[Discussion] What comes next? Liber-all

American liberals and progressives now face their biggest challenge in a generation: What do we do with 4 years of a trump presidency, a republican congress, a likely conservative supreme court and most states under complete republican control?

This thread is not meant as a forum for discussing HOW or WHY democrats got destroyed in the 2016 election. It's meant for finding a way forward.

Arguably there is not a center, or least much of one, to appeal to.

The way I see it the 2020 dem primary comes down to a couple of questions starting from the premise that the platform will be more progressive. The first question is how far, as in just how progressive will people want (e.g. a higher minimum wage vs a national UBI). The second question that I think has the potential for a more heated debate is how fast, e.g. immediately moving everyone to Medicare vs having it as an option but not eliminating private insurance.

For me the primary will have to suss out which candidate has the optimal balance of far/fast as I buy the thesis that the 2020 election will be about who can turn out the largest portion of their current base. I think trying to broaden the base is a fools quest.

Electability is your ability to inspire.
But you have to inspire different demographics to your cause(s) and inspire different causes of different demographics. (heh I first wrote that as emographics, that typo might be more appropriate)

Lots of buy in on "Medicare for all", excited to see what that means from different candidates (Harris, Sanders, et al)

There seems to be pretty broad party support for a healthcare thing named Medicare for All and a decent chunk of grassroots support (I live in a college town, don't take my word hear I'm likely wrong) for a big push on climate change.

Would be cool to see these things nailed down a little more throughout the primary process as different candidates put forth their different versions.

Top_Shelf wrote:

4) He does not write off ANYONE, even if they disagree with him. Many examples of reaching out to local versions of conservative talk radio types to find common interests (often, sports; he's very much a jock).

Well now we know the real reason Jayhawker likes him.

bekkilyn wrote:
Top_Shelf wrote:

4) He does not write off ANYONE, even if they disagree with him. Many examples of reaching out to local versions of conservative talk radio types to find common interests (often, sports; he's very much a jock).

Well now we know the real reason Jayhawker likes him. :)

Had no idea he was into sports, although he does kind of have the old school jock look.

He sure didn't come off as dumb to me, but rather pretty bright. I could see how people view him as naive, as I kind of saw a Jimmy Carter optimism in him.

Jayhawker wrote:
bekkilyn wrote:
Top_Shelf wrote:

4) He does not write off ANYONE, even if they disagree with him. Many examples of reaching out to local versions of conservative talk radio types to find common interests (often, sports; he's very much a jock).

Well now we know the real reason Jayhawker likes him. :)

Had no idea he was into sports, although he does kind of have the old school jock look.

He sure didn't come off as dumb to me, but rather pretty bright. I could see how people view him as naive, as I kind of saw a Jimmy Carter optimism in him.

I should clarify. Dude is far from a knuckledragger and is certainly smarter than the governor of my home state of Kentucky. But he’s not brilliant like Obama or Clinton. There are a few areas like climate politics he knows very well, but a lot of local voters feel he’s ignored other major issues.

Optimism is good but honestly I don’t think Inslee has ever gone up against anything as nasty as the Trump machine. Washington State politics are easy mode compared to DC. I could easily see him being sidelined like Carter or even Dukakis in the general election.

If another candidate decides to go the Tim Kaine route and pick a more traditional VP, he would be an excellent pick.

I just have a sinking feeling we aren't getting off this ship. I think we've lost this. I don't see how you turn the tide when 30-40% of the population are totally okay with what is going on paired with a system that lets 20-30% have a complete stranglehold on politics. They are lining up all the dominoes and they are close to falling.

I guess when I see issues with electability, I think of things like Medicare for all and elimination of private health insurance. I am completely in favor of this although I think it could be challenging to sell. I’m also in favor of reparations to African American and Native American citizens but it must be meaningful, likely several trillion dollars to truly level the cultural playing field.

Just not sure how that will sell.

jdzappa wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:
bekkilyn wrote:
Top_Shelf wrote:

4) He does not write off ANYONE, even if they disagree with him. Many examples of reaching out to local versions of conservative talk radio types to find common interests (often, sports; he's very much a jock).

Well now we know the real reason Jayhawker likes him. :)

Had no idea he was into sports, although he does kind of have the old school jock look.

He sure didn't come off as dumb to me, but rather pretty bright. I could see how people view him as naive, as I kind of saw a Jimmy Carter optimism in him.

I should clarify. Dude is far from a knuckledragger and is certainly smarter than the governor of my home state of Kentucky. But he’s not brilliant like Obama or Clinton. There are a few areas like climate politics he knows very well, but a lot of local voters feel he’s ignored other major issues.

Optimism is good but honestly I don’t think Inslee has ever gone up against anything as nasty as the Trump machine. Washington State politics are easy mode compared to DC. I could easily see him being sidelined like Carter or even Dukakis in the general election.

If another candidate decides to go the Tim Kaine route and pick a more traditional VP, he would be an excellent pick.

See: he gets mocked for being naive he's so positive.

If you're wanting a sports comparison, he is Pete Carroll, minus the USC years/rules violations. And the conspiracy theories.

Think about it.

He really is.

(Except he'd hand it to Marshawn.)

And lol at Trump as Tywin Lannister. More like Viserys but in this world there's no Khal Drogo to crown him.

This is the interview I saw. It is pretty much all I know about Inslee.

Top_Shelf wrote:
jdzappa wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:
bekkilyn wrote:
Top_Shelf wrote:

4) He does not write off ANYONE, even if they disagree with him. Many examples of reaching out to local versions of conservative talk radio types to find common interests (often, sports; he's very much a jock).

Well now we know the real reason Jayhawker likes him. :)

Had no idea he was into sports, although he does kind of have the old school jock look.

He sure didn't come off as dumb to me, but rather pretty bright. I could see how people view him as naive, as I kind of saw a Jimmy Carter optimism in him.

I should clarify. Dude is far from a knuckledragger and is certainly smarter than the governor of my home state of Kentucky. But he’s not brilliant like Obama or Clinton. There are a few areas like climate politics he knows very well, but a lot of local voters feel he’s ignored other major issues.

Optimism is good but honestly I don’t think Inslee has ever gone up against anything as nasty as the Trump machine. Washington State politics are easy mode compared to DC. I could easily see him being sidelined like Carter or even Dukakis in the general election.

If another candidate decides to go the Tim Kaine route and pick a more traditional VP, he would be an excellent pick.

See: he gets mocked for being naive he's so positive.

If you're wanting a sports comparison, he is Pete Carroll, minus the USC years/rules violations. And the conspiracy theories.

Think about it.

He really is.

(Except he'd hand it to Marshawn.)

And lol at Trump as Tywin Lannister. More like Viserys but in this world there's no Khal Drogo to crown him.

I guess I don’t see the comparison, unless it’s that both Carroll and Inslee are positive to an annoying degree. Pete for all his new age positivity talk is crafty AF. Jay not so much. And I would argue that Jay would hand the ball to Lynch and run off to do his victory speech/climate change talk only to be informed that Brady threw a Hail Mary winning pass with a second to go.

Maybe Ramsay Bolton is a better analogy for Trump -a dumb brute with a ruthlessness and keen understanding of how to work other people’s fears and weaknesses.

I guess we will need to see how things shake out in Iowa and New Hampshire. Sometimes candidates rise to the occasion and for all I know Inslee might be one of them. I just don’t have a lot of confidence in that.

BTW Top thanks for giving me the chance to talk Seahawks, politics, and GoT. It’s almost the perfect post.

I agree with the assessment at 538 that Inslee and Hickenlooper main path to the nomination requires a whole bunch of other contenders dropping out of the race for the Democratic nomination.

edit: eh, comment is too inside [strike]base[/strike]basketball and might be misinterpreted, so instead I'll just comment on electibility as just another word for 'moderate' is a trap. I'm not even sure it's about specific policies. It's about appealing to an electorate that feels they're at the mercy of forces they can't control. Electibility is less about details, and more about making people feel like you'll speak for them.

jdzappa wrote:
Top_Shelf wrote:
jdzappa wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:
bekkilyn wrote:
Top_Shelf wrote:

4) He does not write off ANYONE, even if they disagree with him. Many examples of reaching out to local versions of conservative talk radio types to find common interests (often, sports; he's very much a jock).

Well now we know the real reason Jayhawker likes him. :)

Had no idea he was into sports, although he does kind of have the old school jock look.

He sure didn't come off as dumb to me, but rather pretty bright. I could see how people view him as naive, as I kind of saw a Jimmy Carter optimism in him.

I should clarify. Dude is far from a knuckledragger and is certainly smarter than the governor of my home state of Kentucky. But he’s not brilliant like Obama or Clinton. There are a few areas like climate politics he knows very well, but a lot of local voters feel he’s ignored other major issues.

Optimism is good but honestly I don’t think Inslee has ever gone up against anything as nasty as the Trump machine. Washington State politics are easy mode compared to DC. I could easily see him being sidelined like Carter or even Dukakis in the general election.

If another candidate decides to go the Tim Kaine route and pick a more traditional VP, he would be an excellent pick.

See: he gets mocked for being naive he's so positive.

If you're wanting a sports comparison, he is Pete Carroll, minus the USC years/rules violations. And the conspiracy theories.

Think about it.

He really is.

(Except he'd hand it to Marshawn.)

And lol at Trump as Tywin Lannister. More like Viserys but in this world there's no Khal Drogo to crown him.

I guess I don’t see the comparison, unless it’s that both Carroll and Inslee are positive to an annoying degree. Pete for all his new age positivity talk is crafty AF. Jay not so much. And I would argue that Jay would hand the ball to Lynch and run off to do his victory speech/climate change talk only to be informed that Brady threw a Hail Mary winning pass with a second to go.

Maybe Ramsay Bolton is a better analogy for Trump -a dumb brute with a ruthlessness and keen understanding of how to work other people’s fears and weaknesses.

I guess we will need to see how things shake out in Iowa and New Hampshire. Sometimes candidates rise to the occasion and for all I know Inslee might be one of them. I just don’t have a lot of confidence in that.

BTW Top thanks for giving me the chance to talk Seahawks, politics, and GoT. It’s almost the perfect post.

My work here is done!

Senator Elizabeth Warren Announces Plan To Break Up Amazon, Google And Facebook

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) unveiled the third major proposal of her presidential campaign Friday, a plan to make it easier for entrepreneurs to compete in the tech sector by breaking up dominant tech giants including Amazon, Google and Facebook.

“Today’s big tech companies have too much power  ―  too much power over our economy, our society, and our democracy. They’ve bulldozed competition, used our private information for profit, and tilted the playing field against everyone else,” Warren wrote in a post published on Medium.

“I want a government that makes sure everybody ― even the biggest and most powerful companies in America ― plays by the rules. And I want to make sure that the next generation of great American tech companies can flourish,” she continued. “To do that, we need to stop this generation of big tech companies from throwing around their political power to shape the rules in their favor and throwing around their economic power to snuff out or buy up every potential competitor.”

I agree that these companies do that but I think there may be better ways than just breaking up the companies.

farley3k wrote:

Senator Elizabeth Warren Announces Plan To Break Up Amazon, Google And Facebook

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) unveiled the third major proposal of her presidential campaign Friday, a plan to make it easier for entrepreneurs to compete in the tech sector by breaking up dominant tech giants including Amazon, Google and Facebook.

“Today’s big tech companies have too much power  ―  too much power over our economy, our society, and our democracy. They’ve bulldozed competition, used our private information for profit, and tilted the playing field against everyone else,” Warren wrote in a post published on Medium.

“I want a government that makes sure everybody ― even the biggest and most powerful companies in America ― plays by the rules. And I want to make sure that the next generation of great American tech companies can flourish,” she continued. “To do that, we need to stop this generation of big tech companies from throwing around their political power to shape the rules in their favor and throwing around their economic power to snuff out or buy up every potential competitor.”

I agree that these companies do that but I think there may be better ways than just breaking up the companies.

Seizing the means of production!

I really wish there was a way to feasibly break up the United States so the sane parts could come together and the insane parts could part ways with us. Unfortunately, the motes of sanity are all surrounded by seas of criminally stupid, vile people.

BoogtehWoog wrote:

I really wish there was a way to feasibly break up the United States so the sane parts could come together and the insane parts could part ways with us. Unfortunately, the motes of sanity are all surrounded by seas of criminally stupid, vile people.

True dat. Except. I’d be left in a crazy area. And I’d be sad because the sane area would be so much more expensive for me to move to due to lack of supply and a lot of demand.

When the Second Civil War starts, Teresa and I are heading to Maine. Hopefully we move there before it starts.

Just break it into four countries:

Atlantica (the six New England states, New York, New Jersey, and Maryland)
Pacifica (Washington, Oregon, and California)
Disney (Florida)
Jesusland (Everything else)

Yeah, I'd have to move, too. It might almost be worth it to be rid of the insanity, but then I'd be really worried about how much damage the crazies could cause to everyone else without anyone even attempting to mitigate them anymore.

(And yes, I'm well aware they don't really follow his teachings, but they try to convince everyone else they do so they'd name it that anyway.)

Keldar wrote:

Just break it into four countries:

Atlantica (the six New England states, New York, New Jersey, and Maryland)
Pacifica Cascadia (Washington, Oregon, and California)
Disney (Florida)
Jesusland (Everything else)

Jesusland would immediately make plans to invade, dominate, and subdue the "puny liberal countries" (it's their Manifest Destiny as God's chosen nation after all), and make at least a temporary alliance with Disney since Trump declared himself Emperor and moved the capital city to Maralago (or however it's spelled.) The Bush dynasty wants to take Disney for themselves, but seem inordinately frightened by this mysterious battle cry seeming to come from everywhere and nowhere, "But her emails!" If only Jesusland hadn't appropriated all of the fake news reporters. Thanks Obama!

Keldar wrote:

Just break it into four countries:

Atlantica (the six New England states, New York, New Jersey, and Maryland)
Pacifica (Washington, Oregon, and California)
Disney (Florida)
Jesusland (Everything else)

Add Chicagoland (Entire metro of Chicago)!

Keldar wrote:

Just break it into four countries:

Atlantica (the six New England states, New York, New Jersey, and Maryland)
Pacifica (Washington, Oregon, and California)
Disney (Florida)
Jesusland (Everything else)

Weedica(Washington, Oregon, Califronia and Colorado)
Fantasia(Florida), Purplehazia(Florida) or f*ckedtopia(Florida)... Bassackwardsland?

How about four countries:
Blue States - most of the North
Red States - most of the South
California
Texas

(mainly motivated to not have MN lumped in with Jesusland)

We need to sell Texas back to Mexico before this plan goes into effect.

Jayhawker wrote:

We need to sell Texas back to Mexico before this plan goes into effect.

OMG. Can you imagine how much fun that would be watching the Buddy Garrity's of the world, heck the Jerruh Jones'!, adjust to their new reality?

Popcorn.gif

BoogtehWoog wrote:

I really wish there was a way to feasibly break up the United States so the sane parts could come together and the insane parts could part ways with us. Unfortunately, the motes of sanity are all surrounded by seas of criminally stupid, vile people.

booo.
Boooooooooooooooooooooo
I boo this secessionist, elitist crap.

Jayhawker, I have some unfortunate news for you about Paul Lepage.

That he was replaced by a Democratic woman and has now moved to F*ckedtopia?

boogle wrote:

booo.
Boooooooooooooooooooooo
I boo this secessionist, elitist crap.

Sorry, boogle, but I'm not sure how we can ever integrate these people back into the mainstream. And I'm tired of my life being dictated by them. I'm barely able to suppress my rage these days and things are going to get real violent between the left and right real soon if these people don't come around. And I don't see them coming around.