I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n23/david-r...democracy-ends

TM

[Tyrone Slothrop]

A more complete answer to Sebby's question of the other day.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

For all of the bitching about it, the Pantsuit Republic seems to have mobilized quite a few people on their own. I'm a member of the national, Texas and Houston groups, though I don't really do much except scroll every now and then to see what's going on. And I've seen quite a number of people who had no involvement whatsoever take initiative and organize. It's actually quite remarkable. There's a group right now outside of Ted Cruz's office here in Houston. Apparently the staff would rather lock themselves in than talk to a bunch of middle aged women about healthcare.

Also, I don't think Trump won Texas because of Trump. I think he won because of the R. I don't see that much fawning over him down here. Most of the Rs I know who voted for him (including some family members) did so because of party identity. There are almost two Republican parties down here: more traditional (and reasonable) Republicans and Tea Party / Trump types. When the legislature is in session (as sadly, it is now) the dichotomy is pretty clear. And every single reasonable R legislator has told me that there is a constant primary threat against them on the Tea Party side.

I don't generally give a shit about why Hillary lost some random guy in Wisconsin or Michigan as I do why the Rs took Texas over 20 years ago and haven't let go. I go through small Texas towns and know that the hardships borne by manufacturing jobs leaving or coal mines shutting down are not at all borne here. I know a shit ton of it has to do with the redistricting in 2004 (and the Ds knew that too, which is why they fled the state to avoid a quorum). But now I think it comes down to Cowboys vs. Giants*. Teams were picked and no matter how bad your $72 million quarterback sucks, you're still going to root for the Texans in their slaughter on Saturday.

*I was going to use the Washington team, but that name is repulsive to me. The Cowboys are repulsive to me too, but that has to do with the sides I picked (or was assigned) decades ago.

But a ton of the answer for Texas statewide is turnout, isn't it?

I enjoy Pantsuit Nation. The Mass chapter has become an action organization. One of the most effective things they do is drive comments on articles, so now if some winger spouts off in a local paper, when you read the comments its all ornery lefties calling bullshit instead of the peepee the frog crowd. The peepee crowd seems to be getting kind of flustered with it actually. But they can also turn out a crowd on a moments notice, which means when the Gov is about to do something bad, he's suddenly finding himself being called on it very publicly everywhere he goes.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

But a ton of the answer for Texas statewide is turnout, isn't it?

I enjoy Pantsuit Nation. The Mass chapter has become an action organization. One of the most effective things they do is drive comments on articles, so now if some winger spouts off in a local paper, when you read the comments its all ornery lefties calling bullshit instead of the peepee the frog crowd. The peepee crowd seems to be getting kind of flustered with it actually. But they can also turn out a crowd on a moments notice, which means when the Gov is about to do something bad, he's suddenly finding himself being called on it very publicly everywhere he goes.

BTW, Mass 3rd party votes 2012 about 50,000. 2016? 180,000. The tip mattered in states that were closer, but you were not immune to the fact of it.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

A more complete answer to Sebby's question of the other day.

I can't recall which question that answers. But I'm going to suggest we all lay off this impeachment talk. And I can support this argument with three words that ought give everyone piss shivers: President Michael Pence.

(Mic drop here.)

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n23/david-r...democracy-ends

TM

Agreed. But here's another, explaining that democracy already died, and arguments against Trump, or any other leader, are really just complaints that one would prefer to be governed by a different figurehead sitting above a shadow government: https://theintercept.com/2017/01/11/...as-dems-cheer/

You cannot really think this is a battle of freedom vs. autocracy. It's an argument about who you'd prefer in control. Hillary is preferable to many here for a number of reasons which are totally understandable. Trump is preferable to others for equally understandable reasons. But let's not get ahead of ourselves and surmise we'd be any less controlled - any more or less "democratic" - under either of these two. She'd just be a lot more subtle about it.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

BTW, Mass 3rd party votes 2012 about 50,000. 2016? 180,000. The tip mattered in states that were closer, but you were not immune to the fact of it.

You keep fingering the third party voters as villains. Are you expecting regret? I can't speak for all of them, but my guess is, there's wine in your cellar that'll turn to vinegar before you hear it from most of them.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Copy the Tea Party and do it.

You mean, get dumb? Good luck with that. The Left may have its head firmly up its ass on many issues, but most of it retains a reverence for intellectual consistency precluding it from using Tea Party strategies.

"Strategies" is probably an undeserved compliment to the Tea Party. I don't see any, but as they keep succeeding, I'm going to have to assume they're employing at least some rudimentary form of compass.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

That has been the curious side of this election. I lost respect for Cruz and others I used to respect, and have been increasingly finding myself on the side of those I would have previously designated RINOs (mainly McCain and Graham).

None of these people have sincere principles. Graham and McCain are neo-liberal neocons - the worst possible of politicians. Both are just pissed their pet projects (expansion of ongoing wars/conversion of proxy wars to actual ones/interventionist foreign policy/wasteful defense spending) might not be high on Trump's agenda. They need to have a Coke and smile with Bill Kristol, and shut the fuck up.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You keep fingering the third party voters as villains. Are you expecting regret? I can't speak for all of them, but my guess is, there's wine in your cellar that'll turn to vinegar before you hear it from most of them.

I'm math driven. I can look at numbers and see how two states that voted for President Obama both voted for Trump. As others have said, they may be a host of other reasons, and there may be lots of reasons for the increase in third party voters, but third party voters were a 500% increase in Mi and Pa. That is extraordinary. I'm not looking for you to express, or feel, regret. I do expect a lot of Bernie supporters who went third party feel regret. How could they not?

But with the post you were quoting I was just trying to take GGG down a notch. He seemed to be bragging his state was above any of these issues.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I can't recall which question that answers. But I'm going to suggest we all lay off this impeachment talk. And I can support this argument with three words that ought give everyone piss shivers: President Michael Pence.

(Mic drop here.)

You asked why the Russia story isn't going away.

Do you really think we should be more scared of President Pence than President Trump? That's loopy.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You cannot really think this is a battle of freedom vs. autocracy. It's an argument about who you'd prefer in control. Hillary is preferable to many here for a number of reasons which are totally understandable. Trump is preferable to others for equally understandable reasons. But let's not get ahead of ourselves and surmise we'd be any less controlled - any more or less "democratic" - under either of these two. She'd just be a lot more subtle about it.

This is dumb. Flower can explain.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You mean, get dumb?

No. Organize.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I'm math driven. I can look at numbers and see how two states that voted for President Obama both voted for Trump. As others have said, they may be a host of other reasons, and there may be lots of reasons for the increase in third party voters, but third party voters were a 500% increase in Mi and Pa. That is extraordinary. I'm not looking for you to express, or feel, regret. I do expect a lot of Bernie supporters who went third party feel regret. How could they not?

But with the post you were quoting I was just trying to take GGG down a notch. He seemed to be bragging his state was above any of these issues.

Perhaps you should read again. I was noting the ways in which a particular group that both RT and I are on seems to be useful in Massachusetts, as in Texas. Remember, we have a Republican governor (and a Sheriff who has gone full-Arpaio.)

The 500% increase in third party voting in those states is one of the most notable things about this campaign. That is a BFD.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

This is dumb. Flower can explain.

But come on, just how dumb is it? I mean, compared to other posts Sebby's made?