Sargent is right, we need to keep on keepin' on, definitely, but if you want to see how "smart" people can be co-opted by Trump and fall into the "he isn't any worse than the Biden Administration", watch Liz Cheney on CNBC this morning trying to convince Joe Kernen that Trump is a threat. He simply doesn't see it. He is generally rude, a…
Sargent is right, we need to keep on keepin' on, definitely, but if you want to see how "smart" people can be co-opted by Trump and fall into the "he isn't any worse than the Biden Administration", watch Liz Cheney on CNBC this morning trying to convince Joe Kernen that Trump is a threat. He simply doesn't see it. He is generally rude, and he fillibustered for a bit until she asked if he would let her speak.
He is no doubt voicing all the talking points that Republicans have been parroting for decades. But turning this ship around is going to take A LOT of work and a little bit of luck.
That's why I don't agree with Charlie that fatalism will affect the turnout of non-Republican voters. I am DEEPLY fatalistic about the impossibility of getting through to a Trump voter. Their vote is a given. But I don't see how continuing to raise the alarm everywhere possible is going to dissuade anti-Trump voters from voting. Just the opposite. PLEASE, let his threats be heavily publicized. Repetition of talking points has worked on the Republican voters. Repetition of Trump's threat will hopefully work the same way to drive increased interest in the anti-Republican voters. It's the only way to get through to marginal voters who tend not to pay attention to these things.
To paraphrase FDR, the only thing we have to fear is fatalism. That’s how bad it is. I am not fatalistic because once you know what a waste of time it is to connect with some types, you can make better decisions about how to put your resources to better use. It’s sad when people prefer to be rotten. It is not your responsibility to change them. They are hopeless. We don’t have to be. Don’t let the losers win by using their definition of terms, heads we win, tails you lose. As we live and breathe, we need to fight off fatalism because that’s their game. What infuriates them is when good people do and say what is right over and over again. Not that anybody is perfect, but they are so consistently wrong. You know this.
I'll go one further and quote Churchill..."We may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to die than to live as slaves."
I will not be dissuaded from doing everything I can to oppose a wannabe autocrat, if only because I believe at the core of my soul that history will judge that standing for democracy and the rights of all individuals -- not just the ones who look like me -- is the side of right.
We're in agreement. I don't accept Charlie's sense of fatalism. Just the opposite - I think the publicizing of Trump's threats and incoherence will spur MORE anti-Trump voters to register and vote.
Trumpers like to say Biden is horrible and wrecking the country, yet they never provide evidence. They claim things were great under trump, but only ever generalize. Trumpers are not critical thinkers. But maybe if trump's threats and incoherence are publicized like you say it will certainly help.
Looking at NJ where I live, I see small segments of the Democratic electorate being peeled away by issues that are worrisime to them. Thus Arab-American voters in Paterson and Clifton are turned off by Biden's support for Israel. And in my town, Dover, younger Hispanic voters whose ties are to Central America rather than Europe are also turned off b/c of Israel. I know fewer black voters but it seems like they blame Biden for the failure to strengthen voting right. Oh - we have lots of enviromentalists in NJ and they seem turned off by Biden's modest successes re the environment. So I see a possible disaster.
I'd suggest that this is a natural process that is part of being in power. As such, it is usually offset by the incumbent advantage.
I think we will have the added benefit of Biden running against a known quantity. It is one thing to be upset with Clinton and Gore and either sit out or even switch to a 'compassionate' conservative who isn't going to send a $10M missile up a camel's butt. It is quite another to be upset with Biden and pick to support Trump by either not voting or switching.
Pick any issue from above and Trump is obviously going to be worse. And for those of certain groups recently in the country, they might want to take a look at executive order 9066.
There's this small part of me, though bigger than I'd like to admit, that almost wants to see Trump elected and the prognostications to come to fruition, if only just to see all of these people (anyone explicitly supporting Trump, not supporting Biden out of some misguided principle, and in particular, those that say, "it can't happen here!") can experience the consequences first-hand. Of course, that would be terrible, but sometimes I wish I could just get through to those that are determined not to be reached and perhaps a dose of reality would finally break through. Then again, they'd probably say things aren't that bad and that they'd be worse under Biden...
And knowing people, they probably wouldn't even be train riders, just like how retired folks are unhappy about our education system that they don't have kids in.
Well, to be fair, it isn't teaching slide rules, cursive writing, or shorthand anymore. And don't get them started on how 'civics' isn't taught anymore (while it is predominantly the older crowd who supports a coup now and again).
"Many were increasingly of the opinion that they'd all made a big mistake in coming down from the trees in the first place. And some said that even the trees had been a bad move, and that no one should ever have left the oceans."
I've had the exact same thought, but here's the problem... no matter how bad it gets, there will always be an excuse or new liberal to blame for the problems. Things will never get so bad that reality actually peeks in. There will just be more enemies of the people and more scapegoats.
What they need is a temporary but vivid alternate reality experience wherein Trump has been President for 7 years, like in "A Christmas Carol" or "It's a Wonderful life". Very appropriate for the holiday season.
Wrong question. To me the electorate somehow imagines that the president can do all when he can do little. Worse still we have a legislative branch that has no incentivizes to help the president. That may sound great in a civics class but it kills action. My worry is that folks ask why Biden did not... do this that and the other. It suggests no grasp of what it takes to do anything.
I think the Dems should speak about what the tried to pass and couldn't because of GOP intransigence. Make the point it wasn't Biden who failed, it was the MAGA GOP who voted intentionally to kill any Biden success.
At the time they were both Democrats who didn't like the spending in some of the economic bills. Sinema has now announced she has no party but mostly votes with Democrats.
Nothing. And that's why the voting rights legislation got nowhere while the economic related bills got passed.
Back when LBJ was president he could leverage other bills to get votes on his favored piece of legislation like the original VRA. In recent years though that sort of pork barreling is not engaged in. One party in particular decided it would no longer deal in that way. Dealing within the bill seems to be acceptable now.
Correction: he can do little when he follows the rule of law and the Constitution. Just watch what the President can do when he doesn’t give a shit about any of that.
I can’t recall if the Senate was slowed down by the filibuster back in LBJ’s administration. It seems fairly recent that Congress has hobbled itself, to the point of doing little of consequence. Maybe that’s a safeguard, given the perverse “quality” of our congressional members.
LBJ knew where all the bodies were buried in Congress and he could strong-arm them and he did! Very effectively. Today's weak as water politicians make me crazy. 'Play nice" is not for politics.
He had the votes in the Senate to get it done. My poly sci professor said LBJ was a master at pork barrel projects and making deals...a talent honed while he was in the US Senate.
1. How much was that due to the marches, assissations etc. and other pressure do you think? and 2. Given how it's been gutted i wonder if those who weren't for it, where just biding there time....vote for it then to appease and then start the works to undermine when the pressure is off
Because of the filibuster the voting rights legislation could not advance in the Senate. A president can bully pulpit all he wants, he can't make either house of Congress pass something it doesn't want to pass. Plus, voting rights bills don't have the promise of money for red states dangling in them, unlike the various economic bills that did pass with some Republican votes.
Exactly. It may come as a surprise but presidents are not kings and congress has a lot of power. The congress is so evenly matched, centrists of both parties and far right and left members, that it's surprising how much does get through. Biden has worked hard to pass legislation and it's easy to forget his successes despite the opposition.
Just watched. Never heard of or seen Kernan. Has he always been a blow-hard? Even so, good that she is going on shows like that, whose audience probably includes people who are not so clear-eyed as we are. I hope she hits Fox too
Yes, Joe Kiernan has always been pro-Republican on CNBC. For years his favorite, almost regular guests were Stephen Moore and Larry Kudlow, whom Trump picked for key Economic advisor positions after seeing them many times on Fox Noise.
Kernen is an example of who would rather stand behind the partly line than think for himself. I don't have much respect for him as a financial commentator. You can't hold party lines and provide reasonable financial commentary. That aside, in my quest to understand why people stick their political guns on issues and trump, I guess it can be summed with the idea that people will rationalize whatever they have to to avoid the uncomfortable feeling of being wrong and losing their group support. Standing up for what's right is not for the weak, especially if you're doing it alone.
She was practically the definition of a Republican. I, alongside Rachel Maddow, am probably opposed to 90% of her policy positions. Her voting along with Trump so much I think lends her current stance credence- when he so clearly defies democracy and is exhibiting despotic delusions, this is where it is important for actual conservatives to get off. If she were to endorse Joe Biden right now, they would immediately close their ears to her. Same for Chris Christie. Voting for Biden is the logical conclusion for both of them, but now is no where near the time to come out and say that. Now the most important task for them is to get the truth about Trump out there as widely as possible.
I think she understands the political impact of coming out full throated for Biden. The way politics works, and the irrational thinking of many voters ,if she is loud about it, she could hurt him more than help him.
I have no doubt she will be voting for Biden if Trump is the nominee.
I've listened to several of her interviews and I get the impression that, given that the MAGA-verse hates her, she is hesitant to endorse anyone because it could actually be counterproductive for candidates who are attempting to woo not-yet-completely-batshit-crazy Trump supporters. I wouldn't be surprised if she eventually announces she's voting for Biden (or maybe she will say 'against Trump'?) just before the election. It makes sense because that would also make a bigger splash.
I think I read yesterday that she said that Biden would be better than Trump. She's also entertaining (in theory) an independent run, so probably not a technical endorsement, but not nothing either.
Liz told Nicole Wallace that she would not run if it would in any way shape or form help Trump. She left the impression she would vote for Biden if the race came down to Biden vs Trump. I got the impression she would consider running if Trump wasn't the GOP nominee.
As soon as Liz comes out for Biden, she is dead to yet another segment of the "Republican" universe. It's not a lot, but we need every vote we can get...and she's more than smart enough to get that.
A bit like Biden on Ukraine...as soon as it becomes "Joe's War", support for our critically important aid loses some sliver of the GOP that still believes in America's leadership role. He's played that pretty close to the line, and it's painful to watch, but he deserves credit for recognizing the calculus.
Liz recognizes that THE overriding objective is to discredit and defang Trump. She's persona non grata in most of the GOP (ESPECIALLY here in Wyoming, which is sad), but (love it or hate it) her "conservative" credentials are impeccable. There's an audience for that, and Liz is preserving the good she can do.
Sargent is right, we need to keep on keepin' on, definitely, but if you want to see how "smart" people can be co-opted by Trump and fall into the "he isn't any worse than the Biden Administration", watch Liz Cheney on CNBC this morning trying to convince Joe Kernen that Trump is a threat. He simply doesn't see it. He is generally rude, and he fillibustered for a bit until she asked if he would let her speak.
He is no doubt voicing all the talking points that Republicans have been parroting for decades. But turning this ship around is going to take A LOT of work and a little bit of luck.
The harder we work, the luckier we will be.
Kernen pivoted to “drill drill drill” like we aren’t producing the highest amount of oil in the history of our country right now.
Hey, dude, that's a "fact." Don't know if you got the memo, but those are out of style in the GOP...
You’re right, I forgot
That's why I don't agree with Charlie that fatalism will affect the turnout of non-Republican voters. I am DEEPLY fatalistic about the impossibility of getting through to a Trump voter. Their vote is a given. But I don't see how continuing to raise the alarm everywhere possible is going to dissuade anti-Trump voters from voting. Just the opposite. PLEASE, let his threats be heavily publicized. Repetition of talking points has worked on the Republican voters. Repetition of Trump's threat will hopefully work the same way to drive increased interest in the anti-Republican voters. It's the only way to get through to marginal voters who tend not to pay attention to these things.
To paraphrase FDR, the only thing we have to fear is fatalism. That’s how bad it is. I am not fatalistic because once you know what a waste of time it is to connect with some types, you can make better decisions about how to put your resources to better use. It’s sad when people prefer to be rotten. It is not your responsibility to change them. They are hopeless. We don’t have to be. Don’t let the losers win by using their definition of terms, heads we win, tails you lose. As we live and breathe, we need to fight off fatalism because that’s their game. What infuriates them is when good people do and say what is right over and over again. Not that anybody is perfect, but they are so consistently wrong. You know this.
I'll go one further and quote Churchill..."We may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to die than to live as slaves."
I will not be dissuaded from doing everything I can to oppose a wannabe autocrat, if only because I believe at the core of my soul that history will judge that standing for democracy and the rights of all individuals -- not just the ones who look like me -- is the side of right.
We're in agreement. I don't accept Charlie's sense of fatalism. Just the opposite - I think the publicizing of Trump's threats and incoherence will spur MORE anti-Trump voters to register and vote.
Trumpers like to say Biden is horrible and wrecking the country, yet they never provide evidence. They claim things were great under trump, but only ever generalize. Trumpers are not critical thinkers. But maybe if trump's threats and incoherence are publicized like you say it will certainly help.
Looking at NJ where I live, I see small segments of the Democratic electorate being peeled away by issues that are worrisime to them. Thus Arab-American voters in Paterson and Clifton are turned off by Biden's support for Israel. And in my town, Dover, younger Hispanic voters whose ties are to Central America rather than Europe are also turned off b/c of Israel. I know fewer black voters but it seems like they blame Biden for the failure to strengthen voting right. Oh - we have lots of enviromentalists in NJ and they seem turned off by Biden's modest successes re the environment. So I see a possible disaster.
I'd suggest that this is a natural process that is part of being in power. As such, it is usually offset by the incumbent advantage.
I think we will have the added benefit of Biden running against a known quantity. It is one thing to be upset with Clinton and Gore and either sit out or even switch to a 'compassionate' conservative who isn't going to send a $10M missile up a camel's butt. It is quite another to be upset with Biden and pick to support Trump by either not voting or switching.
Pick any issue from above and Trump is obviously going to be worse. And for those of certain groups recently in the country, they might want to take a look at executive order 9066.
There's this small part of me, though bigger than I'd like to admit, that almost wants to see Trump elected and the prognostications to come to fruition, if only just to see all of these people (anyone explicitly supporting Trump, not supporting Biden out of some misguided principle, and in particular, those that say, "it can't happen here!") can experience the consequences first-hand. Of course, that would be terrible, but sometimes I wish I could just get through to those that are determined not to be reached and perhaps a dose of reality would finally break through. Then again, they'd probably say things aren't that bad and that they'd be worse under Biden...
Totally get that. Way too many of them would be fine as long as the trains run on time.
And knowing people, they probably wouldn't even be train riders, just like how retired folks are unhappy about our education system that they don't have kids in.
Well, to be fair, it isn't teaching slide rules, cursive writing, or shorthand anymore. And don't get them started on how 'civics' isn't taught anymore (while it is predominantly the older crowd who supports a coup now and again).
I learned cursive and short hand, but never the slide rule. It seems the decay had started all the way back then.
"Many were increasingly of the opinion that they'd all made a big mistake in coming down from the trees in the first place. And some said that even the trees had been a bad move, and that no one should ever have left the oceans."
D. Adams
I feel ya buddy….
It is sooooooo frustrating.
I've had the exact same thought, but here's the problem... no matter how bad it gets, there will always be an excuse or new liberal to blame for the problems. Things will never get so bad that reality actually peeks in. There will just be more enemies of the people and more scapegoats.
Trump could shoot them on 5th Avenue and they'd blame Biden.
What they need is a temporary but vivid alternate reality experience wherein Trump has been President for 7 years, like in "A Christmas Carol" or "It's a Wonderful life". Very appropriate for the holiday season.
Amen.
You can be disappointed in your children and still feed and clothe them.
The same is true of our politicians.
Why didn't Biden strengthen voting rights?
I believe it was more of the Manchin problem. Couldn’t get it through the Senate.
Wrong question. To me the electorate somehow imagines that the president can do all when he can do little. Worse still we have a legislative branch that has no incentivizes to help the president. That may sound great in a civics class but it kills action. My worry is that folks ask why Biden did not... do this that and the other. It suggests no grasp of what it takes to do anything.
I think the Dems should speak about what the tried to pass and couldn't because of GOP intransigence. Make the point it wasn't Biden who failed, it was the MAGA GOP who voted intentionally to kill any Biden success.
Manchin and Sinema were Republicans?
Effectively, on voting rights they chose to vote with the Republicans, which is why neither of them will be re-elected.
Same thing on changing the filibuster, but they wouldn't have been the only Dems that would have voted no.
There still isn’t a legislative vehicle that moves things with less than 60 votes.
At the time they were both Democrats who didn't like the spending in some of the economic bills. Sinema has now announced she has no party but mostly votes with Democrats.
What does spending have to do with a new VRA?
Nothing. And that's why the voting rights legislation got nowhere while the economic related bills got passed.
Back when LBJ was president he could leverage other bills to get votes on his favored piece of legislation like the original VRA. In recent years though that sort of pork barreling is not engaged in. One party in particular decided it would no longer deal in that way. Dealing within the bill seems to be acceptable now.
It's anti-Black racism. That's the reason why
Correction: he can do little when he follows the rule of law and the Constitution. Just watch what the President can do when he doesn’t give a shit about any of that.
LBJ got the original VRA through when it was less popular among the white population
I can’t recall if the Senate was slowed down by the filibuster back in LBJ’s administration. It seems fairly recent that Congress has hobbled itself, to the point of doing little of consequence. Maybe that’s a safeguard, given the perverse “quality” of our congressional members.
LBJ knew where all the bodies were buried in Congress and he could strong-arm them and he did! Very effectively. Today's weak as water politicians make me crazy. 'Play nice" is not for politics.
Republicans have absorbed that message, that “play nice” is for wimps - in other words, Democrats.
At least LBJ was a hit man on our side (mostly).
It was old Mitch McConnell that started using the filibuster as a weapon to block any & all progressive legislation
He had the votes in the Senate to get it done. My poly sci professor said LBJ was a master at pork barrel projects and making deals...a talent honed while he was in the US Senate.
But more popular with actual legislators. The GOP has changed a tad since then.
1. How much was that due to the marches, assissations etc. and other pressure do you think? and 2. Given how it's been gutted i wonder if those who weren't for it, where just biding there time....vote for it then to appease and then start the works to undermine when the pressure is off
Probably because he is not a member of the legislature is the actual correct answer.
IOW, not part of his job. Just like running the economy is not actually part of his job.
Or how writing immigration law is not part of his job.
Because of the filibuster the voting rights legislation could not advance in the Senate. A president can bully pulpit all he wants, he can't make either house of Congress pass something it doesn't want to pass. Plus, voting rights bills don't have the promise of money for red states dangling in them, unlike the various economic bills that did pass with some Republican votes.
Of course that begs the question of why Senator Schumer hasn't whipped a majority on voting rights.
I don’t think Schumer is effective at whipping any Republican Senators to help pass any legislation
‘I don’t think Schumer is effective’ - - - period.
So we don't really live in a Republic
Because Biden is President not Congress
Good question! Ans: The president does not make law.
Better question: Why didn't Senate and House Democrats pass the voting rights bills before them. Weak as water weenies? Why didn't they even try?
Exactly. It may come as a surprise but presidents are not kings and congress has a lot of power. The congress is so evenly matched, centrists of both parties and far right and left members, that it's surprising how much does get through. Biden has worked hard to pass legislation and it's easy to forget his successes despite the opposition.
Just watched. Never heard of or seen Kernan. Has he always been a blow-hard? Even so, good that she is going on shows like that, whose audience probably includes people who are not so clear-eyed as we are. I hope she hits Fox too
Yes, Joe Kiernan has always been pro-Republican on CNBC. For years his favorite, almost regular guests were Stephen Moore and Larry Kudlow, whom Trump picked for key Economic advisor positions after seeing them many times on Fox Noise.
Yea, he has long been a fool who continually defended Trump.
Kernen is an example of who would rather stand behind the partly line than think for himself. I don't have much respect for him as a financial commentator. You can't hold party lines and provide reasonable financial commentary. That aside, in my quest to understand why people stick their political guns on issues and trump, I guess it can be summed with the idea that people will rationalize whatever they have to to avoid the uncomfortable feeling of being wrong and losing their group support. Standing up for what's right is not for the weak, especially if you're doing it alone.
I completely agree with you, sir.
She wad fine backing Trump for an awful long time
She was practically the definition of a Republican. I, alongside Rachel Maddow, am probably opposed to 90% of her policy positions. Her voting along with Trump so much I think lends her current stance credence- when he so clearly defies democracy and is exhibiting despotic delusions, this is where it is important for actual conservatives to get off. If she were to endorse Joe Biden right now, they would immediately close their ears to her. Same for Chris Christie. Voting for Biden is the logical conclusion for both of them, but now is no where near the time to come out and say that. Now the most important task for them is to get the truth about Trump out there as widely as possible.
Has Liz come out and endorsed Joe Biden for President, yet? Or has Kinzinger? Or any major ex-GoP politician?
I think she understands the political impact of coming out full throated for Biden. The way politics works, and the irrational thinking of many voters ,if she is loud about it, she could hurt him more than help him.
I have no doubt she will be voting for Biden if Trump is the nominee.
I've listened to several of her interviews and I get the impression that, given that the MAGA-verse hates her, she is hesitant to endorse anyone because it could actually be counterproductive for candidates who are attempting to woo not-yet-completely-batshit-crazy Trump supporters. I wouldn't be surprised if she eventually announces she's voting for Biden (or maybe she will say 'against Trump'?) just before the election. It makes sense because that would also make a bigger splash.
I think I read yesterday that she said that Biden would be better than Trump. She's also entertaining (in theory) an independent run, so probably not a technical endorsement, but not nothing either.
Liz told Nicole Wallace that she would not run if it would in any way shape or form help Trump. She left the impression she would vote for Biden if the race came down to Biden vs Trump. I got the impression she would consider running if Trump wasn't the GOP nominee.
As soon as Liz comes out for Biden, she is dead to yet another segment of the "Republican" universe. It's not a lot, but we need every vote we can get...and she's more than smart enough to get that.
A bit like Biden on Ukraine...as soon as it becomes "Joe's War", support for our critically important aid loses some sliver of the GOP that still believes in America's leadership role. He's played that pretty close to the line, and it's painful to watch, but he deserves credit for recognizing the calculus.
Liz recognizes that THE overriding objective is to discredit and defang Trump. She's persona non grata in most of the GOP (ESPECIALLY here in Wyoming, which is sad), but (love it or hate it) her "conservative" credentials are impeccable. There's an audience for that, and Liz is preserving the good she can do.
God speed, Liz Cheney.
Liz Cheney is leaving open the idea of running for president herself so I'm pretty sure she's not going to endorse anybody all that door is still open