The Politics Thread

[GMac]

 

Oh, we cool marce.  I know what you meant.  

Please register in order to view this content

 

Good point IRT CNN and broadcast media.  I'll have to start watching BBC or something...

 

[Khan]

 

That's what I've done.  I can't remember who said it, but it makes sense: the best way to understand what's happening in your country is to see how the rest of the world sees it.

[GMac]

How very true.

 

 

[DramatistDreamer]

Unless there is a debate that a CNN host is moderating and CNN is broadcasting it and there's nowhere else to see it, that's the only time you will ever catch me tuned into CNN. I will stream it online as CNN streams things for (sort of) free during that time and I just hit refresh for the duration of the debate.

Otherwise, I gave up on CNN and cable news in general, a long time ago.

 

BBC is a bit more meticulous with their methods. They're more prone to get confirmation before broadcasting and they seem to have a wider range of news stories that they tell- it's more of a global perspective.

 

They are not perfect. Their behind the scenes politics has been an utter mess in recent years but they've shown at least some acknowledgement that it is a mess that needs remedying (after a public scandal, no doubt).

 

Years ago, I tried to watch RT news before it got so bad and so obvious that they were a tool of the Kremlin- let's just say that there was a striking difference in tone between when Medvedev was President than when Putin got back into the position.

 

I also occasionally, try to stream NHK news, the English language site -- NHK is a Japanese broadcaster which has a really good livestream- not only news but other programming (culture, science, documentaries, etc) as well. I don't expect them to have the most objective view of say, China, but overall they present pretty well rounded perspectives and they report news stories that U.S. news wouldn't have, from countries like the Philippines, Thailand, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Pakistan and India- and they have reporters on the ground and in the case of Thailand, a news desk. So it's not from a perspective of "what's in it for us in the U.S?" it's from people inside those countries as they are being interviewed by reporters, who don't offer an opinion one way or the other. Very interesting.

Edited December 29, 2016 by DramatistDreamer

[DramatistDreamer]

Breaking News-

 

US expels 35 Russian diplomats, closes two compounds

[GMac]

Good tips, DD.  I'll check them out.

[quartermainefan]

 

You are paranoid and clearly don't like white people.  Once again, "these white people..." betrays your actual hate based opinion on this race topic.   The fact that the queen of "I hate whitey" signs in to say she agrees with you pretty much tells me everything I need to know.

 

[marceline]

 

Your opinion has been noted.

 

 

 

I can't imagine being told that you have 72 hours to get out of the country. Of course Donald could invite them back when he takes over but that will show the world that Putin is pulling his strings.

Edited December 29, 2016 by marceline

[DramatistDreamer]

So apparently, the US government released a detailed report on the Russian led hacking by a hacker identified as Grizzly Steppe.  

Anyone who knows about Russian culture, geography, knows about the lore of the Steppe as well as the fact that the Bear is to Russia what the Eagle is to the U.S.  

 

Another note to give the name of the hacker a bit further context- remember the last hacker was named Fancy Bear.

 

https://www.us-cert.gov/security-publications/GRIZZLY-STEPPE-Russian-Malicious-Cyber-Activity

Edited December 29, 2016 by DramatistDreamer

[Khan]

 

Yes, it will.  Frankly, though, I don't think Trump and his followers in this country will care all that much.  He'll just rip up Obama's executive order, welcome back all those people, and throw them a parade (with us picking up the tab).

[DRW50]

 

I wouldn't be too surprised if those people disappear. They did their job, they're there to be used up and cast aside. 

[marceline]

 

Nothing matters to Trump's followers. They are a lost cause. But it might matter to those so-called independents and moderates who broke for him at the last minute. Although Carl has a point. Most of those people are probably as good as dead once they get home. The sad thing is, if the next president wasn't Snatchgrabber I bet one or two would ask for asylum but now there's nowhere to run.

[NothinButAttitude]

 

Excellent. Black excellence.

Please register in order to view this content

 

 

Obama is playing chess while the rest of these fools are playing checkers. 

 

I personally think this move is smart and strategic. One on hand, if Trump pardons these diplomats and invites them back, he is exposing himself to everyone that he is a treasonist. The media will be all over his ass and that'll be his narrative for the next 4 years. On the other hand, I think that if he ignores Putin and doesn't undo what Obama just did, he'll be exposed by Putin for not complying with what he wants. Trump's hands are tied. I'm sure Trump even knows this. What Obama just did is a thing of beauty. 

[DRW50]

 

I think that Hillary did as well as she did in part because Trump was SO terrible and SUCH a figure of hell. If she'd gone against any other Republican running beyond Ted Cruz, I think she would have lost, possibly resoundingly. I don't think she ran the worst campaign ever, by any means, and I do think James Comey and the media kneecapped her repeatedly, but I do think that there were some voters who simply could not support her for reasons that weren't about Obama. I think what hurt her the most was that she felt so inauthentic on issues that turned out to decide the election - trade. There's nothing she could do about that - no amount of telling people that she was now against TPP or she was going to fight for workers was going to resonate, because of 25 years of singing a different song. Of course Trump is a con artist and nothing involving his policies is going to help workers, of course he has a history of cheap labor and not even paying the bills. But you can say that and say that all you want and it doesn't matter to a lot of the people. I was happy when Hillary had those clever soundbites about Chinese steel, yet I underestimated just how many voters simply do not care. It's an unknown to them. He's an unknown. They knew Hillary, and many of them despised her and what she represented. 

 

There's something inherently rotten in the Democratic Party, something similar to what's going on in the UK with the Labour Party, in that voters no longer have any idea what Democrats stand for. Democrats say the "right things," but often with no real conviction. One of the reasons Obama was an extraordinary candidate is because he did have conviction and fire and integrity - people talk about how much Democrats lost with him in charge, but sometimes I wonder how much more they would have lost without him. There's just so little of that with the party as a whole, especially the higher echelons - you have so many people who are out of touch, who may mean well but have no idea what they're doing, what world they're in, have no ability to grasp populism in a way that isn't false or empty. Bernie Sanders inspired that in many, but he wasn't even a Democrat, and his followers (even more than him) were out of touch and often openly resentful and hostile toward black voters who didn't somehow get into line. If he, and more importantly some of his awful followers, had actually tried to build a real coalition, we might be in a very different place right now. 

 

Democrats are lucky compared to Labour because the Tories blurred the lines on social issues. Republicans will not do that - they will keep pushing, and keep delving into silly areas that will possibly alienate even conservative voters. This means that no matter how much Republicans keep trying to suppress the vote and keep passing laws that limit anything Democrats do get across (as keeps happening in North Carolina), there will always be a high level of opposition. Democrats are also lucky that Republicans are often open bigots and racists, more and more and more every year, because that means even with voter suppression, a large chunk of the populace will show up to support Democrats. This isn't enough to help in most downticket races, but it does in statewide races - as I think it would have this year, even with suppression, with a clearer message and a better campaign and candidate.

 

One of the things that I'm most wary of with Democrats is those who have the naive belief that we're always on a path to getting better, and people just have to understand this reality. Many people don't and won't understand that. I'm not saying cater to these views, because Democrats have tried to do that too and often failed - but you can't just dismiss them. It's difficult, because views are so hardened now, even the most compassionate or skilled Democratic candidate isn't going to convince a voter to agree or to compromise, but there has to be a middle ground between pandering and essentially writing off huge portions of voters and entire states, entire sections of the country, as impossible to reach, and saying it won't matter because demographics means other parts of the country will "catch up." Republicans have shown just how efficient they are at that rendering that impossible.

 

There's something inherently decent in many Democrats that they believe everything will move toward equality, fairness, and tolerance (although some struggle to adjust to the reality of this not involving white liberals patting POC on the head), but this also means many of them simply can't and won't understand the huge portions of the country that don't feel this way. Many can't be reached, but the sliver that can be reached - not through pandering and lurching to the right, but in empathy and honest talk - are worth the effort. Instead we either have sneering and elitism, or the tedious wanking of "What's the Matter With Kansas?" that yearns for a past that is never coming back. 

 

Republicans are generally ruthless and vile and have a killer instinct, and most Democrats in power in many recent decades rarely seem to have the same instincts. They just seem dumbfounded. Democrats seem to be showing more spine now because Trump is just that wretched, but it needs to not just be petulance, but planned action up and down the country, from legislatures and councils on. I'm wary of just how many Democrats are only focused on Trump and not on everything else in the party that empowered him. The more I see people say that Pence is better, the more I'm reminded of how easy it will be for Republicans to move on once Trump is gone. 

 

Without big changes, then, as unlikely as it is anytime soon, if the Republicans ever did thread the needle on social issues or on being such open bigots and racists, Democrats would be rendered all but extinct, because those are the main reasons to vote for Democrats now. You aren't voting for them - you're voting against Republicans. And this year that wasn't enough. I'm not sure if will be enough in 4 years (if we aren't nuked out by then) either. 

[Vee]

I think Hillary could've taken down almost any other Republican that was on the board last year, especially Ted Cruz, who IMO most people not in the evangelical ranks view as a religious creep. Trump has the star power and apolitical 'charisma' which drew a lot of an apathetic and disaffected, increasingly disenfranchised and anxious white (and at the very least quietly racist) middle of the country, especially people who only know him as the guy from TV and who think his politics are pretty open-minded (which they actually are, in a bizarre way). That X-factor, the mood of the country, and intense generational hatred of Hillary from the Republican base and the far left, from the media and from elements of our government collided to make an unlikely mix. This could not have happened with Ted Cruz.

Edited December 30, 2016 by Vee