Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Sand Bar Bill

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
600
Reaction score
457
Location
Putin's backyard
Country
llUnited States
The progressiveism has always been there. It always will be. I just don't think it will ever be enough to get where you want. I could be wrong. -- jim
Basically the conservatives run the country most of the time, liberal legislation only slips in in brief windows. But the legislation is of enormous significance... social security, medicare, food stamps, section 8 housing, medicaid..
 

DWPetros

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2016
Messages
140
Reaction score
380
Country
llUnited States
Progressive policies (such as mentioned above) along with many others (child labor laws, wage reform, environmental protections, etc.) practically speaking, represent the core liberal policies that have passed in the last century. Modern Liberalism itself was defined by those progressive policies.
 

TopT

Elder Member
Joined
May 2, 2004
Messages
1,969
Reaction score
699
Location
PA
Country
llUnited States
Progressive policies (such as mentioned above) along with many others (child labor laws, wage reform, environmental protections, etc.) practically speaking, represent the core liberal policies that have passed in the last century. Modern Liberalism itself was defined by those progressive policies.
Not all of those were passed by a Democratic President.
 

Sparafucil3

Elder Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
9,089
Reaction score
1,694
Location
USA
First name
Jim
Country
llUnited States
Basically the conservatives run the country most of the time, liberal legislation only slips in in brief windows. But the legislation is of enormous significance... social security, medicare, food stamps, section 8 housing, medicaid..
Nearly all of those things "slipped in" during Roosevelt's 4 terms as a President. When you get a chance, you should look up how Roosevelt threatened to pack the court in '37 because all his agenda was being stopped as unconstitutional. Funny how a chance to re-shape the court leads to decisions that go your way all of a sudden. I am sure the whole decisions on gerrymandering has a lot of people mad but this isn't something new and nor is it something that has been the purview of just one party. -- jim
 

DWPetros

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2016
Messages
140
Reaction score
380
Country
llUnited States
Nearly all of those things "slipped in" during Roosevelt's 4 terms as a President. When you get a chance, you should look up how Roosevelt threatened to pack the court in '37 because all his agenda was being stopped as unconstitutional. Funny how a chance to re-shape the court leads to decisions that go your way all of a sudden. I am sure the whole decisions on gerrymandering has a lot of people mad but this isn't something new and nor is it something that has been the purview of just one party. -- jim
You simplify how FDR's policies became law. Much else was happening in the world at that time that led to those progressive policies that FDR enacted. It was not the sort of slight-of-hand, politically cynical maneuvering that gerrymandering is.
 

Sparafucil3

Elder Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
9,089
Reaction score
1,694
Location
USA
First name
Jim
Country
llUnited States
You simplify how FDR's policies became law. Much else was happening in the world at that time that led to those progressive policies that FDR enacted. It was not the sort of slight-of-hand, politically cynical maneuvering that gerrymandering is.
No, it was the "court is calling it un-constitutional so I am going to change the makeup of the court" kind. Here, I will even link you an article. -- jim
 

Sand Bar Bill

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
600
Reaction score
457
Location
Putin's backyard
Country
llUnited States
No, it was the "court is calling it un-constitutional so I am going to change the makeup of the court" kind. Here, I will even link you an article. -- jim
Nearly all of those things "slipped in" during Roosevelt's 4 terms as a President. When you get a chance, you should look up how Roosevelt threatened to pack the court in '37 because all his agenda was being stopped as unconstitutional. Funny how a chance to re-shape the court leads to decisions that go your way all of a sudden. I am sure the whole decisions on gerrymandering has a lot of people mad but this isn't something new and nor is it something that has been the purview of just one party. -- jim
Slipped in? All regularly enacted legislation.

Medicare started under LBJ, not sure when section 8 did.

And the supreme court has enabled a lot of wrong historical laws, like seperate but equal. It definitely can be wrong with historical prespective.

The court packing thing was an empty threat. Thank god for FDR helping the people of this country is what is say. The supreme court was practically nutty, such as overturning child labor laws as couple of decades before.

The courts were never packed then and there is a conservative supreme court now, so file suit that social security is unconstitutional.
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,248
Reaction score
3,143
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
Let us also give credit to legislation that Spanky is doing his best to gut, various clean water and air acts enacted under Nixon (extended by other R & D presidents). Nixon was vile but he had some quite redeeming actions under his belt, Spanky has only one, the recent First Step Act.

Despite being in European terms quite left (in US terms out in Oort Cloud), I can still cast an objective eye on politics.
 

Sparky

Member
Joined
May 3, 2018
Messages
299
Reaction score
246
Country
llUnited States
what is interesting to see is just how divided we have become.. and suspect the likes of AOC and her leftist fire-breathing cohorts will be a much more common addition to Congress. That is where the party is going.

9651

and the most recent they've done.. likely showing the beginning the 'Trump effect'

9652


what I'm suspecting we will see in the decade to come is a 3rd hump to arise.. dispossessed moderates from both parties and that as I've riffed on at some length is what is going to first drive the Republican's into California style 3rd party status.. but on a much larger scale..

nationally

thuseventually kill it off for the simple fact of being irrelevant as it is today in California at the national level politically in our 2 party system.
 
Last edited:

Brian W

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
7,180
Reaction score
1,119
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
As with all things, the power of "the Squad" is overblown by republicans represented by their propaganda channel, FoxNews, in order to create a false narrative. The republicans will always put a public face as an enemy. That is one reason I supported Nancy Pelosi to be speaker again--FoxNews would just demonize whoever took the job, so give it to the best candidate, not the one the right can accept.

How Fox News fuels Trump's fixation with AOC and Ilhan Omar

But it has been true all year long: Ocasio-Cortez has been mentioned on Fox almost three times as often as she's been mentioned on CNN or MSNBC. This has fueled the perception, particularly on the right, that her positions and policies are representative of the Democratic Party as a whole.
 

DWPetros

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2016
Messages
140
Reaction score
380
Country
llUnited States
At the bottom of all this is that the Caucasian race is afraid that non-Caucasians are taking their 'God-given' power to rule the world. Slice n dice it however, it's an existential crisis in the minds of white people. Their fear takes many forms - this recent thing about 'the Squad' is only the most recent one of many before and many to come. Stand by.

There's only a little help that 'policies' will help us out of this one. They may help, but ultimately the way out if at all is another matter.

Trump fans the flame of 'white-man's hate and fear. So too do all the other northern hemispheric authoritarian wanna-be dictators around the world. The antidote is also existential - it would be the opposite of hate and fear, I would suspect.
 

DWPetros

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2016
Messages
140
Reaction score
380
Country
llUnited States
This article has it nailed. Yes, it will get worse, not better.


"It will get worse because nobody is going to stop it, or is even trying. It will get worse because this is what Trumpism has been all along, because this narcissistic fraud is the vicar of every American who has longed for someone to say the quiet part loudly. It will get worse because conservatives either agree with him or look the other way in exchange for advancing their policy goals.

It will get worse because the media learned absolutely nothing from 2016, and every time Trump kicks the ball a gaggle of a hundred reporters chase it, overanalyzing it, giving Both Sides a chance to opine on it, and asking customers in Ohio diners how they’d like to see the ball kicked next time.

It will get worse because the House majority for which so many people fought so hard in 2018 has already signaled that impeachment is off the table, so even the pretense of accountability or oversight is gone. It will get worse because the leadership of the Democratic Party is not built, temperamentally or constitutionally, for this fight. It is built for 1996, ready to debate the V-chip or whether the top tax bracket should be 36 percent or 39 percent. It is a party built to negotiate, to concede, and to see “getting something done” as the value-neutral definition of victory. They are clutching to their treasured consensus politics, to their norms and to decorum, and it will never happen because the only people who give a shit about those things are elites with nothing really at stake, now or ever."
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,248
Reaction score
3,143
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
That about summarises it, the GoP has dived so far over the edge that it has created a sonic boom into the abyss. Some, indeed many, are of Spanky's racist, misogynist ilk and most are too craven to oppose that they have become enthusiastic enablers. There are a few like Rand Paul that have rotated up their own ideological fundament that they will oppose compensation for 9/11 first responders. The current GoP is not the '60s Ds which had many vile elements but was trying to see the light. It embraces the dark like a vampire, it no longer has any redeeming values or people of positive principle.

The past week has tipped me into the "It's going to get worse, far worse" camp. I'm getting '60s deja vu. I used to feel that the long lived US institutions would provide some brake on Spankystein. Those institutions are barely clinging on by their fingernails. The infection is not going to go away with Spanky, he is merely the puss leaking out of the wound. That wound is deep and utterly rotten.
 

DWPetros

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2016
Messages
140
Reaction score
380
Country
llUnited States
There are brakes* provided in the Constitution for stemming what is happening with Trump. Some think we have the luxury of time to talk about his crimes and his daily erosion of what's left of our democracy. We don't have that luxury. Trump is a whole new phenomenon. He's destroying our institutions daily, and maybe irretrievably. This isn't 1992. Pelosi, Schumer, Hoyer - don't get it. They're living in the past. We don't have the luxury of doing the same old anymore.

*Impeachment. Of course the corrupt GOP controlled Senate will not impeach Trump. But televised impeachment proceedings would showcase Trump's malfeasance, giving prospective voters (many of whom have never voted or paid attention to politics) who watch TV as their main source of information a good idea of how corrupt he is and consequently not vote for him or vote for someone else.
 

TopT

Elder Member
Joined
May 2, 2004
Messages
1,969
Reaction score
699
Location
PA
Country
llUnited States
*Impeachment. Of course the corrupt GOP controlled Senate will not impeach Trump. But televised impeachment proceedings would showcase Trump's malfeasance, giving prospective voters (many of whom have never voted or paid attention to politics) who watch TV as their main source of information a good idea of how corrupt he is and consequently not vote for him or vote for someone else.
or it could backfire. One person, on GS, has said that he would not vote for anybody that pushed impeachment, ostensibly because the Senate will never introduce that resolution. It could impact many ore Democratic leaning voters. tRUMP is guilty, on many faces, but in the current political climate, it is NEVER going to happen. Unless DJT Jr turns on his father.... 🙄
 

Brian W

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
7,180
Reaction score
1,119
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
I don't want to be pushed into defending Trump, but the crime involved, obstruction of justice, suffers from a lack of gravity when not coupled with another crime. Even if proven guilty in a setting like a republican controlled senate, it is entirely likely that the majority of Americans would agree that it isn't enough to remove him from office. Just like what happened to Bill Clinton, who also obstructed justice.

Now, in a normal world, it would certainly be enough to keep those same people from voting for him. But we can see that Trump's dishonesty doesn't prevent his voters from voting for him. Trump could be removed from office by the senate in June of 2020 and then be put back there by the voters in November of 2020. And what would have been accomplished?
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,248
Reaction score
3,143
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
Trump could be removed from office by the senate in June of 2020 and then be put back there by the voters in November of 2020. And what would have been accomplished?
In between being convicted in the Senate and removed from office and being re-elected he could be indicted in a normal court, possibly convicted as well. If the GoP dominated Senate convicted him it would be because he was found to have done something utterly disgusting and irrefutable. At the moment the GoP is so afraid of his base that it would need a video of him sacrificing a baby in a mosque, followed by sex with Mike Pence and Ivanka. So if the Senate convicts then normal criminal convictions would be quite likely.
 

Brian W

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
7,180
Reaction score
1,119
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
In between being convicted in the Senate and removed from office and being re-elected he could be indicted in a normal court, possibly convicted as well.
If the only thing he would be convicted of is obstruction, he probably won't face jail time. And even sitting in jail, he could (I daresay would because he was sitting in jail because that's the mood of the US voter!) be reelected.
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,248
Reaction score
3,143
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
The odds are in favour of being convicted of campaign finance violations as he directed Cohen in that matter and was referred to as Individual 1, an unindicted co-conspirator. Jail time is a different matter.
 
Top