8 ms·

Interesting, what are some things that you think democrats could do to hold republicans accountable?

munk-a 6y ago
I think Dems have an uphill battle to fight - media seems strongly slanted against liberal policies as evidenced by the lack of deficit spending being anywhere in the debate when tax cuts were happening compared to deficit spending to address the viral crisis. There are entrenched interests that will put a lot of messaging toward suppressing discussions of liberal policies.
- AnimalMuppet 6y ago
  > media seems strongly slanted against liberal policies Um... what? If you think media is strongly slanted against liberal policies, look at how it treats conservative policies.
  - cudgy 6y ago
    The media, republicans, and democrats all were complicit in handing trillions of dollars to large corporations, 0% interest loans, and forgivable loans (more handouts) in the form of the covid bailouts, 2008 bailouts, and quantitative easing. All three also seem to support practically any war proposed especially if it involves oil and false weapons of mass destruction to name a few. True Liberals tend to hate wars and giving tax money to corporations mismanaged by rich citizens.
    - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
      True conservatives don't like giving tax money to mismanaged corporations either.
      - Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
        Ignoring your no true Scotsman, you're insinuating that essentially either airlines/cruise/rail/trucking/etc are managed just fine, or there's no true conservatives still in power.
        AnimalMuppet 6y ago
        Well, that means that cudgy is saying that there are no true liberals in power, either. But I'd be interested in how you think money is being given to rail companies. Not to passenger rail service agencies, to the actual rail companies. (And in your list, you forgot the barge companies.)
        munk-a 6y ago
        I think this is a really good example of why this article is pretty damn accurate. Both true liberals and true conservatives look on their own and the opposition party as being too corporate focused because the majority of neither one represents their interest. It's on the fringes of each party that politicians that represent the interests of the people exist and those fringes are those maligned as fascists and communists, since everyone on the other side wants to pick on them and nobody on their own side wants to defend them. There's a suitable Noam Chomsky quote for this > In the US, there is basically one party - the business party. It has two factions, called Democrats and Republicans, which are somewhat different but carry out variations on the same policies. By and large, I am opposed to those policies. As is most of the population.
        Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
        I'd not disagree with that. My point, which seemed to fall flat, is that Republicans used their majority power to prop up mismanaged companies instead of letting the "free market" do what it does best, destroy bad businesses with nary a whimper from their party about the shortsighted management mismanaging these critical companies.
        AnimalMuppet 6y ago
        Sure. Republicans have principles, until they get in the majority. That's been true for decades (at least). Maybe that's Republicans' moral failings. Maybe it's that they don't actually believe in their claimed positions. Maybe it's just the reality of politics - when you're out of power, you say what you want to do, and when you're in power, you have to do what you can, not what you want to. But it's been observable (and disconcerting) for a long time.
      - cudgy 6y ago
        Liberal - “favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.” https://www.dictionary.com/browse/liberal https://www.dictionary.com/browse/liberal I was not referring to Democrat, but the classical meaning.
leesalminen 6y ago
Pretty sure it goes both ways ;). Which is perhaps why the parent didn’t specifically mention party names. The statement is interchangeable for both parties. Ps- I’m not a member of any political party.
- jdub 6y ago
  It doesn't go both ways, and that's precisely the point the original poster was trying to make. US parties do not behave the same way. One has been festering extremism for 60 years.
  - munk-a 6y ago
    The issue is that if you ask different people in the country which party that "one" is - you'll get a fifty-fifty split.
    - jdub 6y ago
      It's more like a persistent 60/40 (or optimistically 70/30) split, but it's understandable that some people are simply wrong.
    - leesalminen 6y ago
      Exactly this.
      - DubiousPusher 6y ago
        That doesn't make them correct. Constantly averaging your position is a good way to get dragged in the direction of the outlier.
        munk-a 6y ago
        It doesn't make them correct but it means that we've got a pretty gigantic societal issue to deal with.
  - 6y ago
eyelidlessness 6y ago
It’s not that I think they could, for what it’s worth. I’ve fought with my lefty friends to stop having completely unrealistic expectations, or at least to be more pragmatic about the way they evaluate outcomes. But what I think they could do more effectively is: 0. Recognize the disposition of their opponents (they’re belligerent and you should start there). 1. Try more, it’s not a nobody-gets-hurt game. We put you in power to wield it! 2. Focus more on goals than appearances. Nobody really cares if you look belligerent too. They just say they do. Your focus groups are lying as much as the opponents’ focus groups. 3. Set a better example by ruthlessly policing your own more aggressively. Don’t give anyone the opportunity to say you’re hypocritical. 4. Be willing to lose. It’s hard when you’re disadvantaged in most ways. But don’t play the hard game with all your betting money! Play the harder game with some of it. People are looking for you to be sincere, not just blab values and go fold every hand at the big kids’ table. Sorry for the extended gambling metaphor but it’s what I’d advise.

I think Dems have an uphill battle to fight - media seems strongly slanted against liberal policies as evidenced by the lack of deficit spending being anywhere in the debate when tax cuts were happening compared to deficit spending to address the viral crisis. There are entrenched interests that will put a lot of messaging toward suppressing discussions of liberal policies.

AnimalMuppet 6y ago
> media seems strongly slanted against liberal policies Um... what? If you think media is strongly slanted against liberal policies, look at how it treats conservative policies.
- cudgy 6y ago
  The media, republicans, and democrats all were complicit in handing trillions of dollars to large corporations, 0% interest loans, and forgivable loans (more handouts) in the form of the covid bailouts, 2008 bailouts, and quantitative easing. All three also seem to support practically any war proposed especially if it involves oil and false weapons of mass destruction to name a few. True Liberals tend to hate wars and giving tax money to corporations mismanaged by rich citizens.
  - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
    True conservatives don't like giving tax money to mismanaged corporations either.
    - Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
      Ignoring your no true Scotsman, you're insinuating that essentially either airlines/cruise/rail/trucking/etc are managed just fine, or there's no true conservatives still in power.
      - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
        Well, that means that cudgy is saying that there are no true liberals in power, either. But I'd be interested in how you think money is being given to rail companies. Not to passenger rail service agencies, to the actual rail companies. (And in your list, you forgot the barge companies.)
        munk-a 6y ago
        I think this is a really good example of why this article is pretty damn accurate. Both true liberals and true conservatives look on their own and the opposition party as being too corporate focused because the majority of neither one represents their interest. It's on the fringes of each party that politicians that represent the interests of the people exist and those fringes are those maligned as fascists and communists, since everyone on the other side wants to pick on them and nobody on their own side wants to defend them. There's a suitable Noam Chomsky quote for this > In the US, there is basically one party - the business party. It has two factions, called Democrats and Republicans, which are somewhat different but carry out variations on the same policies. By and large, I am opposed to those policies. As is most of the population.
        Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
        I'd not disagree with that. My point, which seemed to fall flat, is that Republicans used their majority power to prop up mismanaged companies instead of letting the "free market" do what it does best, destroy bad businesses with nary a whimper from their party about the shortsighted management mismanaging these critical companies.
        AnimalMuppet 6y ago
        Sure. Republicans have principles, until they get in the majority. That's been true for decades (at least). Maybe that's Republicans' moral failings. Maybe it's that they don't actually believe in their claimed positions. Maybe it's just the reality of politics - when you're out of power, you say what you want to do, and when you're in power, you have to do what you can, not what you want to. But it's been observable (and disconcerting) for a long time.
    - cudgy 6y ago
      Liberal - “favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.” https://www.dictionary.com/browse/liberal https://www.dictionary.com/browse/liberal I was not referring to Democrat, but the classical meaning.

leesalminen 6y ago

Pretty sure it goes both ways ;). Which is perhaps why the parent didn’t specifically mention party names. The statement is interchangeable for both parties. Ps- I’m not a member of any political party.

jdub 6y ago
It doesn't go both ways, and that's precisely the point the original poster was trying to make. US parties do not behave the same way. One has been festering extremism for 60 years.
- munk-a 6y ago
  The issue is that if you ask different people in the country which party that "one" is - you'll get a fifty-fifty split.
  - jdub 6y ago
    It's more like a persistent 60/40 (or optimistically 70/30) split, but it's understandable that some people are simply wrong.
  - leesalminen 6y ago
    Exactly this.
    - DubiousPusher 6y ago
      That doesn't make them correct. Constantly averaging your position is a good way to get dragged in the direction of the outlier.
      - munk-a 6y ago
        It doesn't make them correct but it means that we've got a pretty gigantic societal issue to deal with.
- 6y ago

eyelidlessness 6y ago

It’s not that I think they could, for what it’s worth. I’ve fought with my lefty friends to stop having completely unrealistic expectations, or at least to be more pragmatic about the way they evaluate outcomes. But what I think they could do more effectively is: 0. Recognize the disposition of their opponents (they’re belligerent and you should start there). 1. Try more, it’s not a nobody-gets-hurt game. We put you in power to wield it! 2. Focus more on goals than appearances. Nobody really cares if you look belligerent too. They just say they do. Your focus groups are lying as much as the opponents’ focus groups. 3. Set a better example by ruthlessly policing your own more aggressively. Don’t give anyone the opportunity to say you’re hypocritical. 4. Be willing to lose. It’s hard when you’re disadvantaged in most ways. But don’t play the hard game with all your betting money! Play the harder game with some of it. People are looking for you to be sincere, not just blab values and go fold every hand at the big kids’ table. Sorry for the extended gambling metaphor but it’s what I’d advise.