandic-myths/
SocialistERA turned me on to this dude and he's convinced me that austerity is bad and Keynesianist devaluation (or stimulus spending) doesn't work either. That is, when we recovered (if we truly recovered, Roberts pushes the idea of a "Long Depression"), it is due to externalities of being America and not because either perspective "works".
https://thenextrecession.wordpress....covery-the-long-depression-and-pax-americana/
Gideon Resnick ✔
@GideonResnick
.@BernieSanders campaign announces that they have unionized
@GideonResnick
.@BernieSanders campaign announces that they have unionized
Politico: Bernie Sanders' staffers unionize in first for presidential campaign
Bernie Sanders ✔
@BernieSanders
I'm proud that our campaign is the first presidential campaign to unionize.
We cannot just support unions with words, we must back it up with actions. On this campaign and when we are in the White House, we are going make it easier for people to join unions, not harder.
@BernieSanders
I'm proud that our campaign is the first presidential campaign to unionize.
We cannot just support unions with words, we must back it up with actions. On this campaign and when we are in the White House, we are going make it easier for people to join unions, not harder.
Last edited:
https://slate.com/technology/2018/0...ists-assumptions-about-wealth-inequality.html
There's a tweet I wish I could find for you. It was a small story about evidence of a pre-historical society that had high levels of egalitarianism upended by wealth concentration, which led to its collapse. I'm certain I'm not imagining it but Twitter's search tools are abysmal and I can't bring it up here. I did find this article though.
He might not stand out from the pack here, but his supporters definitely do just from anecdotal observation. He does not draw support from the "compromise and bipartisanship" arm of the Democrats, which we should both agree exists. So a victory for Bernie goes beyond him, towards the galvanizing of the political ideology he represents.
Kamala no. Cory let's all get along and Trump isnt a racist Booker yes
Gideon Resnick ✔
@GideonResnick
.@BernieSanders campaign announces that they have unionized
Politico: Bernie Sanders' staffers unionize in first for presidential campaign
Bernie Sanders ✔
@BernieSanders
I'm proud that our campaign is the first presidential campaign to unionize.
We cannot just support unions with words, we must back it up with actions. On this campaign and when we are in the White House, we are going make it easier for people to join unions, not harder.
Great news. Seriously.
Waves aren't automatic for midterms. The last ones were 1994, 2006, 2010 and 2018, and all had very specific reasons and build up. If Trump loses in 2020, the GOP is going to be a disaster for a while because they've completely reoriented to revolve solely as the Trump party.
I also and many others thought it would collapse nationally after whites became less and less of a majority and they lost demographic advantages. And then 2016 happened.
That part hasn't happened yet, it's in the process of happening, particularly given the preponderance of GOP created maps designed to minimize it. It'll start hitting certain states (like Texas) over the coming years, but not immediately. The GOP had a "last gasp" surge on their whites-only model that even they themselves deemed unsustainable long term in 2012 after Romney lost, but it completely revolves around Trump. When there's no more Trump, what do they do? It's going to be a big scramble for at least several years, and you will get many mini-Trumps run for office, but 2018 has shown they don't necessarily do very well without the cult of personality Trump has.
They're not the ones running for office, plus they're the ones letting him off the hook. Besides, you can't cite supporters here then brush them off when someone brings all up the assholes.
When theres no more trumps the core base isnt as excited but the suburban whites go back to the GOP
That's a really clever move by Bernie and co. I wonder if any other campaigns will follow suit.
Stagnation requires growth because populations grow. People will need new housing, new clothes, new luxuries, new power, new infrastructure as time goes on. If you don't believe in infinite growth, you can't believe in infinite stagnation. And, just to be clear, capitalism does not assume or necessitate unlimited growth, it necessitates flux and accounts for stability.
But, regardless, narrowing things down to capitalism this or capitalism that is fairly reductionist because the capitalism of one country is drastically different from another. Not to mention capitalism of a hundred years ago is drastically different than capitalism today. Not to mention that capitalism is simply an economic system and not a governmental one, so the two are not necessarily in lock-step.
And this flexibility is a strength of capitalism that no other system of government has. Socialism isn't designed for change based on the facts on the ground. Feudalism sure wasn't. Various authoritarian models are rigid. Of these systems I mentioned, though, the one that requires things to go exactly right the most often is Socialism.
Socialism is a fire and forget ideology. One that basically promises that once things are set up they'll all just continuously do well regardless of anything.
See, when people refer to stagnation periods in the past there's plenty of stability and economic flux/downturn during those points, they're just not as easily measurable as they are now.
See, this entire article is rampant speculation, especially in the context of other cities in the area (Everything related to Teotihuacán is speculation, unfortunately). Basically an assumption that tons of rich buildings in a city means that everyone lived equally (Even though there are richer, more opulent buildings than others and it's hard to say how densely packed different areas were). And the lack of any specific evidence of the time or people that lived there makes it a kinda pointless thing to bring up in the first place since you have no idea of the details of said society.
Last edited:
Reminder that Bernie STILL hasn't released his full tax returns....
https://twitter.com/jrubinblogger/status/1106612533564186626
Reminder that Jane Sanders promised in early 2016 that they would release years of tax returns, in full, however many years the Clintons released, 8, 10, whatever it's no big deal. Just gotta go back to Vermont and fire up the ol TurboTax...
https://youtu.be/5uZEtavUWqs
https://twitter.com/jrubinblogger/status/1106612533564186626
Reminder that Jane Sanders promised in early 2016 that they would release years of tax returns, in full, however many years the Clintons released, 8, 10, whatever it's no big deal. Just gotta go back to Vermont and fire up the ol TurboTax...
https://youtu.be/5uZEtavUWqs
Ilhan and AOC? And there will be more following their lead.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joelko...countries-shrinking-the-fastest/#48b96b68b83c
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...29ba66-0d3f-11e9-8938-5898adc28fa2_story.html
https://www.ft.com/content/a4d8316e-8566-11e6-8897-2359a58ac7a5
Past a certain level of living standards they shrink (lower than than the replacement rate of 2.1) rather than grow. And immigration isn't going to shore up these numbers forever, since they rely on high growth rates abroad which relies on desperation, low education, and poverty, all things that we're purportedly fighting against, even via capitalistic "convergence".
I used "modern" to account for this. Capitalists expect growth. When there isn't enough growth they hoard. When too many capitalists hoard at once, they create a recession/depression.
It's clearly not flexible enough to handle climate-change or white nationalism. Ecosocialism would work better for the former and internationalist socialism (I made this up, most branches of socialism are "international") would work better for the latter.
Sure, naive forms of it can be described as idealistic. What I want to is to improve on this where possible.
- Status