The you are drinking a different flavor of the same brand of kookaid they drink from, because I have seen this us v them mentality. This fortress mentality where all must be slapped down.
There is more to opposing than just shouting and building a metaphorical wall to oppose a physical one. Why I liked the rallies was it showed the positive aspects of the opposing voices to Trump/pence/Bannon. It showed positivity and ‘you are not alone’ to those like myself physically surrounded with red hardliners that have been bleating Us or Them Us or Them for years. It is a mentality that turns anything not on the white list of ‘us’ into something that must be opposed and slapped down.
I get why you take this mentality and approach. You have been slapped down until we have reached the point of 'you are worthless you aare not worthy you do not belong.
We are in the same country on the same ship. There have to be those that can be approached with an open hand and talked to. Shouting at these people will make it easier for you to be demonized and harder to generate sympathy especially during the midterm elections.
Think well before you draw into your shell. I know first hand how being ultra defensive has hurt on a personal level and how attractive it is in spite of that.
These are not demons. They are not Monsters. Most are simply pandering to the loud frustrated and pissed off while hoping nobody calls them on their bullshit, and this arms crossed back turn? That isn’t calling out, that is going ‘I give up my voice and seat at the table.’
I hear you completely, but I feel @Kimmo’s right: in the face of an advancing authoritarian front, political impedance is vital. In the longer run, yes, a counter-advance is far better. Right now, however, the Repuglicans need to know that we the people will stand our ground.
How did being the grownup in the room help Obama? The GOP obstructed everything. The system is fundamentally broken. The GOP no longer act in good faith. There are no GOP moderates. You can’t find common ground or deal with them. See the shit they pulled in NC.
Its not a need for personal revenge. I have a need for Obamas nomination to be approved, as it should have been. The GOP knocked a chip off of Democracy when they did that - made the new playing field. If they are interested in fixing it they can approve Garland.
Based on the history of the last several years, playing hardball and using every dirty trick you can get away with is how you win. Taking the high road is how you lose.
You might prefer Democrats to take the high road, and lose, so that the Republican voters around you will appreciate and praise the Democrats’ timidity and restraint. But Democratic politicians have other goals they are trying to achieve.
Political impedance like this would simply be a show of solidarity. It wouldn’t do anything to fix the political process. What it would do is prevent further damage to this country and its laws. Right now, that’s a top priority, if only because the prospect of achieving anything actually progressive is (so it appears) pretty damn bleak, at least for right now.
Apply pressure, stop the bleeding, prevent further injury. Physical therapy and weightlifting can come later.
Freaking Wonderful. By your own logic there is nothing I could say to convince you we are on the same side or even belong in this forum because hey guess what I don’t agree with hardliner all or nothing bullshit room full of five year olds shouting MINE politics and just because the ‘correct’ team needs to resort to those tactics does not make them any less scumtacular.
Dammit, that’s a false equivalency, like I said. Don’t be so goddamn insulting.
Just because these turds have been acting like the Obama administration is not to be accepted as legitimate, is no reason for us to accept them as legitimate, when they are plainly not.
Why don’t you explain what you want the Senate Republicans to do, and what you want the Senate Democrats to do, and why either of those groups should be motivated to follow your advice.
I don’t think anyone does as a general rule. I’ve always seen the ideal of politics as compromise negotiated for the betterement of that country. Yeah, I am that naive, LOL.
Viewing it from the outside (I got no team affiliation. I don’t even vote.) the withdrawal of cooperation is a heavy weapon, to be used only in emergencies, such as when orders of dubious legality are issued hastily by someone who is woefully unprepared and inexperienced and who then immediately dismisses the person who’s job it is to act as a check and balance.
It’s the nuclear option. Something of last resort. Ignoring the fact that one side has been happy to use this option at will for the last few years, just leaving that aside… do you think that, when negotiations aren’t possible, when compromise is not an option and when the checks and balances built into a system are being dismantled…
Do you think it’s a good idea to prevent further damage being done by withdrawing all cooperation?
I think that one reason why it’s seen as an equivalent is because of the way that option been used previously. Rather than a stand to prevent further harm until at least things settle and shake down a bit, it looks like tit-for-tat politicking.
It don;t think it’s anyone’s ideal situation to see things come down to this. But what other option is there? Sometimes, if you’re trying to hold back a tidal wave of crap, you’re gonna get some on you.
No, we are just saying its time to be forceful. We are in the majority no matter the results of the elections and results of gerrymandering. Its time to bend the course to our will. Obama, should have thrown the red alert on the Russian interference and sent the election back to square one. But he was too timid. And here we are in this fucking mess.
