people keep saying the republican party is dying, it looks like the democrats are slowly becoming the republicans, so who’s the new left? it’s worrisome there’s no strong organization there yet.
3 Likes
Apart from command of the military and Supreme Court nominations, the US President has very little power. A hostile House can almost completely negate their political influence.
A parliamentary leader like the Australian Prime Minister has a much greater control of the country. By definition, they command the support of the parliamentary majority, and any MP who openly opposes the PM will be instantly expelled from the party.
OTOH, a PM who loses the support of the majority of their party will no longer be PM, even if the next election is years away.
What the US President has is too much prestige. Y’all tend to act as if they’re divinely-appointed kings.
(and before the “but you have a Queen” response gets posted: yes, we do. She’s seen as an irrelevant and rightfully powerless bit of archaic decoration)
9 Likes
And then he or she has the advantage of running as an incumbent. As for the VP, they may be given some pet project, but as for actual constitutionally granted duties, it comes down to breaking ties in the Senate (which practically never happen these days), presiding over the count of the Electoral College, and not dying for the next 4 years.
2 Likes
I’m voting FOR a non-fascist government!
7 Likes
duh-duh-duh-DULLLL
buh-buh-buh-BLAAAAND
2 Likes
I’ll take “dull” over “terrifying” any day of the flippin’ week. Politics isn’t supposed to be about entertainment value.
9 Likes
…several organizations…sharply questioned Kaine’s liberal bona fides, pointing to Kaine’s support of trade deals and regulations favorable to big banks.
4 Likes
From what I have heard, Warren doesn’t want to be veep, and preemptively shut down feelers reaching out to her.
One thing people who dismiss Hillary as “not progressive enough” tend to forget is that it’s not usually the President who gets real progress on progressive issues done, it’s hard-working legislators like Warren. And people like Elizabeth Warren are one HECK of a lot more likely to accomplish their goals under a President Hillary Clinton than a President Donald Trump.
10 Likes
While what you say is true, a progressive president would be able to nominate a more progressive SCOTUS justice than whatever somewhat moderate compromise Clinton would possibly choose. They’d also issue a lot of executive orders that coincide with progressive values and direct policy at the DOJ and other executive branch departments/agencies to go after things like Wall Street fraud, campaign finance issues, and the like.
4 Likes
Yes, but truly progressive candidates rarely have broad enough appeal to win national elections. And when there are no electable progressives left in the race then “Pragmatic Centrist” still beats the hell out of “Fascist Narcissist.”
5 Likes
Asked and answered?
1 Like
Its a crack about American cars. “Detroit” as in the US auto industry is stereotyped as making/designing giant, boring old fashioned sedans and SUVs.
If you got it it was cackle inducing. Now that I’ve had to explain it, it does seem a bit of a head scratcher.
2 Likes
I like Warren where she is (And Bernie, too, now), but those people remaining senators doesn’t make Hilary herself any more progressive, and Tim Kaine is to the right of her. The hope was that with Hilary clearly appealing to the economic elite, she could’ve chosen anyone who would at least nod in the direction of some progressive points. It’s a symbolic gesture, but anyone who imagines that symbolic gestures aren’t one of the most important things in a presidential campaign is, I believe, sorely mistaken. It being symbolic should’ve made her freer to choose someone who could appeal to people who want SOME reason to vote FOR her.
I hope he brings in the moderate white folks who find Trump abhorrent - that seems to be who she’s targeting here. Someone nice and folksy to brush up her harsh, untrustworthy persona. But I think a lot of the moderate white folks see a need for big changes, and Tim Kaine isn’t bringing those changes any more than Hilary is. She can’t afford dull. Dull doesn’t get people out to the ballot box.
When we look back on this election, I don’t want the narrative to be that Hilary complacently failed to acknowledge the rage and frustration of a nation, and so that rage and frustration gave us President Trump. Trump makes people want to vote FOR him. She needs to give the nation optimism. Kaine isn’t that optimism.
I really hope that optimism is coming.
(If we’re lucky, choosing a crypto-republican for a running mate means she’ll be freer to jag to the left more, which would be nice! I don’t know that I’d expect it, but I’d welcome it!)
10 Likes
Besides the importance of the legislature, the SCOTUS is actually incredibly important in setting a progressive agenda. The damage done by GWB appointees to environmental protections, civil liberties, the Voting Rights Act, opening up a free-for-all of political donations, redefining the 2nd Amendment, and a number of other things will take a long, long time to undo, if they can ever resolved.
A Trump win is the nightmare scenario for the SCOTUS.
10 Likes
Warren does not want the position…yet. If she had aspirations to Executive office right now she would have run for president herself and trounced Hillary.
4 Likes
But the progressives are going to vote for Hillary just to avoid a Trump presidency.
Well yea, in the seventies. Maybe you have to be Nixon’s age to get the joke?
3 Likes
I think Clinton is, deep down, far more left and progressive than what we have seen outwardly. I don’t mean that she’s a boingboing style leftist - instead she’s a distinctly old-school progressive who truly cares about women, children/poverty, etc. but, along with old-school progressivism often (not always) comes conspicuously old-school holdouts like lack of support for LGBTQ issues, and questionable economic views.
She’s 68. Sanders made everyone else of that generation look bad - so we’re not as quick to forgive things the way we might excuse our grandparents for being racist.
So I like your theory that she picked Kaine so that she can veer left. I doubt it will happen but who knows - I think she’s smart enough, and doesn’t have too much ego to miss what seems obvious to us, that her campaign isn’t getting the people she needs excited the way Obama and Sanders did. This has to have been a pick that was made fully aware that he’s dull and less progressive than she is, so I would be incredibly surprised if she doesn’t have something up her sleeve (whether it’ll be particularly successful, whatever it is, is an important question - I guess we’ll probably find out next week). I’m going to vote for her even though I don’t really need to (I will be registered either in New York or California) - unfortunately this isn’t the year for third parties, imo - that’ll be next time since I don’t see how the Republican party will survive this election no matter the outcome, and the Democratic party seems possible to split too - the Democratic establishment becoming the new Republicans essentially (as someone else in this thread suggested), and the progressive wing picking up enough support to offer of a truly leftist party.
And can I just say how crazy this is… it’s like any number of books and films where loud, fascist populist racists run for office, and the opposition just can’t muster a good response… if there’s any hope here it’s that they always crash and burn in the movies.
8 Likes
I’m not a conspiracy theorist. In fact, I’m going to make it clear that if you believe this, you’re stupid. But I will say that if I wanted to make sure that a neoliberal status quo was maintained, I’d make sure that Hillary was running against Trump.
Interpret that anyway you want, but I think it’s a real mistake to argue fear of Trump to vote for Hillary. I’m not even saying that you shouldn’t vote for Hillary, but I don’t think that line convinces anyone who isn’t convinced. You have to realize that this line is fed to us every. Single. Election. Every single one. Even if you think that Trump is different, even if it’s 100% true, do I need to retell the story of the boy who cried wolf? It’s not working because it’s been heard before. Over and over and over and over again.Each time, it’s “different.” Each time, “the stakes are so high.” Every time, “we can’t afford a setback.”
Now people are having trouble buying it. What did you expect? What does anyone expect? You’ve been asking for it to happen sooner or later. That it might lose you an election at the worst possible time? That is a level of irony that only reality is capable of throwing your way. If Hillary doesn’t lose this election, her followers and advocates are going to lose it for her. And they don’t have to.
10 Likes
