What does a MAGA hat stand for?

[Arwon]

Breaking the country so badly that the list of things that need fixing gets so long you can mock the people who want to fix it for being unfocused

 

[JPetroski]

Breaking the country so badly that the list of things that need fixing gets so long you can mock the people who want to fix it for being unfocused

Oh, come on. If you're going to add all THAT to the list, it's at least 50 miles long...

 

[Arwon]

We're used to thinking of other countries as having a "side" of politics that's malignant and damaging to the country as a whole, in spite of sometimes hegemonic support from the public. Be it political Islamists in various parts of the Muslim world, the radical Hindu nationalism now running India, authoritarian populist movements in the Philippines or Hungary, kleptocratic political parties in any number of developing countries, or the socialists in Venezuela, there's plenty of movements with popular support that we have no trouble thinking of as straight up outright harmful.

But we're less used to that thinking being appropriate to developed English-speaking first world countries, and it leads to a lingering smug bothsidesism that just doesn't really work at all and works to the benefit of a radically norm-breaking and rule-changing US Republican Party. Categories have shifted. Even here, external to the US in the rich world, it's hard to come to grips with the US being one of those countries now. But you can absolutely write about its politics in terms of a kleptocratic political movement built around an instinctively anti-democratic single leader which maintains loyalty by patronage and ethnic loyalties.

 

[El_Machinae]

Hmmmn, I think the major complaint about Republicans these days is that they weren't able to stand up to and re-orient Trump's base. I mean, we KNEW tax cuts, deficits, and expanded military spending was gonna happen if (R) won. But the failure to stand up to Trump really was the shameful bit.

 

[JPetroski]

We're used to thinking of other countries as having a "side" of politics that's malignant and damaging to the country as a whole,

I think both major US political parties are a cancer, frankly. One is better at managing their image, but both are spending this country into ruin, and neither seems particularly concerned with trying to unify us.

 

[El_Machinae]

I think both major US political parties are a cancer, frankly. One is better at managing their image, but both are spending this country into ruin, and neither seems particularly concerned with trying to unify us.

Government spending as a share of GDP is basically where it was during the Reagan/Bush years and the Bush II years? Currently something like 38%, less than many normal countries and well-within the range of what other countries are doing. It's not really the spending per se, though a great case could be made that it's not being spent as wisely as it could be.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

built around an instinctively anti-democratic single leader which maintains loyalty by patronage and ethnic loyalties.

People point out how nakedly corrupt it is when Saudi Princes book entire wings of Trump hotels while lobbying him. What is just as shocking, and probably more damaging in the long run, is GOP state representatives from Alabama and Florida doing the exact same thing to push Trump to put the Space Force headquarters in their state. We don't just act like a banana republic on the world stage, we're starting to let the rot spread internally as well.

But to answer question in the OP, the MAGA hat stands for racism.

 

[Arwon]

I think both major US political parties are a cancer, frankly. One is better at managing their image, but both are spending this country into ruin, and neither seems particularly concerned with trying to unify us.

Yeah see that's really silly. The US Democrats are by and large milquetoast centrists, they've still literally got people running for president who don't even want a proper healthcare system. The worst you can say about them is they're miserable and ineffective and really bad at stopping the Republicans from trampling all over them and key political/electoral norms.

Also your government spending per capita is at the low end of the OECD's range, it's not an issue except for the way taxation has become (been allowed to) so politically poisonous.

 

[Estebonrober]

Let me address the Reagan Clinton usage of MAGA vs Trump. Honestly it was always racist dog whistle nonsense. The difference being the blatant use of racist language by Trump. Talking about how dirty our cities are, the criminals coming in caravans, the banning of religious minorities from the US.

I’m really quite troubled by those who can’t detect the difference. Antifa philosophy has a hole set of reasoning why neo liberal types defend this type of speech just like your relatives and yes even you @rah are doing g here.

Because the MAGA hat stands for this guy still being in his cabinet. One of the only people still there from the beginning.

White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller railed against Republicans he saw as too weak on immigration and suggested Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients would one day replace white Americans, leaked emails to Breitbart News between 2015 and 2016 show.

https://www.newsweek.com/stephen-mi...-replace-existing-demographics-leaked-1482174

"Jeb [Bush] has mastered the art of using immigration rhetoric to sound 'moderate' while pushing the most extremist policies," Miller wrote, adding that Bush wanted to use "immigration to replace existing demographics."

@rah I know you are distracted by the lgbtq part of this but right here I've addressed two sets of issues you've brought up in other threads directly. Wearing the hat is racist in its sentiment for these reasons.

 

[JPetroski]

@Arwon
I hope you are correct that the spending isn't an issue and I'll be happy to find I'm worrying about non issues. I do question the wisdom of loading up on more expenses when we are in such debt and think both sides would do well to slay a sacred cow or two.

I do stand by the cancer comment though. It's high time that we have more than 2 parties. It just isn't working well at all. A little more competition would be a great thing, in my mind. It would also be nice to have a conservative party option that was more aligned with my fairly liberal social leanings.

 

[Arwon]

You need to change your electoral system away from single member districts and simple plurality voting, then.

 

[El_Machinae]

@Arwon
I hope you are correct that the spending isn't an issue and I'll be happy to find I'm worrying about non issues. I do question the wisdom of loading up on more expenses when we are in such debt and think both sides would do well to slay a sacred cow or two.

Well, my parallel to Reagan and Bush aren't the worst parallels. It's the lack of taxation that makes the deficits so bad. GOP voted for very high deficits all three times.

 

[Berzerker]

MAGA means many things, but generally returning to a lost era of US economic dominance before the world recovered from WWII, good paying jobs that could support a family in middle class comfort. Send the kids to college without going into massive debt and not fear bankruptcy because of a health bill. A time before the drug war turned neighborhoods into shooting galleries, filled prisons and coffins, and fueled waves of immigrants fleeing the front lines.

And it means pulling back on foreign adventurism and the corporate power driving it. The irony in 2016 is Trump was the peace vote and he took a bite out of the drug war. Canceling past trade deals and renegotiating them, Trump was riding Perot's shoulders 2 decades ago.

As for it being racist, of course some racists wear the hat and dont like brown people. But they're a minority, I suspect most people who want to slow immigration think 'open borders' suppresses wages or fear criminal gangs and those views are race neutral. Ty drug/cold war.

 

[civvver]

You seriously believe I'm in any way comfortable with my fellow Americans voting in any capacity for a party, individual candidate or not, considers me on par with a sexual offender?

Nothing you have said or ever could say could be more offensive then this.

I despair for this country because otherwise reasonable people such as yourself can still contemplate voting for a party of ghouls who clearly relish being reactionary.

Here's the thing, and this is going to sound insensitive because the singular issue is so important to you, it is your identity. But you're advocating that we all become single issue voters and not only exclusively vote for candidates who openly advance LGBT rights, but also vote against any candidate who doesn't. I'm not a single issue voter. I'll probably form some opinion one way or the other based on the debates, and generally I end up voting for the candidate I hate the least. Sad but true.

 

[rah]

@rah, I find it disconcerting that you didn't respond to this, since it is a clam and deliberate statement that points to the crux of the problem.

Because I'm not talking about national or state level. I've haven't voted republican in those in a while. This does not necessarily hold true for more local governments. And that's what I was discussing where I choose the person, not the party.

 

[civvver]

On a national level you pretty much have to go with party since they all vote in a huge bloc anyway. You might like one guy, and know he doesn't really support trump, but he's gonna vote with the party regardless. State level is a little better, country/local level party doesn't matter nearly as much as the individual. Just my thought anyway.

 

[Synobun]

Here's the thing, and this is going to sound insensitive because the singular issue is so important to you, it is your identity. But you're advocating that we all become single issue voters and not only exclusively vote for candidates who openly advance LGBT rights, but also vote against any candidate who doesn't. I'm not a single issue voter. I'll probably form some opinion one way or the other based on the debates, and generally I end up voting for the candidate I hate the least. Sad but true.

It's not her identity, it's her life. What the hell is your problem?

 

[Arwon]

Here's the thing, and this is going to sound insensitive because the singular issue is so important to you, it is your identity. But you're advocating that we all become single issue voters and not only exclusively vote for candidates who openly advance LGBT rights, but also vote against any candidate who doesn't. I'm not a single issue voter. I'll probably form some opinion one way or the other based on the debates, and generally I end up voting for the candidate I hate the least. Sad but true.

This makes it sound as if hating queers were plausibly the only problem with the US Republican Party

 

[Fippy]

While i agree with @Cloud_Strife usually, it's not healthy constantly trying to convince internet strangers of something (if you also really get upset).
In my ~20 years that i used online chats and forums now, i have never seen this work.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Because I'm not talking about national or state level. I've haven't voted republican in those in a while. This does not necessarily hold true for more local governments. And that's what I was discussing where I choose the person, not the party.

Did you realize though that by talking about local politics in a conversation where i think it was at least reasonably obvious that national and state level politics were the primary topic you sort of invited the clash that you got?

For the record, I vote Republican in local elections because no Democrat can make it onto the ballot. But in the grand scheme of the city council partisanship comes in distantly trailing pothole repairs so I understand your position...now that you have clarified it.