Tag: yep

The lesson of the special elections around the country is clear: Democratic House candidates can dramatically outperform Clinton in deep red rural areas by running ideological, populist campaigns rooted in progressive areas. Poorer working class voters who pulled the lever for Trump can be swayed back to the left in surprisingly large numbers–perhaps not enough to win in places like Kansas, Montana and South Carolina, but certainly in other more welcoming climes. Nor is there a need to subvert Democratic principles of social justice in order to accomplish this: none of the Democrats who overperformed Clinton’s numbers in these districts curried favor with bigots in order to accomplish it.

But candidates like Clinton and Ossoff who try to run inoffensive and anti-ideological campaigns in an attempt to win over supposedly sensible, wealthier, bourgeois suburban David-Brooks-reading Republican Romney voters will find that they lose by surprisingly wide margins. There is no Democrat so seemingly non-partisan that Romney Republicans will be tempted to cross the aisle in enough numbers to make a difference.

The way forward for Democrats lies to the left, and with the working classes. It lies with a firm ideological commitment to progressive values, and in winning back the Obama voters Democrats lost to Trump in 2016 without giving ground on commitments to social justice. It does not lie in the wealthy suburbs that voted for Romney over Obama in 2012, or in ideological self-effacement on core economic concerns.

David Atkins nails it over at the Washington Monthly. I’d only add: yep. Though it’s also worth noting the Democrats are also fighting a messaging machine they can’t hope to match at this point. This is worth noting that in light of the South Carolina over-performance in an essentially forgotten race in a deep red district…

Let’s cut the crap about why Hillary Clinton lost

Please read the whole thing, but here’s part of the nut:

So why didn’t she [win]? The answer is pretty simple: despite running a pretty good campaign, she got walloped by things that decidedly don’t come with the territory: Russian interference via the WikiLeaks drip; an indefensible letter released by the FBI director; and a press corps that treated the Comey letter like the OJ trial. She got slammed late in the game, and had no time to recover.

Yep.

Let’s cut the crap about why Hillary Clinton lost

I’ll tell you what’s at the bottom of it. If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.

Lyndon B. Johnson, man ahead of his time.

I was struck last night by a comment that I heard made by Speaker Ryan, where he called this [Affordable Care Act] repeal bill ‘an act of mercy.’ With all due respect to our speaker, he and I must have read different Scripture…The one I read calls on us to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to shelter the homeless, and to comfort the sick. It reminds us that we are judged not by how we treat the powerful, but by how we care for the least among us. There is no mercy in a system that makes health care a luxury. There is no mercy in a country that turns their back on those most in need of protection: the elderly, the poor, the sick, and the suffering. There is no mercy in a cold shoulder to the mentally ill. This is not an act of mercy. It is an act of malice.

Joe Kennedy III (D. MA) doing it the right way

So why do Republicans hate Obamacare so much? It’s not because they have better ideas; as we’ve seen over the past few weeks, they’re coming up empty-handed on the “replace” part of “repeal and replace.” It’s not, I’m sorry to say, because they are deeply committed to Americans’ right to buy the insurance policy of their choice.

No, mainly they hate Obamacare for two reasons: It demonstrates that the government can make people’s lives better, and it’s paid for in large part with taxes on the wealthy. Their overriding goal is to make those taxes go away. And if getting those taxes cut means that quite a few people end up dying, remember: freedom!

Paul Krugman, writing in the Times of New York. I’d only quibble with the “over the past few weeks, they’re coming up empty handed” part. The GOP has had YEARS to come up with a plan. They haven’t. In fact, they haven’t even produced so much as a meaningful tweak, much less full replacment. Their plan is that anyone who can’t pay or exhausts their tax sheltered Health Savings Account should kindly go die in the streets. Period. Just how big should that HSA get? I guess that depends on how sick you plan on being or the level to which you are prepared to shop around during your heart attack.

If the Republicans in the Senate were really as concerned about a renegade presidency as they claim to be on Twitter and in anonymous mumblings to various reporters, they’d join with Democrats to block [Mnuchin’s] nomination. It only takes three of them, and they all could cite Mnuchin’s dubious testimony to the committee as a very plausible reason for doing so.

There was absolutely no chance of that ever happening, however. Nobody—except Bernie Sanders, who said it all the time—wants to get up and state flat out that the business model of people like Stephen Mnuchin, the people who immiserated millions out of sheer animal greed, was plain vanilla bunco fraud. This was really the last chance to make that point before these gombeen yahoos do it all over again.

Charlie Pierce, writing about the Mnuchin confirmation for Treasury Secretary. Yep. Great Recession II is coming, and if these yahoos are still in charge when it happens they’ll merily let the global economy burn to the ground Hoover style. The Market will sort all that out, don’t ya know? So get ready for your haircut, Wall Street, because it’s coming sooner than later; the great reckoning that should have been bailout and jailterms back in ought-eight will instead be no bailout, total ruin for you, and a decades long recovery for literally everyone else. And, of course, the end of the GOP. So we’ll have that going for us.

Eichenwald: Neil Gorsuch is supremely qualified, and must not be confirmed

Well reasoned article by Kurt Eichenwald, starts thusly:

Gorsuch [though well qualified in terms of the “traditional norms”], unfortunately, must be sacrificed on the altar of obscene partisanship erected by the Republicans in recent years. Temper tantrums designed to undermine the Constitution for naked political purposes cannot be rewarded. Our government cannot survive the short-term games-playing that has replaced fidelity to the intent of the Founding Fathers’ work in forming this once-great nation.

But I have to say, his solution is an odd one, basically force a vote on Garland, which, of course, would simply be a party-line “no” based on the current Senate, then renominate Gorsuch:

So even though Garland would not have won a Senate confirmation vote, a precedent needs to be established: the Senate’s confirmation responsibilities under the Constitution are not a joke, are not something where absurd rationalizations that pass for smarts on Fox News can be used to circumvent history and precedent. Nominees must be given hearings and votes. And yes, if that means letting the Republicans blow up the filibuster, let them do it.

Honestly, I don’t see how that’s “punishment” or is in any way reseting the Constitutional norms. His final paragraph, however, does break the glass on what I would definitely agree is true and lasting retribution for this act (and that also presumes the inevitable end of judicial filibusters he alluded to above):

Then, when a Democratic president is in office, the Democrats control the Senate, and there is no filibuster, show the Republicans a real exercise in raw power: revive Franklin Roosevelt’s plan to pack the Supreme Court and fill it with the most liberal justices around. If the Republicans insist on turning the judiciary into a political plaything, play the roughest game of hardball they have ever seen.

That is nothing if not serious hardball. It is amazing to see it suggested in print by someone like Eichenwald. Trump voters wanted change. They’re getting change alright.

Eichenwald: Neil Gorsuch is supremely qualified, and must not be confirmed

What Atrios Said

Press conferences don’t really matter that much anyway. Just one of those ritualistic things we’re all used to. Just get rid of it, spend your time doing something else. Stop whining about it.

Full Text

Yep. I’d only add that “something else” has to be real, aggressive, confrontational journalism. It is a colossal waste of time and resources to wait around all day for the privelege to sit there and go through the motions of jotting down what the press secretary said and, on a good day, elicit some minor gaffe around imprecise wording that we can all titter about for a few hours before repeating the same pointless nonsense the next day. Seriously, when was the last time news of any kind was broken at a press conference? If you’re thinking of citing Muskie’s suspect tear, then keep looking and leave the Man from Maine alone, my friend.

If Trump eliminates this particular brand of nonsense forever, I say good on him. At least he accomplished something beyond enriching himself and forcing all the august journals to acknowledge that water sports are officially ‘Merica’s Prime Patriotic Pastime.