Rift in the Democratic Party

[Dill]

(07-09-2019, 02:07 PM)hollodero Wrote: But that's exactly what Trump does. Only a hundred times worse.
Also, you criticized that they "don't appear to comprehend the need for a more moderate approach in most of the country". I don't think they have to do that. AOC unseated some established moderate democrat, it would be odd if she would just follow his lead once in Congress.
That I am not a fan of AOC's and their style is something else. I sure am not. She shouldn't ridicule people or castigate folks, but it's also not her task to fall in line and become moderate.

Quite safe to say there has never been a more immoderate, intemperate president than Trump, nor one who appears to draw support precisely BECAUSE of what some have termed his "style," his willingness to degrade the office with boorish behavior.  The important "rift" in the nation right now is not between Dem and Dem but between Americans who think the president's behavior essentially affects what the nation is, here and abroad, and those who think his behavior a side issue, and calling it out just "hyperbole." 

But the Dems need "moderation" if they hope to win against someone like this?

(07-09-2019, 02:07 PM)hollodero Wrote: Yeah, those do matter in my view.
But I sure could list some policy issues as well. Eg. he widely lost respect in foreign lands, his no progress in NK show just as well as the nearly attack on Iran that he obviously has no "oh he plays 3D chess" strategy, he's erratic, he denies climate change, raised the deficit in economic good times, he puts children in cage-like structures that lack basic sustenance etc. - which all can be seen as the result of severe personality flaws (or not, that's just my view of course - that he is severely flawed seems a more objective statement in comparison).
Also, I'd say such extreme flaws as Trump displays (like calling media outlets "enemy of the people") are disqualifying for a leader and to me that is a political statement. And it sure is a "position" and a valid, legit reason to be opposed to him. How can it not be?

Also, Dino has kind of a point. So many claim Trump's biggest asset is owning the libs and making 'em heads explode. Which is less political and way more petty than critizising a leader for not having the traits it takes to be one.

(And oh btw. China - and his demands that Europe do more for their own defense - are issues I do not have a problem with. It's not all bad.)

Agreed. And more.

Regarding Trump's policies, again, the effects seem just as invisible to Trump defenders as the effects of his personality.  It's not just that there is "no progress" on NK; Trump has legitimized Kim as world leader. As I have mentioned elsewhere, he has now met with six world leaders and was a fixture at the Asian Games in Indonesia in 2018. This makes it next to impossible to ever re-instate sanctions at their previous level, and the US has gotten nothing in return but presidential love letters. Pulling out of the TPP basically left China to dominate the Far East economically, and pushed allies to consider alternatives to US alliance. (Admittedly, the less one knows about foreign policy, the better this probably sounds.)

Regarding domestic policy: Under the radar, all manner of capillary changes are occurring in Depts. under control of Trump appointees. Everyone here has probably hashed over Trump's appointments for HUD, Education, Treasury, Interior and EPA, so I'll introduce a new example--the USDA--as typical of what is happening across the executive.

Problem one: Trump is far behind on appointments and staffing at the USDA. As a result phones in many offices, taking calls from those agriculture based red states which supported Trump, are ringing without anyone to answer them.
https://www.eater.com/2017/10/17/16488890/usda-trump-administration-sonny-purdue

Problem two: the USDA is not all muddle, though. Trump's actual policies are coming to surprise his rural constitutents in the red states which supported him.
Trump Administration Proposes to Eliminate Most Rural Housing Programs
http://www.ruralhome.org/whats-new/menu-policy/1468-trump-fy18-budget-usda
600 organizations oppose Trump administration's rural development cuts.
https://www.farmprogress.com/usda/600-organizations-oppose-trump-administrations-rural-development-cuts

Problem three: No time for Dems to enjoy the irony. To positions which require scientific competence and background knowledge, Trump appoints unqualified campaign contributors, and that affects all of us.
Trump hires campaign workers instead of farm experts at USDA
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/21/trump-agriculture-department-usda-campaign-workers-242951

Problem four follows from three: He and his appointees then cancel or alter ongoing scientific inquiry important to agriculture, to fit their pro-corporate, anti-science bias.
USDA Indefinitely Suspends Honey Bee Tracking Survey as States Get Approval to Use Bee-Killing Pesticide
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/06/politics/honeybees-study-usda-donald-trump-budget-cuts/index.html
This includes efforts to stop, stall and distort research into climate change.
Betrayal at the USDA (2018):How the Trump administration is sidelining science and favoring industry over farmers and the public
https://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/food-agriculture/unhealthy-food-policy/betrayal-usda-2018
USDA Under Trump Hides Studies Proving Effects of Climate Change: Report
https://www.thedailybeast.com/usda-under-trump-hides-studies-proving-effects-of-climate-change-politico

One acutely disruptive consequence of all this, plus Trump's disciplinary measures against USDA scientists who protest, is the looming massive "brain drain" from the USDA.
Vast Majority of Staffers at Agriculture Research Agency Reject Relocation
https://www.govexec.com/management/2019/06/vast-majority-staffers-agriculture-research-agency-reject-relocation/158074/
Trump USDA climate science quash squanders US science leadership
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/trump-usda-climate-science-quash-squanders-us-science-leadership-63079493616

So it's not like its just the DOJ or the State Department which are shot through with chaos and incompetence.

The RIFT in the US is between those who think Trump's personality disorder flows downward, into all aspects of government (e.g., by his choice of the "best people" of similar competence and ethics), and those who don't see what the problem is--either with personality or policy--but sure like it when liberal heads explode. To the former, this mess is all linked--foreign and domestic policy, State Dept. and USDA; to the latter, this mess is no mess at all, but liberals getting put in the place, America made great again. For them, nothing changes tomorrow because USDA scientists quit today.

[BakertheBeast]

(07-09-2019, 11:50 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: They are political comedians. So what exactly do you expect for them to make jokes about? Trump is politics right now. He has inserted himself into every single topic since he began running for president. And, frankly, everything else about politics seems completely boring compared to his outlandish behavior. 

"Shitting on Trump" is a subjective measure. Norm may call it that. Others may call it "playing a literal video of Trump/Fox News/Republican Senator saying something/doing dumb and making jokes about them saying/doing something dumb." It's not a new formula. They did the same thing with Bush before him.

As far as Colbert's jokes, he's always been a political comedian and, when he first came to relevance, he took a different approach which was just satirizing Republicans. 

He can't really play that role anymore since he's on a network late night show. He clearly still has the same viewpoint and is making the same or similar jokes born from that viewpoint, he just now has to portray them from the more realistic side of the conversation (rather than illustrating the joke via satire, he is just telling the joke in a straight fashion). This change has less to do with who the President is and more to do with the company he works for. If you enjoyed the satire more, then you'd agree that it's a shame he didn't just stay with the Colbert Report (which, if it still existed, you know he'd be caricaturing Trump supporters right now), but it isn't an indication of his declining skills in the art of political comedy.

All those shows have sophomoric jokes (see: Putin's Cockholster), as well as insightful political commentary (See: Trevor Noah's Between the Scenes videos). Some are serious insights, others have a more tongue in cheek spin.

I don't see the difference between them now and during Bush's presidency. What, to you, has changed between these two Republican Presidents and their portrayal during the political comedy shows?

Colbert is F'n hilarious. Its the perfect setup for a comedian. Point out the exact words that sound like it came out of a sixth graders mouth by a illiterate conman posing as a potus and use them to make him look like the ass he is. No wonder the Trump lovers don't think its funny because by association it makes them look like asses too for backing that moron. Kimmel and Meyers are good at it to. Fallon missed the boat. The only "hacking" going on is at the white house.