Support NeoGAF

[Lime]

So after 8 years of the GOP blocking shit at every turn during Obama's years, and blocking Obama's nomination of Garland for SCOTUS and after a defeat to the least liked Republican candidate of all time because of arrogance and incompetence, and after all these proclamations of 'resisting Trump' and what-not, the Democrats are seriously still so spineless. You have Schumer, the self-proclaimed leader of the so-called Resistance who keeps approving Trump's fascist nominees:

Trump is "using populist rhetoric to cover up a hard-right agenda," Schumer told CNN on Sunday. "We certainly feel that we have to bring to the American people how different this Cabinet is — how hard-right, how many conflicts of interest, billionaires."

So far though, Schumer's tough talk doesn't square with his voting record. As of now, the Senate has voted on three of Trump's nominees: General James Mattis for the Department of Defense, General John Kelly for the Department of Homeland Security, and Mike Pompeo for the Central Intelligence Agency. Schumer has voted for every single one of them, and, absent meaningful opposition, each of them has been confirmed. Trump is batting 1000 at assembling the cabinet he wants.

[...]

That the leader of the Democratic opposition had to be led by the nose to demand a bare minimum of legislative oversight before co-signing on someone who pointedly refused to disavow American torture chambers raises the question: If this is what resistance looks like to Schumer, what distinguishes it from collusion?

This approach by Schumer is echoed when talking about the way in which the GOP responded to Garland as pick for the SCOTUS:

Tarini Parti @tparti
Asked about how the Merrick Garland experience would affect Dems handling of SCOTUS nom, Schumer: "we're not playing tit for tat here."

Just look at the confirmation hearings of Trump's horror cabinet where the following 14 Democrats voted for Mike Pompeo: (who talks about the Rapture, advocates torture, thinks that we're at war with Islam, goes on far-right radio, etc.)

• Joe Donnelly of Indiana
• Dianne Feinstein of California
• Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire
• Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota
• Tim Kaine of Virginia
• Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota
• Joe Manchin of West Virginia
• Claire McCaskill of Missouri
• Jack Reed of Rhode Island
• Brian Schatz of Hawaii
• Chuck Schumer of New York
• Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire
• Mark Warner of Virginia
• Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island

Then Elisabeth Warren, who people champion as this aggressive and critical politician, voted for Ben fucking Carson. Look at her statement, she thinks this will buy negotiating power over the GOP as if she has learned absolutely nothing the last decade:

Then you have *only* 4 Democrats voting against Nikki Haley as the UN Ambassador. She opposes the Iran Deal and is an enthusiastic supporter of Israeli apartheid.

They simply think this is some chivalrous game where you win some and you lose some. Meanwhile the Republicans are going for the throat and people are facing a fascist government.

Mazel makes the point really well:

As Sarah Jones writes for the New Republic, the "Democratic Party hasn't earned the right to silence its critics.". E.g. the criticism of Cory Booker:

Consider the controversy that erupted over Senator Cory Booker earlier this month. Activists and columnists (including me) excoriated Booker for rejecting a bipartisan affordable drugs proposal during the Senate's Vote-a-rama. Booker's justification—that Canadian drugs present safety concerns—doesn't survive scrutiny. And his vote was hardly an exception. He once sat on on the board of Trump education secretary nominee Betsy DeVos's education reform group. He's been silent on the subject of single-payer health care and has supported raising the federal minimum wage to $12 an hour. (The Democratic Party platform supports a $15 minimum wage.) His school choice fetish when he was mayor of Newark, New Jersey, left its public schools in upheaval. He voted for the 21st Century Cures Act, which reduces drug regulation and benefits pharmaceutical corporations.

[...]

This is a debate Democrats need to have. The problem is that the same camp that is championing establishment ideology is also claiming that any attacks on that ideology are a blow to Democratic unity. If the Democratic Party wants to flourish, it must adapt to its changing electorate and it cannot do this if it will not listen to new voices. It's not enough for Democrats to call themselves The Resistance. They must also explain what it is they're resisting. Is it simply Trump? Or is it the ideology that helped put Trump in power?

Here, Democrats should take a lesson from the left. ”Movements can mobilize people to refuse, to disobey, in effect to strike," Frances Fox Piven recently wrote in The Nation. ”[P]eople in motion, in movements, can throw sand in the gears of the institutions that depend on their cooperation." Fight for 15, Occupy, Black Lives Matter: They point the way forward. So, too, did last Saturday's Women's March. In each instance, people rallied around a cause, not a person or a party. They did not turn out for politicians, they were not attracted by celebrities. They turned out because they wished to identify themselves with a specific values statement. Their actions teach us what it means to do politics—and warn us against defining politics in electoral terms alone.

They seriously need to buckle up and start doing some introspection instead of blaming shit on Russia or whatever reason they use to absolve themselves from the mess they have helped create.

Sorry if I'm being a tad inflammatory here, but it's simply frustrating to watch the so-called Resistance not taking the GOP and Trump's fascism seriously and keep voting in for Trump's picks *after* how the GOP execute their politics through sheer power and not chivalry.

 

[Chichikov]

I'll quote myself from poligaf -

Honestly, I think this whole discussion about how Democrats vote for these conformations is a complete waste of time.
If there is candidate where you have a realistic chance to block a nomination it's one thing, but in cases where it's a forgone conclusion, everybody is just doing the same math - which vote might help me politically down the road. And yeah, I guess there can be a room for discussion about what is the best course of action, but being actually angry at Democrats over picking one and not the other?
And let's be a bit humble here, none of us knows for sure how any of that play it and really, I seriously doubt this will have any lasting impact on anything.

There are way more important things going on right now and we should focus our attention on them.

 

[NEO0MJ]

Don't worry, if enough people change their profile pictures and avatars with "resistance" something good is bound to happen.

 

[Lord Frieza]

Yep, bad start. Though, honestly, Mattis isn't that bad of a pick though I understand why many are concerned with a military man at the post. But I really don't think he's that bad. The rest, though...yeah. Yeah. I have no idea if America can survive all of this.

 

[Rentahamster]

Yes. Personally, I think right now the Bernie strategy will be the most effective, like when he printed out Trump's tweet and is holding him to his words. Oppose him on the shitty stuff, and hold him accountable to the potentially positive things. The infrastructure thing was good too.

As of now, the Senate has voted on three of Trump's nominees: General James Mattis for the Department of Defense, General John Kelly for the Department of Homeland Security, and Mike Pompeo for the Central Intelligence Agency. Schumer has voted for every single one of them, and, absent meaningful opposition, each of them has been confirmed. Trump is batting 1000 at assembling the cabinet he wants.

Yeah, there might be a reason for that....

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1337225

 

[mo60]

It would have been pointless for the democrats to vote against a lot of trump's executive branch nominees because they would have all been approved pretty easily. There are some that they should definitely not vote for like DeVos.

 

[jerry113]

 

[massoluk]

I guess no one think Carson can really do much damage in that position. But me disappointed, Dems just loved being in abusive relationship

 

[HotHamBoy]

American Democracy is over.

The system can't work without trust and integrity. It definitely doesn't work without empathy and altruism.

Trump is basically the logical conclusion to the path we started down after 9/11.

Terrorists win.

 

[UberTag]

Bernie and Cenk might have the right idea. You should probably just burn all of D.C. down and start over from scratch.

 

[Ms.Galaxy]

Democrats have always tried to pass an olive branch when it came to the GOP, they'll never learn despite how many times Republicans grabbed that branch, chewed it up and spat it at their faces. They seriously still believe in bipartisanship and reaching across the aisle even after what has happened in the past eight years alone.

I give them this though, bless them for trying to find reasoning and good inside Republicans even if it futile.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

So, Democrats shouldn't support Trump EO withdrawing from TPP then?

You can't just put a hold on the full cabinet. You generally give the President the cabinet they want, Trump did win the election.

Also, the cabinet is so bad that they can make Trump and GOP own their badness.

 

[StrategyFan]

American Democracy

what democracy?

there's nothing democratic about 2 senators representing 50 million people having the same voting power as 2 senators who represent 500,000 people

 

[jerry113]

Yeah, there might be a reason for that....

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1337225

Yes, the Democrats inadvertently screwed themselves in 2013 by defanging the fillibuster like that.

 

[Lord Frieza]

I mean, what was the alternative really? While declaring martial law and resetting the election process would have been a dream of many, do you not think it would have caused all kinds of issues that could have still lead to this, especially with the country as divided as it is?

 

[HotHamBoy]

what democracy?

there's nothing democratic about 2 senators representing 50 million people having the same voting power as 2 senators who represent 500,000 people

The illusion of American Democracy, I guess.

 

[Branduil]

They're still trying to play the realpolitik game even as the GOP is burning down the country. They've also become completely out of touch with how their base is feeling.

 

[UberTag]

Democrats have always tried to pass an olive branch when it came to the GOP, they'll never learned despite how many times Republicans grabbed that branch, chewed it up and spat it at their faces.

Democrats = Charlie Brown
Republicans = Lucy van Pelt

They just keep falling for this stunt over and over again.

 

[Lime]

I'll quote myself from poligaf -

I appreciate the sentiment, but the Republicans aren't going to help anyone down the road. They've made that perfectly clear in the last 8 years and it's wishful thinking to act diplomatically with people who are going for your throat.

 

[CyclopsRock]

Surely if the Democrats want more control, they need to try winning more often? This isn't just about Trump. They lost key battles for the President, but also gubernatorial, house, senate, local government etc, and they have been doing so since 2010. They even lost control of Congress after Obama's first midterms. Of course they're powerless - they keep losing. People are concentrating on Trump and saying - with the unerring confidence of hindsight - that his brand of comic book demogoguery was always going to lead down this path and he won because he appealed to the lowest common denominator (unlike the Democrats, who don't appeal to any denominator it seems) - sure, but he was the only one to actually *lose* the popular vote. What about all the others? All the governors and state legislators and Congressional positions? The Dems there lost too, and they actually lost the popular vote too. THAT'S why the GOP could be ballsy and put up walls - because the American people elected them to positions where they could do that, over and over again.

 

[Lord Frieza]

So, basically, a the end of the day, the message to take back from all this is basically that it's over and done. We've lost, and they've won, and that's really all there is to it, I guess.

 

[capitalCORN]

Democrats have always tried to pass an olive branch when it came to the GOP, they'll never learned despite how many times Republicans grabbed that branch, chewed it up and spat it at their faces.

That humble pie sure tastes great while taking the high road!

 

[The Silver]

I'll quote myself from poligaf -

i guess the point is that they don't play hard ball like the GOP does. If this was the other way around the GOP would likely fight to the death no matter how pointless, they never concede, even at the expense of the country.

Now the Dems are taking the road where they're looking at what's best for the country, the problem is they don't win. If there's one thing I can say about the GOP, especially looking at this past week, is by god they will do anything to get shit done.

what's the solution when you wanna do the right thing but keep losing? Do you become more ruthless like the other side? Stand by your principles and hope it gets better?

I think the atmosphere right now is.........the people want fighters.

 

[hodayathink]

It would have been pointless for the democrats to vote against a lot of trump's executive branch nominees because they would have all been approved pretty easily. There are some that they should definitely not vote for like DeVos.

This is how I feel. Republicans have enough of a majority that the vast majority of these people (if not all of them) are going to get confirmed anyway, so I don't see it being some huge deal that they aren't unilaterally voting against all of them. I'll judge them for how they vote on actual legislature, not on these votes which are barely more than ceremonial.

 

[Chichikov]

I appreciate the sentiment, but the Republicans aren't going to help anyone down the road. They've made that perfectly clear in the last 8 years and it's wishful thinking to act diplomatically with people who are going for your throat.

I think the calculus here is that they don't want to look like they opposed everything. That also allows them to focus more attention about the worst of the worst.

But again, I don't think any of that matters, until I googled it yesterday I didn't remember how Republican voted for Obama's cabinet in '09 and none of that shit had any lasting effect.

 

[Lord Frieza]

i guess the point is that they don't play hard ball like the GOP does. If this was the other way around the GOP would likely fight to the death no matter how pointless, they never concede, even at the expense of the country.

Now the Dems are taking the road where they're looking at what's best for the country, the problem is they don't win. If there's one thing I can say about the GOP, especially looking at this past week, is by god they will do anything to get shit done.

what's the solution when you wanna do the right thing but keep losing? Do you become more ruthless like the other side? Stand by your principles and hope it gets better?

I think the atmosphere right now is.........the people want fighters.

Yes. You have to get even more ruthless, if anything.

 

[Lime]

So, basically, a the end of the day, the message to take back from all this is basically that it's over and done. We've lost, and they've won, and that's really all there is to it, I guess.

No, the protests and organizing are making a difference.

 

[jerry113]

No, the protests and organizing are making a difference.

The Dems really need to funnel that popular sentiment and anger into something soon. Get the message out about 2018 early.

 

[Trokil]

Oh please, who would expect real oppistion form the democrats. They have their place at the feeding through and that is all that matters for them.

 

[Lord Frieza]

No, the protests and organizing are making a difference.

Are they? In what way? I don't see any kind of political fall out from any of it.

 

[UberTag]

I think the atmosphere right now is.........the people want fighters.

You know who's a fighter? This guy!

The Democrats at the federal level are rolling over.
But at the state and municipal level... they're showing some spine.

 

[Chichikov]

The Dems really need to funnel that popular sentiment and anger into something soon. Get the message out about 2018 early.

I agree. I'm just not sure that a symbolic vote against Nikki Haley is the place to do that.

 

[Ms.Galaxy]

The Dems really need to funnel that popular sentiment and anger into something soon. Get the message out about 2018 early.

I want democrats who "tells it like it is" during the midterms and 2020. None of this "I disagree with my opponent on some issues" bullshit. I want someone ruthless that says Trump and his ilk are fascists and corrupt to the very core. People want non-PC talk, we'll give them non-PC talk.

 

[UberTag]

I want democrats who "tells it like it is" during the midterms and 2020. None of this "I disagree with my opponent on some issues" bullshit. I want someone ruthless that says Trump and his ilk are fascists and corrupt to the very core. People want non-PC talk, we'll give them non-PC talk.

Check out my clip of NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio above and you'll get just that.

 

[Lime]

I think the calculus here is that they don't want to look like they opposed everything. That also allows them to focus more attention about the worst of the worst.

But again, I don't think any of that matters, until I googled it yesterday I didn't remember how Republican voted for Obama's cabinet in '09 and none of that shit had any lasting effect.

But that's exactly the problem - by not looking like the oppose Trump and the GOP, they are implicitly condoning Trump and the GOP. Not only are they sending a signal to the voterbase that they don't have any specific ideology or value that they want to fight for, but also that they are more than fine with putting the fascist/nutjob candidates in power.

It's no wonder people were so apathetic during elections and don't go out when the Democrats are signalling to everyone that it doesn't matter and that they share many similarities with Republicans.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Every single one of Trump's Cabinet nominees will be confirmed.

There will be time for fights in the coming weeks when Trump picks a lunatic for the Supreme Court and Ryan and McConnell try to repeal everything.

 

[E-Cat]

The only answer is a progressive takeover of the party, because they're the only ones who have any principles. The longer you continue to dispute this fact, the more you will suffer.

 

[Angelus Errare]

But that's exactly the problem - by not looking like the oppose Trump and the GOP, they are implicitly condoning Trump and The GOP. Not only are they sending a signal to the voterbase that they don't have any specific ideology or value that they want to fight for, and that they are more than fine with putting the fascist/nutjob candidates in power.

It's no wonder people were so apathetic during elections and don't go out when the Democrats are signalling to everyone that it doesn't matter and that they share many similarities with Republicans.

Yup. Our current DNC are basically toddlers who keep putting their hands on the stove expecting a different result and coming away not learning shit. They don't stand for shit and fall for everything.

 

[Elaugaufein]

I mean game theory says tit for tat is the correct response here, you need to punish people for bad behaviour. But it also says that vetoing even Trump's reasonable picks is a bad idea, tit for tat just cycles unless you offer forgiveness (ie reward moving away from bad behaviour).

Of course it's probably also not a coincidence that a lot of those Democrat wave throughs are in fairly conservative seats.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I love how Tim "Hillary's VP" Kaine was one of the people who voted to confirm Pompeo.

 

[Ghostshark]

I feel proud of Governor Brown of my state (California) in his defiance of the White House. If he was younger, I think he'd be a great candidate for 2020. Unfortunately, he'll be 82 at that point.

 

[kittenbreath]

OP, if your benchmark for success or failure is that the Trump administration hasn't collapsed by day 7, you're going to have a rough few years.

This is a long game and how people voted on cabinet appointments of all things isn't going to set the tone for how the Democrats do or don't push back (especially for these guys, the least controversial of the bunch - at least wait to see how they react to DeVos, Price, et al). Hold any Democrat accountable if they compromise core progressive principles in the legislative fights to come. But the cabinet? It's not worth freaking out over.

 

[UberTag]

I have felt proud of Governor Brown of my state (California) in his defiance of the White House. If he was younger, I think he'd be a great candidate for 2020. Unfortunately, he'll be 82 at that point.

There were a number of inspiring messages of defiance from both Governors and Mayors across the country yesterday. Frankly, it was the first sign of resistance from people of importance since the celebrities that spoke out at the Women's March on Saturday.

 

[Brakke]

that dude's name isn't actually mazel, you know

I mean game theory says tit for tat is the correct response here, you need to punish people for bad behaviour. But it also says that vetoing even Trump's reasonable picks is a bad idea, tit for tat just cycles unless you offer forgiveness (ie reward moving away from bad behaviour).

Of course it's probably also not a coincidence that a lot of those Democrat wave throughs are in fairly conservative seats.

finally, it's time for some game theory

 

[Kaiterra]

I want democrats who "tells it like it is" during the midterms and 2020. None of this "I disagree with my opponent on some issues" bullshit. I want someone ruthless that says Trump and his ilk are fascists and corrupt to the very core. People want non-PC talk, we'll give them non-PC talk.

Anthony Weiner was reliably awesome for this. He was a total dick.

Then, of course, he let his dick get away from him. Motherfucker.

 

[Rentahamster]

So, basically, a the end of the day, the message to take back from all this is basically that it's over and done. We've lost, and they've won, and that's really all there is to it, I guess.

Uh, no.

 

[Lord Frieza]

Uh, no.

If we have no party with the ability to resist, what do we have then?

 

[KiwiLannister]

The perceived weakness of the Democrats isn't helped with this kind of thing.

I'd bet that a lot of Trump voters would have voted for Dem policies if they were presented by seemingly strong and confident people.

 

[Chichikov]

But that's exactly the problem - by not looking like the oppose Trump and the GOP, they are implicitly condoning Trump and The GOP. Not only are they sending a signal to the voterbase that they don't have any specific ideology or value that they want to fight for, and that they are more than fine with putting the fascist/nutjob candidates in power.

It's no wonder people were so apathetic during elections and don't go out when the Democrats are signalling to everyone that it doesn't matter and that they share many similarities with Republicans.

You got to think about those things in a more practical and less symbolic way.
Like it or not the public and the media have a limited attention span - there are two stories that the media can tell about this -

• Democrats oppose everything Trump propose.
• Democrats oppose this awful unqualified person for this job.

Understand, this is a PR fight, Democrats have no ability to make Trump cabinet not awful, and if you want to pick a PR fight, I think it's much better to do it over Rex Tillerson than Nikki Haley.

And more broadly, Trump is going to dump a ton of shit on this country and it's going to overwhelm the news and the public, that's how those fuckers work. You won't be able to fight it all, at least not until you get some political power back. Democrats need to focus on issues where they can be united, where they can win and where a win will make a real difference. Whether or not Ben Carson is going to be the HUD secretary is none of those things.

Don't worry, I'm sure Democrats will have time to legit disappoint you, but this is at worst an insignificant tactical error.

 

[capitalCORN]

The perceived weakness of the Democrats isn't helped with this kind of thing.

I'd bet that a lot of Trump voters would have voted for Dem policies if they were presented by seemingly strong and confident people.

The right is predisposed to people with a severe victim complexes. The only strength they understand is anger.