2020 US Election (Part One)

[Imaus]

Problem with absolve from student debt is it annoys people who have paid it off.

Interest free student debt and/or dollar for dollar repayments tend to be a bit more doable.

Okay so?

What are they going to do? Mow down the new generation of students? Who cares if they're 'annoyed'? What - they're going to take their selfishness and vote against their interests? There's already a party for that. ZING.

I didn't know we stopped policy-making and lawmaking because some people will be 'annoyed' all of a sudden.

 

[Birdjaguar]

The left should do a similar long term plan. But that would require agreeing to one. A critical weakness that the right has seemingly exploited.

A short term plan to beat trump would be much better. Until that happens, a democratic plan is pretty worthless. If they cannot beat Trump, they sure as hell need to have a plan to take the Senate.

The way you beat Trump is to get out the vote. The way to take the Senate is to get out the vote.

To get out the vote you identify the key problems and the kinds of solution you want your coalition to support. And you make sure you don't scare the middle. The goal should be more votes and voters in the states where votes matter.

 

[Zardnaar]

Okay so?

What are they going to do? Mow down the new generation of students? Who cares if they're 'annoyed'? What they're going to take their selfishness and vote against their interests? There's already a party for that. ZING.

It's why a lot of right wing parties non Trump can still get 30 or 40% support which is almost enough when one in three or four don't vote.

Often a tax cut might only be $20 a week but it's $20 bucks more than whatever the left is offering.

Would you sell your vote for $3000 or $4000 dollars vs nothing. Well over an election cycle......

That's what it comes down to often who can bribe the middle class.

For a lot of people who's in power makes no difference. They're not poor enough to qualify for government help and not rich enough to benefit much from tax cuts.

If you focus campaigns on groups which is what the left died alot of the time it's

"Well I get nothing I'll vote XYZ"

Or "Well you're ignoring us I'll vote for XYZ"

 

[Ajidica]

What are they going to do? Mow down the new generation of students? Who cares if they're 'annoyed'? What - they're going to take their selfishness and vote against their interests? There's already a party for that. ZING.

I mean, there are ways to approach student debt without blanket debt forgiveness or just making it free going forward. No interest government loans, loan forgiveness in exchange for some amount of public service work, dischargeable through bankruptcy, etc. Couple that with government programs to bring down the cost of higher education.
I graduated with a fair amount of student debt despite help from my parents and a good scholarship/financial aid package. I lived at home for two years and was able to put 75% of my income straight to paying off student loans. Got it all paid off in just over that time. My lizard brain would definitely kick in if I could have just paid the bare minimum and waited for the government to wipe my loan debt for me.

 

[Mouthwash]

Of course I don't:

To be clear, you think a quote from seven months ago which I qualified as being a rare moment of lucidity for him is grounds for calling me a hypocrite (due to my 'support of Trump')?

 

[Socrates99]

The people criticizing Owen's mob comments act like our elected officials in this supposed representative democracy actually carry out the will of the electorate. There's a reason they have a constant negative approval rating. Sometimes the spread is as low as negative 50, sometimes even lower. Not once in my adult life have they been positive. The representatives don't serve the people as intended. Occasionally activist uprisings are going to be necessary. It's why we have a constitutionally protected right to protest.

Theoretically if Sanders does win he will win both the popular vote and the EC because there is no path for a Democrat to lose the popular vote and win the EC. If he wins he does actually have a popular mandate for his ideas because they are so different from other candidates. There would be nothing wrong with him using public pressure to force Congress to actually represent people's will. You know, like they should be doing in the first place.

 

[AdrienIer]

Theoretically if Sanders does win he will win both the popular vote and the EC because there is no path for a Democrat to lose the popular vote and win the EC.

That's not actually true. Obama would have won in both 2008 and 2012 if you substracted his national margin of victory to his score in all states (winning by 7.3% in '08, with a tipping point state at 8.95% and by 3.9% in '12 with a tipping point state at 5.37%). So he could have lost the popular vote, and if his losses had been perfectly distributed among all states he'd have won the election anyway

 

[Ajidica]

Theoretically if Sanders does win he will win both the popular vote and the EC because there is no path for a Democrat to lose the popular vote and win the EC. If he wins he does actually have a popular mandate for his ideas because they are so different from other candidates. There would be nothing wrong with him using public pressure to force Congress to actually represent people's will. You know, like they should be doing in the first place.

Obama couldn't get the Congresscritters to spend on stimulus packages during the largest economic crisis since the Great Depression, what makes you think that President Sanders, who the majority of his own party neither likes nor trusts, would be able to rally Congresscritters on both sides via the bully pulpit to oversee a massive change to US society and economy.

 

[Socrates99]

That's not actually true. Obama would have won in both 2008 and 2012 if you substracted his national margin of victory to his score in all states (winning by 7.3% in '08, with a tipping point state at 8.95% and by 3.9% in '12 with a tipping point state at 5.37%). So he could have lost the popular vote, and if his losses had been perfectly distributed among all states he'd have won the election anyway

Operative words are "could have". The wide margins and high populations of solid blue states pretty much make it impossible.

Obama couldn't get the Congresscritters to spend on stimulus packages during the largest economic crisis since the Great Depression, what makes you think that President Sanders, who the majority of his own party neither likes nor trusts, would be able to rally Congresscritters on both sides via the bully pulpit to oversee a massive change to US society and economy.

You didnt read Owen's posts I referred to did you? One of the major complaints about Obama was that he built a huge movement to get elected then essentially let it go and shifted to technocrat mode.

Owen referred to Bernie promising to be the "activist in chief." If congresscritters in progressive districts legislate conservative, ie Nancy Pelosi, he'll support primaries against them. The reason Democrats hate him is because hes an independent and he's forcing them leftward.

 

[Ajidica]

You didnt read Owen's posts I referred to did you? One of the major complaints about Obama was that he built a huge movement to get elected then essentially let it go and shifted to technocrat mode.

Owen referred to Bernie promising to be the "activist in chief." If congresscritters in progressive districts legislate conservative, ie Nancy Pelosi, he'll support primaries against them. The reason Democrats hate him is because hes an independent and he's forcing them leftward.

I firmly disagree with Owen's "Keep them angry all the time" position as something that is quite unsustainable, both politically and societally.

 

[Socrates99]

I firmly disagree with Owen's "Keep them angry all the time" position as something that is quite unsustainable, both politically and societally.

I don't think keeping people angry all the time is possible. People got angry after the Great Depression and forced populist legislation through that massively improved the conditions of the average citizen. Over time people became complacent and allowed power and wealth to concentrate just like it did in the early 19th century.

Its almost inevitable that big changes are going to happen. Trump's election was a molotov cocktail thrown at Washington. This anger has been stewing since the second worse economic collapse in US history.

People are mad whether you like it or not. It's just a matter of whether we get a leader that steers it towards positive change or channels it into hating various groups.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

We live in a time when obstruction has become the only thing that the GOP can do. Unless the Democrats win overwhelming majorities in both houses this year, no amount of voter anger is going to make the GOP act. I read the other day that the largest protests in US history have all been in the last 5 years and it hasn't been enough to change really anything.

 

[Imaus]

The people criticizing Owen's mob comments act like our elected officials in this supposed representative democracy actually carry out the will of the electorate. There's a reason they have a constant negative approval rating. Sometimes the spread is as low as negative 50, sometimes even lower. Not once in my adult life have they been positive. The representatives don't serve the people as intended. Occasionally activist uprisings are going to be necessary. It's why we have a constitutionally protected right to protest.

Theoretically if Sanders does win he will win both the popular vote and the EC because there is no path for a Democrat to lose the popular vote and win the EC. If he wins he does actually have a popular mandate for his ideas because they are so different from other candidates. There would be nothing wrong with him using public pressure to force Congress to actually represent people's will. You know, like they should be doing in the first place.

And then what happens when the other side uses the same tools and tactics? You really want to drag America down that road? You want the reps to whip up their militias even more? Form their own mobs? Form their own paramilitary wings? You think the Reps and Fascists and Libertarians are going to just stand by, let the Dems and Socialists and Progs pick up these tools and not follow suite? You think they'll be cowered by one wave of mob action?

This **** occurs around the world already and it's not a boon for democracy, it's a chain. The mob is not needed. Getting rid of voter apathy is. Getting the people invested, but not angered, over the political process is. Using public pressure and the mob is the worst type of banal democracy.

And now that it seems Bernie is on a path he's not going to recover from, it's a moot point anyway.

 

[Socrates99]

And then what happens when the other side uses the same tools and tactics? You really want to drag America down that road? You want the reps to whip up their militias even more? Form their own mobs? Form their own paramilitary wings? You think the Reps and Fascists and Libertarians are going to just stand by, let the Dems and Socialists and Progs pick up these tools and not follow suite? You think they'll be cowered by one wave of mob action?

This **** occurs around the world already and it's not a boon for democracy, it's a chain. The mob is not needed. Getting rid of voter apathy is. Getting the people invested, but not angered, over the political process is. Using public pressure and the mob is the worst type of banal democracy.

And now that it seems Bernie is on a path he's not going to recover from, it's a moot point anyway.

You act like Bernie would lead some violent movement which is absurd. No, all I'm saying is the representatives need to actually represent the people or get protested everywhere. Volunteers need to phone bank against politicians that fail to legislate the way those who elected them want them to. Activists need to get suppressed messages out. Congress has a permanently abysmal approval rating because they aren't doing what they're supposed to do.

You're using a hyperbolic version of what I'm actually saying in a sad sack attempt to claim it's "bad." Politicians just need to be held to account.

 

[Traitorfish]

The mob is not needed. Getting rid of voter apathy is. Getting the people invested, but not angered, over the political process is. Using public pressure and the mob is the worst type of banal democracy.

Could you explain to us your plan to get rid of voter apathy without actually mobilising voters? Do you imagine some future where the public become really energised about deferring to their technocratic overlords?

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Could you explain to us your plan to get rid of voter apathy without actually mobilising voters? Do you imagine some future where the public become really energised about deferring to their technocratic overlords?

I'd go with hope and change but it turns out that wasn't able to sustain turnout in the off-years. In any case, it was an energetic and positive movement.

 

[Takhisis]

Just want to clarify - "burn your house down" is a metaphor here. I don't, as a general principle, advocate literal physical violence. What I do advocate is direct action: organization, general strikes, picketing, boycotts, protests and the like. By the latter part of that line, to stay angry after you get what you want, I mean in the sense of maintaining solidarity and being hyper-vigilant about any sign of recalcitrance, because that is, in a word, why the Left always loses in the end. People get fed up with the state of affairs, people form a mob and demand their rights, the political system gets scared and concedes those rights (or, more typically, a watered down version that kind of extends those rights), the mob is satisfied and disperses, and then what follows is many years of chipping away and eroding those extended rights until we're right back to square 1.

Moreover, the project doesn't revolve around fomenting anger against individual people. Leftism isn't anger at individuals, but rather righteous anger at a system which denies people their dignity, which systematically prohibits them from even the minimal levels which might constitute a decent life. I am not angry at Jeff Bezos. I am angry that in this country currently there are more unoccupied houses than homeless people. I am angry that 49.1 million Americans are food insecure while food rots on the shelves of grocery stores every day. I am angry that 80 million Americans have to convince themselves "you know, maybe that ache isn't such a big deal, I can manage" because healthcare in this country is treated as a commodity, rather than a basic human right. I am angry that graduate students, who teach classes, grade papers, perform research, and attend conferences - and nominally for this labor receive a salary - have to every day justify their existence to administrative staff and faculty. That they should give their 50+ hours of weekly labor freely and accept what scraps admin decides to throw their way with a nod and a smile and a "thank you sir," because they should consider themselves lucky to be receiving such direct "on-the-job experience." The Leftist project is the eternal struggle to right these injustices, and the promise to not be satisfied and never rest until every human being is able to live in the dignity and comfort to which they, as human beings, are entitled.

To quote MLK:

Let us be dissatisfied until America will no longer have a high blood pressure of creeds and an anemia of deeds.

• Let us be dissatisfied until the tragic walls that separate the outer city of wealth and comfort from the inner city of poverty and despair shall be crushed by the battering rams of the forces of justice.
• Let us be dissatisfied until those who live on the outskirts of hope are brought into the metropolis of daily security.
• Let us be dissatisfied until slums are cast into the junk heaps of history, and every family will live in a decent, sanitary home.
• Let us be dissatisfied until the dark yesterdays of segregated schools will be transformed into bright tomorrows of quality integrated education.
• Let us be dissatisfied until integration is not seen as a problem but as an opportunity to participate in the beauty of diversity.
• Let us be dissatisfied until men and women, however black they may be, will be judged on the basis of the content of their character, not on the basis of the color of their skin. Let us be dissatisfied.
• Let us be dissatisfied until every state capitol will be housed by a governor who will do justly, who will love mercy, and who will walk humbly with his God.
• Let us be dissatisfied until from every city hall, justice will roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream. Let us be dissatisfied until that day when the lion and the lamb shall lie down together, and every man will sit under his own vine and fig tree and none shall be afraid. Let us be dissatisfied. And men will recognize that out of one blood God made all men to dwell upon the face of the earth. Let us be dissatisfied until that day when nobody will shout "White Power!" — when nobody will shout "Black Power!" — but everybody will talk about God's power and human power.

The LGBT struggle didn't end in 1958, and it didn't end in 1977, and it didn't end in 2010, and it didn't end in 2012, and it didn't end in 2015 it continues through today. Likewise, the Civil Rights struggle didn't end in 1954, and it didn't end in 1964, and it didn't end in 2008. The Union Organizer understands this. Laws are fickle and subject to change. What matters is power, and people are powerful so long as they are united, committed and vigilant. If you lose that power, then it doesn't matter what the courts once said. It doesn't matter what the old legislation guarantees, those hard-fought rights will be rolled back at the snap of a finger. To me this is a big ideological difference between Warren and Sanders, and mostly what I meant by the mob comments. Warren's plan is to implement some rules and is confident that they'll be respected and maintained going forward. Sanders knows that such confidence is misplaced, and instead is focused on building an organized, committed base of power that will make sure of it.

As an important sidenote, I pay a lot of attention to this because the US corporatosphere has been actively trying to disseminate and deepen this system by buying TV channels, pharmaceutical companies, mining companies, grains and livestock shippers, funding miracle-peddling megachurches, etc. so I'm not a mere spectator. E.g. Uber operates openly breaking the law, Amazon's set to come in and get a tax break while I get tax increases…

I can agree with MLK's speech, of course, but… anger is not the same as dissatisfaction. Dissatisfaction and disagreement are one thing; perpetual ire is another. (remember: ira fvror brevis est)
I hope that you can help fix the country you live in because that will help fix the one I live in, but I hope that you can do so by answering those that are currently waging war on society by waging peace against them.

By technocrat is meant here essentially what Lexicus said. The problem isn't "having a plan," nor is the problem in "consulting experts to create those plans." The problem is in framing your platform around your expertise/qualifications qua expertise/qualifications. I think this is a big distinction between Warren and Sanders, and indicative of the sorts of reasons why I'm bugged by Warren. Look at the way their campaigns are framed. Bernie's got plans. Bernie's got a ton of plans. Contrary to popular narrative, most of them are quite well fleshed out. But the thing about Bernie's campaign is that the platform is based on the content of the plans themselves: Green New Deal, Medicare for All, Housing for All, Free College, Workplace Democracy. It's pretty routine to be able to rattle off the core plans of his platform, and you are ultimately evaluating Bernie on the basis of whether or not you agree with the content of those plans. The difference with Warren is that the focus isn't on the content of her plans, but the fact that she has plans. Nevermind that many of her plans are, in fact, extremely vague (at least going by the Medium posts that constitute her Issues page). The important fact is that she has them. What are they? Who knows, who cares, you need simply take solace in the fact that she has a plan for that. It's that fetishization of expertise or qualifications for their own sake that I take issue with. Had the same problem with the Hillary campaign. See also: the deification of Mueller by the r/esisters slash Mueller Time-ers

These technocrats of yours sound awfully familiar to the typical Latin American caudillo who'll tell you to trust you because he/she's better (they often rattle off plans and plans too on camera) and once they're in power everything's going to be all right and all you need to do is vote them at the end of each mandate.

To be clear, you think a quote from seven months ago which I qualified as being a rare moment of lucidity for him is grounds for calling me a hypocrite (due to my 'support of Trump')?

You didn't qualify it as ‘a rare moment of lucidity for him’. Please stop lying. I know that you do not respect ‘us liberals’, but at least show some respect for yourself.

 

[Mouthwash]

You didn't qualify it as ‘a rare moment of lucidity for him’. Please stop lying. I know that you do not respect ‘us liberals’, but at least show some respect for yourself.

"[It was] the smartest thing Donald Trump has ever said. I know it's not a high bar, but he is absolutely correct and insightful here."

Calling me a liar when the proof is literally in your own post? Yeah, it's a real headscratcher why I don't respect you guys.

 

[Zardnaar]

Protests don't really matter unless they are married to falling polls.

We had them in the 90s PM kinda panicked, minister said ignore them.

It's mostly a way for people to blow off steam/give them something to focus on/make them think their opinions important.

 

[Zkribbler]

Often a tax cut might only be $20 a week but it's $20 bucks more than whatever the left is offering.

Overlooking the $1,000/mo offered by Yang,
The $15/hr minimum wage.
Universal health care under Medicare.
Tuition frii college education.