Well I got most of my wishes... I mean both the Fed and State governments are split again. Unfortunately MN went too far DEM for my tastes.
The questions on my mind:
CNN DEMs Ascendant
FOX News DEMs to Flex Muscles
MinnPost DEMs Win Most
MPR News Results
The questions on my mind:
- Will Trump change his style somewhat in response to this rebuke from the American people? Or will he blame others for the failures, claim any successes and stay the same annoying person? (likely the latter)
- Will the US Dems waste the next 2 years trying to impeach Trump? (likely)
- Will that crackpot Ellison waste MN dollars suing the Feds, protecting illegal residents and fighting our police officers? (likely)
CNN DEMs Ascendant
FOX News DEMs to Flex Muscles
MinnPost DEMs Win Most
MPR News Results
85 comments:
Item #1 on the House Ways and Means committee's (I think that's the right one) agenda should be subpoenaing Trump's tax returns.
Moose
"Will the US Dems waste the next 2 years trying to impeach Trump? (likely) "
Unless Mueller has smoking-gun level evidence, I think they'll stay away. There's no way you're going to get 67 votes in the Senate to remove Trump from office, so they're better served doing the dozens of legitimate investigations that are warranted based on the behavior of this administration.
And that's not just Trump controversies. The GOP Congress never held a single hearing to review the hurricane response in Puerto Rico. That's just a failure of basic governance.
John, are you now going to call for Republicans to change their views to better reach the urban and suburban voter?
I think I already did... I voted for three Democrats in protest...
The party of Trump went too far as I noted Monday.
Well it seems I was correct about #1... Trump is still Trump
It doesn't make sense to try to impeach Trump. But I do worry whether he will otherwise be overinvestigated. I don't think that helped when the Republican s did that with Hillary. She did win the popular vote. And people expect Democrats to be more positive.
--Hiram
America's Problem Isn't Tribalism—It's Racism
Who left the link? Oh well...
From Merriam Webster...
tribalism
1 : tribal consciousness and loyalty especially : exaltation of the tribe above other groups
2 : strong in-group loyalty
tribe
1a : a social group comprising numerous families, clans, or generations together with slaves, dependents, or adopted strangers
1b : a political division of the Roman people originally representing one of the three original tribes of ancient Rome
2 : a group of persons having a common character, occupation, or interest
3 : a category of taxonomic classification ranking below a subfamily
Per the link...
"In the fallout from Tuesday’s midterm elections, many political analysts have concluded that blue America and red America are ever more divided, ever more at each other’s throats. But calling this “tribalism” is misleading, because only one side of this divide remotely resembles a coalition based on ethnic and religious lines, and only one side has committed itself to a political strategy that relies on stoking hatred and fear of the other. By diagnosing America’s problem as tribalism, chin-stroking pundits and their sorrowful semi-Trumpist counterparts in Congress have hidden the actual problem in American politics behind a weird euphemism."
I mean how incorrect can a writer be?
I mean just look at the terms Moose used to describe the members of Tribe Conservative over here just this morning...
"However, some people do choose to be "Christian" racists, sexists, xenophobes, homophobes, etc. etc."
And of course there are Clinton's memorable words...
"Hillary Clinton sparked a controversy Friday night after suggesting half of Donald Trump’s supporters belonged in “a basket of deplorables” which she described as consisting of “the racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic – you name it.”
She went to note “some of those folks – they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America”."
If that is not a "political strategy that relies on stoking hatred and fear of the other"...
You need to remove your blind fold.
This is a good review of that Writer Adam Serwer :-)
Were we stoking fear of racists and anti-Semites when we went to war against Germany?
What a strange ideology it is that says that racism is the same as not-racism.
Moose
Racism
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
2b : a political or social system founded on racism
3 : racial prejudice or discrimination
Now how does that Godwin Law go again?
When people are losing the argument, they will make the huge irrational leap to the Nazis... Try again, you can do better.
"What a strange ideology it is that says that racism is the same as not-racism."
As for this, please remember the definitions above.
Are the Stupid People that think less of certain White people any less Racist than the Stupid People that think less of certain Minority people.
It is a fascinating concept.
That’s not Godwin’s Law.
Moose
Close enough...
"Godwin's law (or Godwin's rule of Hitler analogies) is an Internet adage asserting that "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"; that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Adolf Hitler or his deeds, the point at which effectively the discussion or thread often ends."
I don't think you met Godwin's criteria for bringing it up...
"If you're thoughtful about it and show some real awareness of history, go ahead and refer to Hitler when you talk about Trump, or any other politician."
I think you just got lazy a threw it out there...
“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”
-- H. L. Mencken
I hope you're happy.
I used it as an analogy to your idiotic idea that racists and not-racists should be equally feared in a pluralistic society, or rather that "fear stoking" by racists is the same as not-racists calling out the fear stoking of racists. It is an apt analogy.
And the parallels between Hitler's and Trump's authoritarianism have been well established by many people much smarter than me.
Moose
Jerry,
I am so happy !!!
- No more unpaid for tax cuts
- Someone will be watching the Executive Branch for graft and corruption
- Maybe something can be done on immigration policy
- Trump MAY even learn to work with and respect people, instead of only attacking and demeaning them... :-) If not the next 2 years are going to be really LONG for him.
The only way this would be better is if the Senate went back to requiring 60 votes for new appointments.
Here is what you wrote...
"Were we stoking fear of racists and anti-Semites when we went to war against Germany? What a strange ideology it is that says that racism is the same as not-racism." Moose
Where I take exception, is that you and the rest of Tribe Liberal often use terms like "Christian" racists, sexists, xenophobes, homophobes, etc. etc." to described Tribe Conservative members. When I believe those terms describe a small percentage of the people in that tribe.
In that way you are just like the members of Tribe Conservative. They label Tribe Liberal people as socialists, against borders, against ICE, against law enforcement, etc all to make Tribe Liberal people appear more extreme than they are.
So yes both Tribes are similar but different.
Here is what I actually said.
“However, some people do choose to be "Christian" racists, sexists, xenophobes, homophobes, etc. etc.”
You’ll notice here the word ‘some’.
So...go away and take your poor reading comprehension and your straw man with you.
Moose
Here is a little more for context
____
Usually that means...
Taking from Peter...
and
Giving to Paul...
With little or no consideration to Peter or Paul's life choices...
_____
"With little or no consideration to Peter or Paul's life choices..."
Because people choose to be black, poor, sick, gay, born in a dangerous country, etc. etc...
However, some people do choose to be "Christian" racists, sexists, xenophobes, homophobes, etc. etc.
All of that is part of my consideration when voting. I don't play games with my votes like you do.
Moose
With that in mind...
What percentage of the Tribe Conservative Membership do you think is "some"?
Does it justify comparing fighting them to fighting Nazis?
Some more context:
Moose: "However, some people do choose to be "Christian" racists, sexists, xenophobes, homophobes, etc. etc."
John: If that is not a "political strategy that relies on stoking hatred and fear of the other"...
Racism, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, etc. etc. should never be condoned. It is not a political strategy to denounce such things and to warn people about those who espouse those ideologies. It is good citizenship. The Nazis espoused those ideologies. We denounced them (eventually) and warned about them and fought them and defeated them. It is an apt and just comparison.
Also "some" is "some". It doesn't require a percentage.
Moose
Of course percentages matter.
2 out 100
Is a lot different
Than 80 of 100
In your view then. Are most Tribe Conservative members nice normal Americans or racists, sexists, xenophobia’s, etc?
Your comprehension is terrible. Read what I have already written. Understand it.
Moose
I have read it multiple times and it still indicates to me that you think a large number of the members of the Conservative Tribe are those "evil things".
I simply disagree with you and would never use such a broad brush to apply such a hateful stereotype to such a large group of American citizens.
An example: Just because a citizen wants to:
- stop illegal entry into our country
- deport illegal residents from our country
- base immigration on qualifications that are meant to benefit America
- ensure that our welfare and education benefits go to people who are in America legally
In no way means they are Racist or Xenophobic. It just means that they are law abiding and pragmatic.
Now as for sexists... Please remember that 10's of Millions of Tribe Conservative members are women... Are you really calling them sexist?
Just because they believe differently than you?
Now I am NOT saying that all the folks in Tribe Conservative are nice people...
But I believe the VAST majority are...
Just as I would never say that all the folks in Tribe Liberal are nice people...
But I believe the VAST majority of them are...
And it sure would help AMERICA if the people of both Tribes would stop throwing rocks at the other tribe and start working to improve our country.
The past few weeks Trump has conducted a very racist campaign. I think it is fair and logical to say that many voters who support Trump and vote GOP are somewhat racist.
Laurie,
Trump played on these simple logical beliefs.
An example: Just because a citizen wants to:
- stop illegal entry into our country
- deport illegal residents from our country
- base immigration on qualifications that are meant to benefit America
- ensure that our welfare and education benefits go to people who are in America legally
In no way means they are Racist or Xenophobic. It just means that they are law abiding and pragmatic.
How is striving to stop illegal immigration
or acknowledging that some people who violate our borders are criminals
being racist?
Remember...
Racism
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
2b : a political or social system founded on racism
3 : racial prejudice or discrimination
It’s really simple.
A racist is a racist
A sexist is a sexist
A xenophobe is a xenophobe
A homophobe is a homophobe
An islamophobe is an islamophobe.
Got the picture? Good.
Now. If you don’t consider yourself to be any of those things, but you support people who are those things and who do those things, what are you?
A Republican.
Moose
"How is striving to stop illegal immigration or acknowledging that some people who violate our borders are criminals being racist?"
There are ways to oppose those things that are not racist. Unfortunately, the President doesn't choose those ways - he makes broad assertions about populations, he says things that are untrue, and he and his sycophants traffic in language (like "the caravan will bring disease") that is just vile and yes, reminiscent of things that happened in certain unsavory regimes of the past.
That is certainly a lot of prejudice, stereotyping and likely racism packed into one comment... I mean assume you are mostly aiming this vitriol at White citizens?
And a HUGE assumption that no one in Tribe Liberal supports people who are the above... Which I am pretty sure is very incorrect.
Why is it so important for you to see Republicans as bad or evil?
And for you to deny that your tribe also contains some bad / evil members?
Sean,
I agree that Trump traffics in fear and lies to scare people. And yet on the other hand...
There is always a possibility that people coming into our country illegally from third world countries will bring in:
- disease
- criminals
- terrorists
- slaves
- etc
This has nothing to do racism, it is just a fact that he blasts through a loud speaker to scare people.
For some reason Liberals work equally hard to deny the down sides of soft borders and illegal entries.
"There is always a possibility that people coming into our country illegally from third world countries will bring in:"
Our border has been "soft" for decades and none of that has happened. Illegal immigrant crime occurs at a lower rate than native-born crime. None of the 9/11 terrorists swam across the Rio Grande. On and on and on...
There is always a possibility that a giant meteor will fall on the White House tomorrow, too. But it would be irresponsible to trumpet it out like it's fact.
"I mean assume you are mostly aiming this vitriol at White citizens?"
Silly assumptions are silly.
"Why is it so important for you to see Republicans as bad or evil?"
Do I? Maybe. By their fruits shall you know them.
"And for you to deny that your tribe also contains some bad / evil members?"
I never said that. You have a really bad habit of putting words in other people mouths. It's not something good people do.
Moose
Sean,
Somehow drugs, illegal workers, trafficked illegals "indentured slaves", etc keep showing up in our communities... My point being that our soft borders create a LOT of problems in the USA that Liberals like to down play...
Not to mention the simple fact that illegals drive down wages for our low skill / low knowledge workers.
As for lower crime stats... I am not sure how much credibility to give that since I think of crimes committed within illegal communities go unreported.
Finally, I personally would love to deport our home grown criminals to another country... Do you think Australia would be willing to become a penal colony again. :-)
And by the way, please note that none of this discussion is about race or legal immigration.
It is about people trying to enter our country illegally or under false pretense.
Moose,
Actually you did...
"Now. If you don’t consider yourself to be any of those things, but you support people who are those things and who do those things, what are you? A Republican." Moose
You did not acknowledge that you could also be a Democrat, an Independent or a Disenfranchised.
"Illegal immigrants drive down wages" is not the same as saying "They're sending rapists" or "The caravan is bringing disease".
As I said...
I agree that Trump traffics in fear and lies to scare people.
It's not just Trump, though. Much of the institutional Republican Party does. Jeff Johnson certainly did in his campaign. Fox News does it in spades -- and not just the evening people.
Just as Tribe Liberal does with...
"they will take away your Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, coverage with pre-existing conditions, etc..."
or broad brushing a whole tribe with terms like...
"racist, sexist, xenophobe, homophobe, islamophobe"
Apparently fear sells for both sides...
"they will take away your Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, coverage with pre-existing conditions, etc..."
Again, as I documented just a few days ago, Republicans have in fact proposed cutting those very things.
Changing them is not necessarily a bad thing, since they are like a train running towards a tunnel that is too small.
But Tribe Liberal down plays the looming disaster and uses recommend changes to scare the needy and infirm.
I am curious...
Do you really think that Republicans want to cut their own benefits? Or those of their Parents?
"Do you really think that Republicans want to cut their own benefits? Or those of their Parents?"
No, we know who Republicans want to screw with policies like this, and it ain't themselves.
"Actually you did..."
No. I did not. Because that goes withOUT saying.
I'm talking about sanctioned Republican ideology. The same does not exist on the Democrat side.
Moose
Sean,
Who is it then? Please remember that many different types of American citizens vote Republican.
People from all Races, both sexes, all ages, all education levels, all income levels, etc... Moose and you may like to stereotype them, but they are pretty diverse.
Moose,
Then do you want to change this statement to include people from all citizen groups?
"Now. If you don’t consider yourself to be any of those things, but you support people who are those things and who do those things, what are you? A Republican. Moose"
"racist, sexist, xenophobe, homophobe, islamophobe"
"sanctioned Republican ideology"
Please elaborate.
sanc·tion
NOUN
1. a threatened penalty for disobeying a law or rule.
"a range of sanctions aimed at deterring insider abuse"
synonyms:
penalty · punishment · deterrent · punitive action · discipline · [more]
2. official permission or approval for an action.
"he appealed to the bishop for his sanction"
synonyms:
authorization · consent · leave · permission · authority · warrant · [more]
VERB
3. give official permission or approval for (an action).
"only two treatments have been sanctioned by the Food and Drug Administration"
synonyms:
authorize · consent to · permit · allow · give leave for · [more]
4. impose a sanction or penalty on.
synonyms:
punish · discipline someone for
Moose
Moose,
I understand the word sanction. I do not understand how you see Republican ideology as sanctioning the above?
"sanction: official permission or approval for an action"
You appear to be saying that the Republican ideology gives official permission or approval to be "racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic, islamophobic" and I want some specifics?
Cause I just don't see it. I do agree that there are some in the party who may support these bad behaviors. One being our dork of a President. But it sure is not part of the platform.
Republican Platform 2016
You have it backwards.
Republican politicians espouse that ideology. The electorate (the ones in charge, remember) put those politicians in office. The electorate have sanctioned that ideology.
I am saying that the electorate, by putting such people in office, have given official permission or approval for them to be "racist, sexist, etc.". If the electorate did not want to sanction those things, they would not have put them in office.
Moose
I do agree that the election of and blind support for the sinful Trump by the religious right does puzzle me.
Though if I get beyond Trump's personality and lies, his political intent seems somewhat aligned with the GOP platform.
I have to assume that it is simply his cult of personality that swayed them to support him. Not desire to support hurtful policies.
"Not desire to support hurtful policies."
The "religious right" of the not-too-distant past was virulently racist. Perhaps the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
It is simple. Liberals do not understand conservative morality and reject it. Therefore, any attempt to make peoples' lives better-- the greatest good for the greatest number-- is rejected because it does not meet the Left's irrational test for "caring" and "fairness." For example, Trump's economy has benefited poor blacks (who now have jobs) disproportionately, and allowed some to escape the welfare rolls. That is "unfair" according to Democrats.
Sean,
Now doubt there... But weren't they call Democrats back then.:-)
Jerry,
I agree that Liberals have a different concept of caring.
They are obsessed with giving people stuff instead of forcing the people to become responsible, independent and self confident. They apparently would be happy with huge welfare roles full of helpless needy people.
Now as for "Trump's Economy"... That is just silly... Obama and crew did most of the work. Trump just signed massive debt exploding tax / government jobs creating spending bills.
That was pretty easy... Just put our success on our children's backs.
"Now doubt there... But weren't they call Democrats back then.:-)"
Sure. And then they left because that crap wasn't accepted in our party anymore.
So, Obama gets credit for the tax cuts necessary to make his "hard work" pay off? And with ZERO support from Democrats in Congress? Mirabile dictu!
I think this says and shows it well...
"So while the White House can certainly point to some yardsticks that indicate a meaningful turnaround on Trump's watch — including small business sentiment, business investment and goods-producing job growth — broader measures of the overall job market and wages show the economy continues to follow the steady, upward glide path that began under Obama."
And one can not ignore what Trump's choices have done to the US Deficits.
Please remember what happened when Bush gave big tax cuts... There were a few years of joyful mania before economic collapse. Only time will tell how Trump's choices turn out.
Will you hold him accountable for the HUGE Debt he incurred or blame that on someone else?
A country should never be running big deficits during an economic boom cycle... Especially when they are ate peace and carrying a huge debt.
Prove to me that tax cuts cause deficits. We DO know that Obama tripled deficits in his first year, with no tax cuts.
Jerry,
Deficits are increased when the President signs legislation that increases spending faster than revenues.
Trump signed both tax and spending bills in the the last 12 months...
He owns the result of his actions. Are you going to deny this?
Jerry,
Here is an interesting piece.
He owns the results, yes, that is the way the political game is played these days. Republicans get the blame for bad things, Democrats for good things. But can he get credit for saying he will "never again" sign a bloated budget? Or for asking his cabinet to cut 5% in the next budget request?
You have dueling charts. Your latest bemoans the lack of productivity improvement, which leads to rising wages. Your previous showed the remarkable uptick in capital investment since Trump took office, which will raise productivity. Unless the Democratic House puts a stop to it, and they will try.
Thank media bias for the gridlock. Recent Yale studies prove an 8% Democrat vote advantage because of it.
Jerry,
Trump gets no credit for what he says... He lies too often...
Source for the 8% comment? Google gave me nothing.
"the remarkable uptick in capital investment"
Which completely dried up in the third quarter of this year, after the linked article was posted.
Sean... Source?
This one indicates things have slowed but are still good.
"One potential red flag for the outlook came from fixed investment, which slipped 0.3% in the quarter. Investment in equipment rose a paltry 0.4%."
IBD: Third-quarter GDP report
These were the things that were supposed to be permanently juiced by the Trump tax cut. Instead, it looks like we got a short burst followed by a regression to the mean.
There was a lot of good news in that source and you picked the "One potential red flag".
It was interesting how they noted the FED choices as a challenge to that permanent juice...
"There was a lot of good news in that source and you picked the "One potential red flag"."
The tax cuts were designed to help corporations, so yeah, that's what I'm looking at in judging their effectiveness.
"It was interesting how they noted the FED choices as a challenge to that permanent juice..."
Well, yeah, it's no secret that trying to juice an already-strong economy is going to result in the Fed increasing interest rates.
We need a bigger glass.
I'll just leave this here.
"Capital spending did pick up steam earlier this year. For companies in the S&P 500, capital expenditures rose roughly 20 percent in the first half of 2018. Much of that was concentrated: The spending of just five companies — Google’s parent, Alphabet, and Facebook, Intel, Exxon Mobil and Goldman Sachs — accounted for roughly a third of the entire rise. ...
The results of a survey published in late October by the National Association for Business Economics showed that 81 percent of the 116 companies surveyed said they had not changed plans for investment or hiring because of the tax bill."
NYT: Trump’s Tax Cut Was Supposed to Change Corporate Behavior. Here’s What Happened.
So 35 of 116 did? Glass half full.
~30.2% full?
Sean,
That was an informative piece...
From my personal experience... It seems that the Executives and Shareholders got the savings and we got lay offs and lack luster wage increases. :-(
Post a Comment