ADVERTISEMENT

The single-most cynical political essay I've ever read . . . but I also think it's almost 100% accurate

I think the sad truth is is that given the partisan divide and the current trajectory, it would/will only be a matter of time before a radical leftist populist becomes a similar "cult of personality" leader a la Trump but on the liberal side.
I’m just not seeing how a cult of personality type could arise on the left.

“Immigrants are taking your jobs” is an easier sell than “boys can have periods.”

The most populist figure on the left was Bernie Sanders with his economic justice playform and he couldn’t close the deal in 2020. He won’t be a contender in ‘24. I think we’re set on the left for the reaminder of America as we know it’s existence with a range between stuffy old moderates and obnoxious millennials with too many advanced degrees yammering about trans rights and other assorted shit that creeps too many people out to be a threat for the Senate or Presidency.
 
The most accurate description of where we are at:

Republicans still want to hold onto what made America great and get back to it. Democrats want to complete the destruction of this country that started back in the '60s.

Obviously I'm a believer in America's greatness and hope it still has a chance. What I don't understand is why Democrats just don't leave this country if just about everything its stood for for the better part of 3 centuries is frowned upon by their more and more radicalized beliefs.
 
The most accurate description of where we are at:

Republicans still want to hold onto what made America great and get back to it. Democrats want to complete the destruction of this country that started back in the '60s.

Obviously I'm a believer in America's greatness and hope it still has a chance. What I don't understand is why Democrats just don't leave this country if just about everything its stood for for the better part of 3 centuries is frowned upon by their more and more radicalized beliefs.

You should really read the op-ed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rudolph
Spending can be good if the spending is via the form of investment that pays dividends. Unfortunately, nobody signs on unless the dividend is votes.
It's not even votes it's funding from corporate donors, and since Trump has broken down the barrier they don't even actually have to win to keep the game going.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fsu1jreed
We've reached a point where we have no common ground - no values upon which we agree, which is reflected in the party line voting on almost every topic. Both sides are guilty of it

I agree this is where our political parties and our political media are. I still strongly disagree that general people are nearly that divided. Polls over and over show strong majorities for moderate policies.

I say this as someone who doesn't consider himself a moderate, nor traditionally has particularly respected moderates. But I think its pretty obvious that the parties' crippling and marginalizing moderate voices has been a disaster.

Caveat, I know Biden has voiced some more moderate sentiments on some issues, but he's simply not the type of force a president usually holds over his party and his party's media. He certainly isn't willing or able to wrangle the types of more moderate or compromise legislation from his party that Clinton or GWB did. I literally don't know if that's a factor or his weakness, or a changed environment like we're talking about.
 
The most accurate description of where we are at:

Republicans still want to hold onto what made America great and get back to it. Democrats want to complete the destruction of this country that started back in the '60s.

Obviously I'm a believer in America's greatness and hope it still has a chance. What I don't understand is why Democrats just don't leave this country if just about everything its stood for for the better part of 3 centuries is frowned upon by their more and more radicalized beliefs.
Always have said this. One resembles what America has stood for. The other has become highly radicalized. I part blame Trump for stirring that hornets nest, because it is becoming beyond reproach to reel it back in to normalcy. Not sure what administration will have the answer going forward.
 
Not putting any stock in anything someone who cant differentiate b/w "America" and the US says about the US.
 
Much of what he says is true. Americans have taken “sides.” They support their team no matter what, and refuse to compromise as it simply cannot be allowed to let the other team “win.” In anything.

Just look at many of the posters on this board. Complete partisan hacks. Hateful people. Disagree with them or have a different opinion? Then you are called stupid…idiot. Admit they are ever wrong on anything? Heavens no! Compromise? Definitely not! Respect the opinion of anyone with a different view? Good God no!!
While thats true, there's how many hundreds of posters? And the hardline biased ones make up...what? 10%? Less? The loud are loud, but rarely do they represent a significant portion.
 
Not putting any stock in anything someone who cant differentiate b/w "America" and the US says about the US.
john-oliver-cool.gif
 
Last edited:
HOWEVER, it's undeniable that the optics around how often the raw vs electoral totals have mismatched is bad optics and leads to ill will and debases trust in Democracy, whether or not it can be explained. It's not NOT a problem as is.
I think people make the raw vote argument disingenuously.

The reason I say that is anytime I point out another governing body (UN) that has a voting representation that doesn’t equivalate to population, they won’t make the argument that China should have 4x the voting power of the U.S. or 56x the voting power of Australia.

They understand the sovereignty argument, and unable to refute it they just want to imagine it doesn’t exist and just don’t address it.

We also don’t try to settle all our problems through increasing the power of the UN to dictate national policies globally. We can quickly realize that would actually maximize dissatisfaction.

They understand the sovereignty argument, and unable to refute it they’d rather imagine it doesn’t exist and just don’t address it.
 
I agree this is where our political parties and our political media are. I still strongly disagree that general people are nearly that divided. Polls over and over show strong majorities for moderate policies.

I say this as someone who doesn't consider himself a moderate, nor traditionally has particularly respected moderates. But I think its pretty obvious that the parties' crippling and marginalizing moderate voices has been a disaster.

Caveat, I know Biden has voiced some more moderate sentiments on some issues, but he's simply not the type of force a president usually holds over his party and his party's media. He certainly isn't willing or able to wrangle the types of more moderate or compromise legislation from his party that Clinton or GWB did. I literally don't know if that's a factor or his weakness, or a changed environment like we're talking about.

We all say we're moderates because we all think we're the voice of reason and living off of the reasonable man standard. When it comes time to vote, particularly at the local level and in primaries - where a reasonably small unified group can get a candidate through - people don't support it. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction blah blah, that's where we're at right now.

I blame social media and our cable news networks. We got along much better when we could wind our day down by finding out how many people got shot in your city that day, what the weather would be tomorrow, a brief 90 seconds on sports, and onto your late night show for a few laughs. Now it's 24/7 political chaos. You can't even avoid this crap on linkedin where anybody with anything between his/her ears would use to make more money.
 
I don't necessarily think that it's a problem by nature. I think that there's some value to avoiding a situation where the entire heartland of the country can be made voiceless.

I also think that people overplay the electoral vs. raw vote totals considering that raw vote totals aren't the game. It's like a team going up 28-0 in the first quarter and then being outscored 10-3 the rest of the way...you can't claim that you were the better team because you won three quarters. Republicans know they don't have to do shit or spend shit in NY, CA, WA etc. Democrats can do the same in Mississippi and Alabama, but it's not the same population wise. Democrats haven't conceded big states like Texas and Florida, but if and when they do, that will depress their raw vote totals as well.

This is actually another thing affected by non-competitive districts...it wasn't that long ago that presidential candidates campaigned in states they couldn't win for the benefit of down state races. A Republican is no longer going to campaign in NY or CA when there might be 2-3 competitive house districts in a giant state. Same thing with a Democrat in states they can't carry.

I think it would be problematic if removing the electoral college resulted in campaigns basically in 8-10 states getting campaigned in, and would only much further cause the type of alienation from the rest of the country that this piece talks about. And it's no good for those who want more moderate candidates if the Democrat doesn't have to try to win Arizona and the Republican doesn't have to try to win Pennsylvania. I'm not sure increasing the weight of votes in Texas and California will lead to the more moderated voices people would prefer. I know it feels like it can't get worse, but it can.

HOWEVER, it's undeniable that the optics around how often the raw vs electoral totals have mismatched is bad optics and leads to ill will and debases trust in Democracy, whether or not it can be explained. It's not NOT a problem as is.

If you can come up with a reform that is less likely to end in conflicting totals AND compels candidates to have to still play most of the board, I'm open.

Your third paragraph is what I had in mind. "Neglected" states or non-competitive states, I'm sure there's a bit of a helpless/meaningless feeling being a Republican in California or New York, knowing your vote president is essentially pointless, even though there's more Republicans in each state than there are in most other states.

Similar for Democrats in say Texas or the Deep South, it may not be "rigged" but it may also feel that way, when only a handful of states are in play and make the determination for the rest of the country.

Regarding your comments about the heartland becoming voiceless, or Texas and California having additional weight, that's not what I was attempting to describe. I was thinking of a system where every citizens vote counts the same regardless of where they live. Meaning a vote by an Iowan registers the same as a vote by a Californian or Texan.

I do agree that the "popular" vote may turn out much differently if that's what each party/candidate had as a goal.
 
Much of what he says is true. Americans have taken “sides.” They support their team no matter what, and refuse to compromise as it simply cannot be allowed to let the other team “win.” In anything.

Just look at many of the posters on this board. Complete partisan hacks. Hateful people. Disagree with them or have a different opinion? Then you are called stupid…idiot. Admit they are ever wrong on anything? Heavens no! Compromise? Definitely not! Respect the opinion of anyone with a different view? Good God no!!
For most people, not really although I know that is the partisan narrative.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 83Hawk
Ideally states could govern as they chose like the flounders intended and breaking up wouldn’t be necessary.
 
I pretty much have given up on my fellow citizens, so a proposal like this seems much more reasonable to me than it would have been pre 2016.
I’ll just move to a reasonable, progressive region….y’all can have Iowa in the race to the bottom
Well, bye.
 
Interesting viewpoint. Thanks Torbee.
Citizens United accelerated our decline.
Saw that Peter Thiel,billionaire Trump guy threw 3.5 million in late ads for Vance in Ohio.
Karl Rove wrote today in the WSJ that the ads put Vance over the top as much as Trump's endorsement.
Interesting take by the article's author but hugely depressing.
 
This is the problem regardless of the article:

Blue States on the West Coast and in the Atlantic Northeast would immediately adopt every progressive policy you can imagine. National healthcare, free education, climate action, taxing the rich — we’d have it all. Blue States are rich enough that our tax dollars subsidize the Red State voters who use the federal government to prevent us from having things we want.

Meanwhile Red States like Florida and Texas are set to ban abortions, curtail LGBTQ+ rights, limit what teachers can say about racism, and end a slew of social welfare programs. In their America immigration desperately needed to mitigate labor shortages will be limited, taxes slashed, guns carried visibly on the street, and public displays of Christianity mandated.

Republicans hold the blue states in check despite the fact they would die without the blue state's money. Then the republicans try to limit rights, take away freedoms, enforce their Christian ideals on other. At least with the Democrat agenda I get some sort of personal gain with my tax dollars- improved environment, healthcare, education. I get nothing from the republicans. What do the republicans give me?

Republicans refusing to have a real agenda, with the decision to lead and legislate is the biggest problem. Constant obstructionism is breeding this. They have nothing to offer.
 
This is the problem regardless of the article:

Blue States on the West Coast and in the Atlantic Northeast would immediately adopt every progressive policy you can imagine. National healthcare, free education, climate action, taxing the rich — we’d have it all. Blue States are rich enough that our tax dollars subsidize the Red State voters who use the federal government to prevent us from having things we want.

Meanwhile Red States like Florida and Texas are set to ban abortions, curtail LGBTQ+ rights, limit what teachers can say about racism, and end a slew of social welfare programs. In their America immigration desperately needed to mitigate labor shortages will be limited, taxes slashed, guns carried visibly on the street, and public displays of Christianity mandated.

Republicans hold the blue states in check despite the fact they would die without the blue state's money. Then the republicans try to limit rights, take away freedoms, enforce their Christian ideals on other. At least with the Democrat agenda I get some sort of personal gain with my tax dollars- improved environment, healthcare, education. I get nothing from the republicans. What do the republicans give me?

Republicans refusing to have a real agenda, with the decision to lead and legislate is the biggest problem. Constant obstructionism is breeding this. They have nothing to offer.
Republicans are the “Party of No” and most everyone knows this...even (and especially) Republicans! But then why not? It works for them and lets them win elections. The ideas being proffered by Dems just don’t seem to resonate with many citizens and don’t allow Dems to gain legislative advantages needed to make changes.
 
Honestly, I'm becoming more and more in favor of some kind of breakup. After reading these two books:

Cover_of_American_Nations.jpg


and

53159043._SX318_.jpg


I am more and more convinced that trying to cobble together colonies with such vastly different cultures, societal values, political ideologies and approaches to governance was always a recipe for failure.

I'm ready for America to divide up into urban and rural enclaves.

JC, don't go all Texas whiney and start yelling about wanting to secede or break up the country.
 
So true. The rise of Trump obscures the fact that if you'd told someone in 2008 that Bernie Sanders would be within an arms length of being the Democratic nominee for president, you'd have been laughed out of the room.

Some really fvcked up times are afoot.
And yet Bernie pretty much espouses everything in the “70%” post that precedes yours by just a few.

People’s perceptions of things are so unbelievably mis/dis-informed, if not just flat out whacky.
 
The most accurate description of where we are at:

Republicans still want to hold onto what made America great and get back to it. Democrats want to complete the destruction of this country that started back in the '60s.

Obviously I'm a believer in America's greatness and hope it still has a chance. What I don't understand is why Democrats just don't leave this country if just about everything its stood for for the better part of 3 centuries is frowned upon by their more and more radicalized beliefs.
Lol.
 
I think people make the raw vote argument disingenuously.

The reason I say that is anytime I point out another governing body (UN) that has a voting representation that doesn’t equivalate to population, they won’t make the argument that China should have 4x the voting power of the U.S. or 56x the voting power of Australia.

They understand the sovereignty argument, and unable to refute it they just want to imagine it doesn’t exist and just don’t address it.

We also don’t try to settle all our problems through increasing the power of the UN to dictate national policies globally. We can quickly realize that would actually maximize dissatisfaction.

They understand the sovereignty argument, and unable to refute it they’d rather imagine it doesn’t exist and just don’t address it.
And for the last time, the UN doesn't govern anyone. Nobody. Not a single person on the planet. The representatives to the UN are not elected. They enact no laws. Trying to conflate the Senate with the UN is the height of stupidity.
 
And yet Bernie pretty much espouses everything in the “70%” post that precedes yours by just a few.

People’s perceptions of things are so unbelievably mis/dis-informed, if not just flat out whacky.
Well yeah. By most Western Democratic standards, Bernie Sanders is a slightly left of center moderate. In American politics, that makes him fringe radical leftist.
 
You just demonstrated the authors point perfectly.
Actually, no, you just did. I’m a guy that’s helped develop brand and message for both D and R politicians, and study this stuff fairly fervently. Bernie is as Torbee just described.

Somewhat related — I say it all the time: the Green New Deal has some very conservative underpinnings, and yet cons think it’s some crazy leftistsocialist thing. Bernie has basically been a GND pol since well before the GND was a thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: torbee
Actually, no, you just did. I’m a guy that’s helped develop brand and message for both D and R politicians, and study this stuff fairly fervently. Bernie is as Torbee just described.

Somewhat related — I say it all the time: the Green New Deal has some very conservative underpinnings, and yet cons think it’s some crazy leftistsocialist thing. Bernie has basically been a GND pol since well before the GND was a thing.
America is irrevocably broken. The sooner this fact is acknowledged the sooner peaceful solutions can be sought.
 
And for the last time, the UN doesn't govern anyone. Nobody. Not a single person on the planet.
Their resolutions are enforced by member nations. This isn’t a coffee club. People have been killed to enforce UN resolutions. The legal employment of violence to enforce compliance is what governments do.
It’s why we don’t confuse them with charities or think tanks

Practically everyone on the planet falls under their jurisdiction.
Your pronouncements demonstrably fail to intersect with reality when you declare ‘the UN doesn’t govern anyone’.

The representatives to the UN are not elected.
Was the King of Saudi Arabia elected?
Does Saudi Arabia have a government?
What a terrible argument.

Originally the members of the Senate were chosen by state legislatures, they were not elected. Were they thus not part of the government?
As in the UN, the representation was equal among members to represent the equal sovereignty of the member states.
This is the part you refuse to wrap your mind around.

They enact no laws. Trying to conflate the Senate with the UN is the height of stupidity.
Trying to pretend the UN isn’t an intragovernmental body that passes resolutions enforced by violence like other governments so you can close your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears and ignore the principal upon which they selected representation - sovereignty, not population weight - is the height of stupidity.

It’s sophistry so you can ignore the actual point.
 
This is the problem regardless of the article:

Blue States on the West Coast and in the Atlantic Northeast would immediately adopt every progressive policy you can imagine. National healthcare, free education, climate action, taxing the rich — we’d have it all. Blue States are rich enough that our tax dollars subsidize the Red State voters who use the federal government to prevent us from having things we want.

Meanwhile Red States like Florida and Texas are set to ban abortions, curtail LGBTQ+ rights, limit what teachers can say about racism, and end a slew of social welfare programs. In their America immigration desperately needed to mitigate labor shortages will be limited, taxes slashed, guns carried visibly on the street, and public displays of Christianity mandated.

Republicans hold the blue states in check despite the fact they would die without the blue state's money. Then the republicans try to limit rights, take away freedoms, enforce their Christian ideals on other. At least with the Democrat agenda I get some sort of personal gain with my tax dollars- improved environment, healthcare, education. I get nothing from the republicans. What do the republicans give me?

Republicans refusing to have a real agenda, with the decision to lead and legislate is the biggest problem. Constant obstructionism is breeding this. They have nothing to offer.

blogs-the-feed-2014-03-03-05-BILL-MURRAY-CLAPPING.gif
 
This is the problem regardless of the article:

Blue States on the West Coast and in the Atlantic Northeast would immediately adopt every progressive policy you can imagine. National healthcare, free education, climate action, taxing the rich — we’d have it all. Blue States are rich enough that our tax dollars subsidize the Red State voters who use the federal government to prevent us from having things we want.

Meanwhile Red States like Florida and Texas are set to ban abortions, curtail LGBTQ+ rights, limit what teachers can say about racism, and end a slew of social welfare programs. In their America immigration desperately needed to mitigate labor shortages will be limited, taxes slashed, guns carried visibly on the street, and public displays of Christianity mandated.

Republicans hold the blue states in check despite the fact they would die without the blue state's money. Then the republicans try to limit rights, take away freedoms, enforce their Christian ideals on other. At least with the Democrat agenda I get some sort of personal gain with my tax dollars- improved environment, healthcare, education. I get nothing from the republicans. What do the republicans give me?

Republicans refusing to have a real agenda, with the decision to lead and legislate is the biggest problem. Constant obstructionism is breeding this. They have nothing to offer.


200.gif
 
This is the problem regardless of the article:

Blue States on the West Coast and in the Atlantic Northeast would immediately adopt every progressive policy you can imagine. National healthcare, free education, climate action, taxing the rich — we’d have it all. Blue States are rich enough that our tax dollars subsidize the Red State voters who use the federal government to prevent us from having things we want.

Meanwhile Red States like Florida and Texas are set to ban abortions, curtail LGBTQ+ rights, limit what teachers can say about racism, and end a slew of social welfare programs. In their America immigration desperately needed to mitigate labor shortages will be limited, taxes slashed, guns carried visibly on the street, and public displays of Christianity mandated.

Republicans hold the blue states in check despite the fact they would die without the blue state's money. Then the republicans try to limit rights, take away freedoms, enforce their Christian ideals on other. At least with the Democrat agenda I get some sort of personal gain with my tax dollars- improved environment, healthcare, education. I get nothing from the republicans. What do the republicans give me?

Republicans refusing to have a real agenda, with the decision to lead and legislate is the biggest problem. Constant obstructionism is breeding this. They have nothing to offer.

citizen-kane-clap.gif
 
ADVERTISEMENT