[Discussion] Blue no matter who?

This post is discussing the efficacy of voting "Blue no matter who" as it relates to the working class and working poor.

Mixolyde wrote:

Busting the rail workers strike and the dripping of student debt relief in weird random chunks instead of forgiving all of it are two that I can think of policy-wise. But the main thing is not making systemic changes that will meaningfully shore up the government from the next administration of society destroyers.

But that is by design - meaning a single person or even party is not supposed to be able to just change stuff. It is supposed to be a long process with lots of hoops to jump through.

While many of us want systemic changes etc. there is almost half the voting public that doesn't want those changes. Sure I think they are flipping morons but in a democracy they get a say too. That makes the process even slower!

farley3k wrote:

While many of us want systemic changes etc. there is almost half the voting public that doesn't want those changes.

It depends on the issue, though, right? Sure, the USA is pretty close to 50/50 if you poll on partisan identity, but if you ask about specific issues like abortion, universal health care, legalizing weed, "common sense" gun control stuff like universal background checks, etc - there are very clear majorities in favor once you remove the partisan cultural signifiers.

I'm sure you know that one of the big knocks on the Democrats is that they are feckless dweebs who decline to pursue popular policies for various self-interested reasons and instead implement incomprehensible means-tested bullsh*t that helps almost no one. And that they would rather shrug their shoulders helplessly about the filibuster than actually govern or exert any political power whatsoever, and then fundraise on "orange man bad" while they make a big show of banning TikTok or flavored vape pods or whatever.

Podunk wrote:

I'm sure you know that one of the big knocks on the Democrats is that they are feckless dweebs who decline to pursue popular policies for various self-interested reasons and instead implement incomprehensible means-tested bullsh*t that helps almost no one.

But then I look at the history of the last 50 years (my lifetime) and every meaningful good change has been spearheaded by Democrats. In that same time frame republicans have worked ceaselessly to hurt people

Would I like them to have done more? Hell yes but I can't just ignore what the other side has done and wants to do.

farley3k wrote:

Would I like them to have done more? Hell yes but I can't just ignore what the other side has done and wants to do.

Right, yeah, I'm not saying vote Trump. I'm saying that I am soooooo motherf*cking tired of hearing Democrats trot out these tired arguments about procedure and decorum as reasons why they can't do what we elected them to do, and then sending me hysterical fundraising emails every day about how this election could be the end of democracy if I don't send them $20. Really, is it? If so...is this really the best you guys can do?

Mixolyde wrote:

Busting the rail workers strike and the dripping of student debt relief in weird random chunks instead of forgiving all of it are two that I can think of policy-wise. But the main thing is not making systemic changes that will meaningfully shore up the government from the next administration of society destroyers.

I was 100% with you on the rail workers strike bullsh*t when it was happening. It wasn't advertised (because Democrats are stupid?), but Biden was having meetings with the rail companies and the union representatives behind the scenes to try to get consessions without a strike. I think the rail worker union should have really used the crash in Ohio to nail the railroad executives to a wall, and let the administration be grumpy about it, but that's not my call.

The student debt thing is not even a little Biden's fault. Like at all. He tried to implement a broad sweeping debt forgiveness program and it was shut down by the Supreme Court. That should have been his cue to add about 8 seats to the Court, but instead he buckled down and pulled up already passed laws from the last 20+ years and made sure they got applied. Sure it's a lot slower than anyone wants, but it's still happening, and it's not from a lack of effort on the part of the administration.

I don't think anyone here is trying to say that the Democratic Party will save us all, and that they are the saviors we all can pray to, but letting the constant disappointment that is our stupid two-party system turn us into supporters of fascist, authoritarian, psychotic 'leaders' isn't going to solve anything. Anyone paying any attention after 2016 should know better.

Podunk wrote:

If so...is this really the best you guys can do?

for me, the answer is yes. It is like trying to steer at container ship on the ocean (since they have been in the news). You haul away on the wheel and it slowly, slowly, slowly turns. It takes a freaking long time to effect change.

Exactly. As painful as it is, most voters are in the middle and *support* the status quo. In a democracy, their voice counts too.

farley3k wrote:
Podunk wrote:

If so...is this really the best you guys can do?

for me, the answer is yes. It is like trying to steer at container ship on the ocean (since they have been in the news). You haul away on the wheel and it slowly, slowly, slowly turns. It takes a freaking long time to effect change.

To continue the metaphor, Democrats trying to steer this ship while Republicans are cutting the power.

Okay, but if this is really truly the most important election (again) - the best they can do is drown the primaries in the bathtub in order to run a historically unpopular octogenarian with (literally) no posted policy platform on his campaign site? And the message to voters is "get over yourselves?"

To continue this increasingly tortured metaphor: Democrats are trying to steer the ship while Republicans are cutting the power, and the people the Democrats have intentionally put in charge of driving should have voluntarily retired a decade ago and are so old and frail and confused that the rest of the crew is constantly making dark jokes about it, and they either don't actually believe that Republicans would really go as far as cutting the power, or don't actually care because they will make more money from the GoFundMe campaigns and insurance payouts after the inevitable wreck.

That's how this feels, in this moment. I can believe that the Democrats offer a slightly better alternative to the howling pit of fascism on the GOP side while still expressing dismay at the Democrats pissing in my face every day and telling me, no, get over yourself, it's actually raining.

farley3k wrote:
Podunk wrote:

If so...is this really the best you guys can do?

for me, the answer is yes. It is like trying to steer at container ship on the ocean (since they have been in the news). You haul away on the wheel and it slowly, slowly, slowly turns. It takes a freaking long time to effect change.

It’s a good thing then that we don’t live in a country with like a half dozen existential problems all coming to a head and we definitely aren’t like two decades past the point where we have enough time for slow, incremental change.

IMAGE(https://i.postimg.cc/k5bZ7Y6J/16xcpg.jpg)

Podunk wrote:

That's how this feels, in this moment. I can believe that the Democrats offer a slightly better alternative to the howling pit of fascism on the GOP side while still expressing dismay at the Democrats pissing in my face every day and telling me, no, get over yourself, it's actually raining.

I really didn't want to comment in this thread but I completely disagree with "slightly better".
Let's look at two different states to see what democrats and republicans will accomplish when they have the governor's office, the state house, and the state senate.

Iowa has:

decreased funding for education, the AEA, and the DNR.
taken money from public schools and given it to private institutions.
decreased the budget of the AEA and taken away services that help people with special needs.
lowered the age at which children can work dangerous jobs in meat packing, construction, and other industries.
refused federal money that gives food to children because they're fat
restricted what food can be purchased with SNAP funds as well as enact laws to make it harder to get those funds. SNAP is Iowa's food stamp program)
passed laws to ban books.
passed a law that says schools can only use the legal name of a student unless the parent signs a form for a nickname (you can't even call a kid Mike instead of Michael without this form).
enacted laws restricting gender affirming care and bathroom use for transgender people (these are just two of the 29 bills that target transgender individuals).
put forth a bill (that has been tabled for now) that criminalizes homelessness.
enacted laws that require anyone who wants to report animal cruelty (specifically animal cruelty by a company) to do so publicly.
changed who tests public lakes and streams from the universities to the DNR.
taken away housing for most of the park rangers in the state
passed a law removing park rangers from the parks and putting them into counties (to decrease the number of rangers)
stripped the ability of the state auditor to do their job allowing state officials to opt out of being investigated by the state auditor and be audited by someone else that they choose.
loosened conceal carry laws (no need for a permit here, yeehaw)
made it legal to have a gun in school parking lots

These are just things I can think of at the moment and just what has passed thus far. There are laws I am forgetting. There are also laws (such as a 6 week abortion ban) that were struck down by the supreme court.
Have they passed laws that I am for? Sure. I can teach my own kid how to drive and I can get to go alcohol at breweries and bars. Can't think of anything else.

Minnesota, which has the governor's office, house, and senate, has done a lot to help individuals. Note this isn't anywhere close to all the good things they are doing just laws I know of. I don't pay as much attention to MN laws as I live in Iowa.
A law to:
provide free breakfast and lunch for all children in school.
provide free period products in school
improve PTO accrual while sick for employees
improve red flag laws for guns and expand background checks
provide free tuition for students with a family income under 80, freeze tuition at 33 colleges/universities through spring 2025
protect rights for reproductive health
legalize cannabis and expunge low level offenders
improve worker safety and protections
increased the minimum wage
increased teacher salary and school funding without taking money from the AEA (iowa passed a law that increased teacher pay but took the money for that increase from the AEA budget)

Honestly just the difference between what Iowa has passed and not passing those same laws is huge.

But this is what republicans and democrats do when they have the governors office, the house, and the senate. Wisconsin is what they do when they have the governor's office (look for creative ways to affect change since you can't get the votes to actually change). You can talk about how little progress is made but without the presidency, the house, the senate, and a supreme court that isn't completely, utterly corrupt you can't really do much.

Biden can't create much change when half of the government is against any progress, even when it's something they've been trying to get passed for years. I mean, when you have bipartisan support for a bill on immigration and border control and Trump tells them not to pass it because he needs it for his campaign and they flipping don't pass it just for his benefit how can you expect much progress?

Oh, and republicans aren't cutting the power to the boat. They're grabbing the wheel and steering it towards an ice berg so that Trump can sell seats on the lifeboat.

Podunk wrote:

if you ask about specific issues like abortion, universal health care, legalizing weed, "common sense" gun control stuff like universal background checks, etc - there are very clear majorities in favor once you remove the partisan cultural signifiers.

I'm sure you know that one of the big knocks on the Democrats is that they are feckless dweebs who decline to pursue popular policies for various self-interested reasons and instead implement incomprehensible means-tested bullsh*t that helps almost no one. And that they would rather shrug their shoulders helplessly about the filibuster than actually govern or exert any political power whatsoever, and then fundraise on "orange man bad" while they make a big show of banning TikTok or flavored vape pods or whatever.

Well said. You flew that realitycopter straight into the ground of Truth.

I guess I should be clear that I'm mostly talking about politicians at the federal level - it's maybe easy for me to be glib because I live in a blue state where there is at least a good faith effort to keep public services and institutions afloat. And even here, local and state level officials are still expected to make a compelling case to voters, and to actually govern, vs. spending all their time sh*tposting and fundraising.

EvilHomer3k wrote:

But this is what republicans and democrats do when they have the governors office, the house, and the senate. Wisconsin is what they do when they have the governor's office (look for creative ways to affect change since you can't get the votes to actually change). You can talk about how little progress is made but without the presidency, the house, the senate, and a supreme court that isn't completely, utterly corrupt you can't really do much.

You make some very good points, but again, there's a straight line from the woeful state of the Supreme Court back to the arrogance and complacency of liberals - I'm thinking here of Hillary's bungled presidential campaign, RBG's refusal to retire while Obama could have appointed a successor, the Merrick Garland debacle. There's a straight line from the situation in the House and Senate to the historic losses that Democrats suffered during the Obama administration - a perfect storm of negligence and strategic incompetence that resulted, among other things, in a lot of up-and-coming young talent on the Dem side being scoured away, leaving the geriatrics like Biden, Pelosi, Schumer, and Feinstein holding the reins of power with no clear successors.

I don't disagree with anything you're saying--I have voted Democrat across the board for years, and I don't see that changing any time soon--but I wish I felt like the leadership I was seeing from the Dems gave me any hope that things had changed for the better.

EvilHomer3k wrote:

Iowa has:

degraded from a slightly-red state to effectively a banana republic in the span of a mere 8 years at an accelerating rate.

It's increasingly hard to tell the difference between Iowa and Florida, aside from the lack of eroding/flooding sea coasts.

Farscry wrote:
EvilHomer3k wrote:

Iowa has:

degraded from a slightly-red state to effectively a banana republic in the span of a mere 8 years at an accelerating rate.

It's increasingly hard to tell the difference between Iowa and Florida, aside from the lack of eroding/flooding sea coasts.

Yeah, we barely even get any snow now.

EvilHomer3k wrote:
Farscry wrote:
EvilHomer3k wrote:

Iowa has:

degraded from a slightly-red state to effectively a banana republic in the span of a mere 8 years at an accelerating rate.

It's increasingly hard to tell the difference between Iowa and Florida, aside from the lack of eroding/flooding sea coasts.

Yeah, we barely even get any snow now.

At the risk of off topic, by how many inches this year do you figure you're off? Is it a temperature thing? More rain vs snow or is it a complete lack of rain OR snow?

Drazzil wrote:
EvilHomer3k wrote:
Farscry wrote:
EvilHomer3k wrote:

Iowa has:

degraded from a slightly-red state to effectively a banana republic in the span of a mere 8 years at an accelerating rate.

It's increasingly hard to tell the difference between Iowa and Florida, aside from the lack of eroding/flooding sea coasts.

Yeah, we barely even get any snow now.

At the risk of off topic, by how many inches this year do you figure you're off? Is it a temperature thing? More rain vs snow or is it a complete lack of rain OR snow?

my family lives in Iowa and this last winter at least they were always complaining that they were getting all the seasons at once- it would be 70 degrees one day and a blizzard the next and the week would end with torrential rain and tornado warnings.
(they all think climate change is fake, though, btw)

ruhk wrote:
Drazzil wrote:
EvilHomer3k wrote:
Farscry wrote:
EvilHomer3k wrote:

Iowa has:

degraded from a slightly-red state to effectively a banana republic in the span of a mere 8 years at an accelerating rate.

It's increasingly hard to tell the difference between Iowa and Florida, aside from the lack of eroding/flooding sea coasts.

Yeah, we barely even get any snow now.

At the risk of off topic, by how many inches this year do you figure you're off? Is it a temperature thing? More rain vs snow or is it a complete lack of rain OR snow?

my family lives in Iowa and this last winter at least they were always complaining that they were getting all the seasons at once- it would be 70 degrees one day and a blizzard the next and the week would end with torrential rain and tornado warnings.
(they all think climate change is fake, though, btw)

Oy.

Drazzil wrote:
EvilHomer3k wrote:
Farscry wrote:
EvilHomer3k wrote:

Iowa has:

degraded from a slightly-red state to effectively a banana republic in the span of a mere 8 years at an accelerating rate.

It's increasingly hard to tell the difference between Iowa and Florida, aside from the lack of eroding/flooding sea coasts.

Yeah, we barely even get any snow now.

At the risk of off topic, by how many inches this year do you figure you're off? Is it a temperature thing? More rain vs snow or is it a complete lack of rain OR snow?

Looking further into it, it wasn't that we didn't get snow. January snow fall set records in several areas. But then after it snowed we got very warm weather. In fact much of the midwest had record setting temps in February. Essentially, it only snowed a few times this year but when it did there was a lot of it. Then, it warmed up right after and it all melted. We got snow in November one day. It melted and we had no snow until a record setting snow in January. Then it melted and we had temps in the 50s, 60s, and 70s (though 30 overnight) until we got snow in the last few days of March.

So I was incorrect. We actually got more snow than normal. We just got it all at once and then had record setting high temps for 6 weeks. Normally, that snow would have stuck around until March.

EvilHomer3k wrote:
Drazzil wrote:
EvilHomer3k wrote:
Farscry wrote:
EvilHomer3k wrote:

Iowa has:

degraded from a slightly-red state to effectively a banana republic in the span of a mere 8 years at an accelerating rate.

It's increasingly hard to tell the difference between Iowa and Florida, aside from the lack of eroding/flooding sea coasts.

Yeah, we barely even get any snow now.

At the risk of off topic, by how many inches this year do you figure you're off? Is it a temperature thing? More rain vs snow or is it a complete lack of rain OR snow?

Looking further into it, it wasn't that we didn't get snow. January snow fall set records in several areas. But then after it snowed we got very warm weather. In fact much of the midwest had record setting temps in February. Essentially, it only snowed a few times this year but when it did there was a lot of it. Then, it warmed up right after and it all melted. We got snow in November one day. It melted and we had no snow until a record setting snow in January. Then it melted and we had temps in the 50s, 60s, and 70s (though 30 overnight) until we got snow in the last few days of March.

So I was incorrect. We actually got more snow than normal. We just got it all at once and then had record setting high temps for 6 weeks. Normally, that snow would have stuck around until March.

And you guys are in the breadbasket too.

Rent, Food and Utilities such as gas are all way up. Wages have not increased to match.

Iowa's major crops are corn and potatoes right? Oh. Add in soybean.

Pigs. We are all about pork

Porks up there but mostly corn for ethanol and suger. Also chicken eggs.

Honestly without Iowa the US might be forced to eat a bit healthier.

ruhk wrote:

Honestly without Iowa the US might be forced to eat a bit healthier.

Lol. We could make that our state motto
"Iowa, without us you would eat healthier"

Corn, soybeans, and 23.9 million pigs.

Costs have increased here but not that much. I've covered that cost for the most part by making my own coffee and spending less money on bicycle parts I never end up having the time to use anyway. I used to get starbucks 3-4 times a week. Now I make my own and it's better than Starbucks (even on my minimal setup).

For people less fortunate than I am I am sure they're struggling. Minimum wage in Iowa is still $7.25 per hour. Even Missouri has increased theirs to $12 per hour. Our governor also made it harder for low income families to qualify for food and medical assistance, refused federal aid to give free breakfast and lunch to children because they're too fat, and passed a regressive income tax law (which affects lower income people more). Best not to be poor in Iowa.

I noticed we have a new state slogan on the signs coming into the state

Freedom To Flourish

It is 1984 levels of doublthink.

Hey, we've got so much freedom that we needed to tell over a dozen dedicated staff that we wouldn't be able to renew their contracts.

Paying to help people? Not with MY taxes. Welcome to Iowa.

Read a blurb in the NY Times Briefing this morning and then went looking for more information. Unfortunately, I confirmed it quickly:

Iowa made it a crime for a person to enter the state if they have ever been deported or denied entry into the U.S.

The Register wrote:

Gov. Kim Reynolds has signed a Texas-style immigration law allowing Iowa officers to arrest undocumented immigrants under a new crime of "illegal reentry" into the state.

Reynolds signed Senate File 2340 Wednesday, making it a crime to attempt to enter Iowa after being previously deported or barred from entering the United States. It takes effect July 1.

I guess illegal immigration is a huge problem in Iowa, since they're so close to the border being in the center of the freaking country.

Another example of "the cruelty is the point". Also, pointing out that we would have had some stronger enforcement if Trump hadn't ordered his loyal followers to torpedo it so Biden couldn't get any political points for it.

When anyone not Blue is a member of a cult that worships at the altar of a narcissistic, despotic leader who doesn't care about anyone other than himself and can't go two sentences without lying through his teeth (and usually can't even go one)? Then, yeah. Blue, no matter who.

There are more undocumented people in Iowa than you would think with the amount of farms and slaughterhouses that use drastically underpaid workers to do hard work in unsafe conditions.

Having said all that, Reynolds is a monster.

My twisted dream is that all illegals just go home - and we suffer as our entire economy collapses. Want a new house, want fresh vegetables, want meat - all professions with huge numbers of illegals working in them.
I would laugh my ass off (as I weeded my own garden) when chicken goes to $20 a lb.

Iowa doesn't deserve the hard work of immigrants.