Party or country?

[Belsnickel]

This image got me thinking about something I listened to last night:

(07-15-2017, 01:57 PM)GMDino Wrote:

I listen to the Crooked Media family of podcasts, and there are times when they have conservatives/Republicans on to talk about issues. This week they had a GOP operative on talking about things. This guy has an opposition research firm and has worked for GOP candidates and is well connected to folks in Washington. He was talking about how in private, all of these guys think Trump is a mess. But, because GOP voters support Trump as POTUS by a majority, they aren't willing to do anything about it. He talked about seeing internals showing this support, including one recently showing overwhelming support for Trump over Pence as POTUS.

Now, I'm not saying in this thread that Trump has done anything to warrant removal from office, that is not the point of this. The point here is to discuss how the politics in this country, in Washington specifically, has seemed to be to place party over country/law. This is an example of this where we have politicians that, in private, discuss how much they dislike the actions of the POTUS but because it can damage the party they do not express these concerns in public. Even if they believe that these actions are damaging to the country. Whether or not you like Trump is really irrelevant here, this behavioral pattern is troubling. We should have elected officials that stand up for the country and stick to their principles, not kowtow to someone because of party loyalty.

But this is why I handle the behind the scenes stuff and am not a politician.

[*Nately120*]

I'm awesome.
I'm stupidly rich.
All I do is win.
I'm smug as hell, but it's all good because I'm awesome as hell.
People who criticize me are straight-up hating and/or jealous.
I'm a badass who will fudge anyone up who steps on my turf.
Women are all over me and I take what I want and treat them like crap.
I do whatever I want.

These are the common themes of both Donald Trump and gangsta rap, and yet supporters of each tend to have little appreciation for the other. It's quite baffling, really.

[Millhouse]

(07-15-2017, 04:24 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: We should have elected officials that stand up for the country and stick to their principles, not kowtow to someone because of party loyalty.

But this is why I handle the behind the scenes stuff and am not a politician.

A lot of the reason this doesnt happen on both sides of the aisle is like almost everything it goes back to $$$$$. A generic saying is that the moment a congressman/woman is elected, they need to raise roughly $10,000 a week for re-election in two years. If that politician decides to go against the potus of their party &/or the RNC/DNC, then they can risk getting funds & support cut going towards their re-election , which is a dealbreaker for many.

[HarleyDog]

Both parties are crooked. We would be better off without them.

[SunsetBengal]

(07-15-2017, 04:24 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: This image got me thinking about something I listened to last night:


I listen to the Crooked Media family of podcasts, and there are times when they have conservatives/Republicans on to talk about issues. This week they had a GOP operative on talking about things. This guy has an opposition research firm and has worked for GOP candidates and is well connected to folks in Washington. He was talking about how in private, all of these guys think Trump is a mess. But, because GOP voters support Trump as POTUS by a majority, they aren't willing to do anything about it. He talked about seeing internals showing this support, including one recently showing overwhelming support for Trump over Pence as POTUS.

Now, I'm not saying in this thread that Trump has done anything to warrant removal from office, that is not the point of this. The point here is to discuss how the politics in this country, in Washington specifically, has seemed to be to place party over country/law. This is an example of this where we have politicians that, in private, discuss how much they dislike the actions of the POTUS but because it can damage the party they do not express these concerns in public. Even if they believe that these actions are damaging to the country. Whether or not you like Trump is really irrelevant here, this behavioral pattern is troubling. We should have elected officials that stand up for the country and stick to their principles, not kowtow to someone because of party loyalty.

But this is why I handle the behind the scenes stuff and am not a politician.

A thought provoking post.  Kind of puts me in mind of a meme that I saw recently.  It featured a Native American, he was reminding everyone that the Right Wing and the Left Wing belong to the same bird.  If I contemplate the deeper meaning, the bird itself could represent the US, and that both the Right and the Left must be healthy and functioning, in order for the bird to fly.  In reality, I sort of feel like both the Left and the Right are both injured and unhealthy, and the bird (Nation) is at risk of not getting to where it should go.

Getting back to your post, bolded in particular.  I truly think that we have reached a point where everyone that chooses a life of politics, (and politics shouldn't be a career, in my opinion) is tainted in one way or another.  Once any given politician reaches a certain level of success (getting to Washington) they are forced to "go along with the program" (party agenda) in order to remain in Washington.  Personally, I feel that if there were term limits, a lot of career minded politicians would just not even enter the arena.  Those candidates should be chosen by their populous for their works, not because they have "raised the campaign funding".  Anyway, enough of my blathering.  Your post just made me think.

[xxlt]

(07-15-2017, 04:36 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I'm awesome.
I'm stupidly rich.
All I do is win.
I'm smug as hell, but it's all good because I'm awesome as hell.
People who criticize me are straight-up hating and/or jealous.
I'm a badass who will fudge anyone up who steps on my turf.
Women are all over me and I take what I want and treat them like crap.
I do whatever I want.

These are the common themes of both Donald Trump and gangsta rap, and yet supporters of each tend to have little appreciation for the other.  It's quite baffling, really.

That was some serious insight. Maybe Obama was right? Orange is the New Black? Either way, I blame Obama for both phenomena.

[Vlad]

(07-15-2017, 04:24 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: We should have elected officials that stand up for the country and stick to their principles, not kowtow to someone because of party loyalty.

And that's exactly why an outsider, a non career politician was elected president.
Trump is standing up for the country like no one has and has clearly demonstrated it.

MAGA wasn't meant to be a catchy campaign slogan then shelved like the Hope and Change horseshit Obama sold you.


 


Aside from that, you're just now realizing this stigma of "party before country"?

Been going on probably since politics have been going on.

Especially with democrats...whos very existence is dependent on victimhood and dependency.
Democrats need the victim and the villain. The villain being those racist, haters of poor people Republicans to blame for their failed policies.

[*Nately120*]

(07-15-2017, 05:14 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Both parties are crooked. We would be better off without them.

That reminds me of the two things I hear people say the most.  

#1 We need more than 2 choices and/or I'm so sick of D vs. R
#2 Nate, you're an idiot for voting for a 3rd party

(07-15-2017, 06:51 PM)Vlad Wrote: MAGA wasn't meant to be a catchy campaign slogan then shelved like the Hope and Change horseshit Obama sold you.

Hmm, well I will agree that it is pretty sad when people swallow political horseshit.  But hey, if that's what people want what can you do?  People claim they hate lying politicians but then elect the guy who promises to cut taxes, raise spending, fart rainbows, unify factions, decimate enemies, and so on and so forth.  

When I think of political suicide I think of John McCain failing to agree that Obama was a dangerous arab and Walter Mondale telling Americans that both he and Reagan would raise taxes if elected (Reagan did, but Mondale clearly didn't get the chance to do so).  The last thing people want to hear is the truth.  The married guys in here should get it.

[Belsnickel]

(07-15-2017, 06:51 PM)Vlad Wrote: And that's exactly why an outsider, a non career politician was elected president.
Trump is standing up for the country like no one has and has clearly demonstrated it.

MAGA wasn't meant to be a catchy campaign slogan then shelved like the Hope and Change horseshit Obama sold you.


 


Aside from that, you're just now realizing this stigma of "party before country"?

Been going on probably since politics have been going on.

Especially with democrats...whos very existence is dependent on victimhood and dependency.
Democrats need the victim and the villain. The villain being those racist, haters of poor people Republicans to blame for their failed policies.

The issue is one that both parties engage in. We are seeing it in full effect from the GOP right now. As for Trump, I understand why he had the popularity he did. The problem is that he never was an outsider. He was part of the elite that has been pulling the strings of politicians for decades. People thought that his lack of previous position in the government made him an outsider but it only makes him inexperienced and naive as to how it all works. He ran on a populist message but does not support a populist agenda. He has a hard time with any agenda because his administration has been ineffective and filled with distractions caused by a lack of experience in those around him.

There is a need for experience in elected officials, and Trump has shown us that.

[Dill]

(07-15-2017, 07:52 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The issue is one that both parties engage in. We are seeing it in full effect from the GOP right now. As for Trump, I understand why he had the popularity he did. The problem is that he never was an outsider. He was part of the elite that has been pulling the strings of politicians for decades. People thought that his lack of previous position in the government made him an outsider but it only makes him inexperienced and naive as to how it all works. He ran on a populist message but does not support a populist agenda. He has a hard time with any agenda because his administration has been ineffective and filled with distractions caused by a lack of experience in those around him.

There is a need for experience in elected officials, and Trump has shown us that.

He hasn't shown everyone that. Most of his base don't see inexperience and incompetence. They think--or say they think--that he is effective. For them, 80% of positions still unfilled at the State Department portends no harm at all. And they still think that Hillary would have been "far worse" in some undefined sense.

"Both parties" are not overlooking Trump's vulgarity and incompetence. Only one is, and only 80% of that one. Both parties are not broken, or if they are, not in the same sense or to the same degree.

I completely agree with you that Trump is not an "outsider" in the sense most of his base thinks he is, though if he was ever a string puller, it was mostly at the very local level. He belongs to the 1% fighting above all for lower taxes on the rich.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Every single president ever elected was about "Country First" and yes, even Donald Trump. It's just that every person has different views and ideas on how to put the country first.

The Left sees tax breaks as selfish while the Right sees entitlements as selfish and both sees the other as not putting the country first while in fact both are doing what they believe is right and good for the country.

[Dill]

(07-15-2017, 05:17 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Getting back to your post, bolded in particular.  I truly think that we have reached a point where everyone that chooses a life of politics, (and politics shouldn't be a career, in my opinion) is tainted in one way or another.  Once any given politician reaches a certain level of success (getting to Washington) they are forced to "go along with the program" (party agenda) in order to remain in Washington.  Personally, I feel that if there were term limits, a lot of career minded politicians would just not even enter the arena.  Those candidates should be chosen by their populous for their works, not because they have "raised the campaign funding".  Anyway, enough of my blathering.  Your post just made me think.

Sunset, I agree with your points here.  I would just like to add two more.

1. It isn't just Washington that forces people to "go along with the program." Think of what happened to Eric Cantor. Voters often choose bad candidates and place impossible demands on them, then blame "Washington" when their one Congressman or Senator cannot do what they want.  The demand for "outsiders" is often a cover for voter incompetence. And when they get the outsiders they want, at least at the national level the results are rarely good. They are disastrous at the level of president.

2. Again, as Millhouse pointed out above, because people need funds for election, they tend to be more beholden to people who contribute those funds than to their voters. So someone who contributes a million dollars to a campaign has more influence than an entire township of voters.  I agree that contributors should not have this power. But until we change campaign finance laws, we must accept that the votes of the donor class count more than ours do.  Voters COULD change this, but they would have to re-priortize and not let the campaign spending distract them from the issue.

[Dill]

(07-15-2017, 09:13 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Every single president ever elected was about "Country First" and yes, even Donald Trump. It's just that every person has different views and ideas on how to put the country first.

The Left sees tax breaks as selfish while the Right sees entitlements as selfish and both sees the other as not putting the country first while in fact both are doing what they believe is right and good for the country.

Democrat politicians are not voting entitlements for themselves. They want them for needy people, like the unemployed and elderly.

Republicans are voting tax cuts for themselves, not for the needy.

Different ways of putting country first. Washington, Lincoln and Kennedy in their ways. Trump in his.

[ballsofsteel]

Trump as an outsider is a joke. He was an insider and the worse kind of insider, a fence sitter. He sucked up to any politician he could if it benefited him. He used/uses anyone he could/can. Think the Clintons would be at his next wedding if he decided to dump Melania for a newer model?

[Dill]

(07-15-2017, 04:24 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Now, I'm not saying in this thread that Trump has done anything to warrant removal from office, that is not the point of this. The point here is to discuss how the politics in this country, in Washington specifically, has seemed to be to place party over country/law. This is an example of this where we have politicians that, in private, discuss how much they dislike the actions of the POTUS but because it can damage the party they do not express these concerns in public. Even if they believe that these actions are damaging to the country. Whether or not you like Trump is really irrelevant here, this behavioral pattern is troubling. We should have elected officials that stand up for the country and stick to their principles, not kowtow to someone because of party loyalty.

But this is why I handle the behind the scenes stuff and am not a politician.

So far as I know, Kasich has never Kow Towed to Trump.     Cruz--wow--who expected that?

Remember that there was a "never Trump" movement in the Republican party.  People have opposed him, including, recently, Paul and Murkowski. The constant leaks are also another way in which people have resisted Trump. And remember the 1,000 signature memo from the state department personnel, and the guy who from the ethics office who resigned. This kind of resistance is unprecedented.

I am curious if you think the current situation is different from, say, the mid-60s under Johnson. He often privately bullied Congressmen and Senators to get them to go along with important legislation. But he knew how to do that effectively, knew what the rules allowed--written and unwritten--and where the levers of power were, and when and when not to pull them. Voters often did not know this. They just knew he was effective. Got the job done.

Seems to me that Trump is a unique problem. The base elected a man who insults womens looks like a 10-year-old and sends out blatant tweet lies, embarrassing the nation, and who does not know where the levers of power are and how to work them. So he constantly shoots himself in foot, then blames others--all while representing what used to be the party of personal responsibility. Trump and his behavior are not somehow separable from the issue of "party before country." Whatever forces produced the Trump win are the same ones that now produce the party-over-country tendency you speak of.

It is possible that some Republican leaders remain silent only because, at the moment, they think they can get some legislation passed before Trump flames out. So they may believe they are still putting country over party, if they genuinely think tax cuts for the rich are best for the country.  If that legislation finally becomes impossible, we may see a few more turn on Trump. Perhaps the resistance of a few will morph into a movement, if they can get Fox on board.

But if Republicans are not speaking out because they put party over country, I don't see any reason to characterize this as a "Washington" problem as opposed to a Republican one, or more specifically a Republican voter problem.  Republican Congressmen who resist Trump are cast as "Rinos" and "establishment," and targeted for primary challenges. And they are the kind of Congressmen who are already the product of state primaries dominated by the Trump base. They got where they are by toeing a party line set by the voters.  In short, if so many of the current crop of Republican leaders put party over country, it is because Republican voters demand they do it, and Congressmen with backbone are not liked by fundamentalist voters.

[StLucieBengal]

We have two parties because the money decides it's best spent on two parties vs threee +.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(07-16-2017, 12:38 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: We have two parties because the money decides it's best spent on two parties vs threee +.

That's how a free market economy works.

[StLucieBengal]

(07-16-2017, 01:29 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: That's how a free market economy works.

That is .... I often wonder if multiple parties would be a good thing. Trump winning shows that if you can get the early free coverage by the media then you can run a streamlined campaign.

[Belsnickel]

(07-16-2017, 12:38 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: We have two parties because the money decides it's best spent on two parties vs threee +.

We have a two party system because of Duverger's Law.

[xxlt]

(07-16-2017, 07:23 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: We have a two party system because of Duverger's Law.

Was his first name Murphy?