R10Neymarfan
Member
Hillary has failed, Schumer has failed, Pelosi has failed. And for sure Booker will fail he won't get past the purity test.
Obama is the only true leader and I worry for him tbh
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Democrats are spineless and worthless in opposing Trump & the GOP
- Thread starter Lime
- Start date
- Status
Hillary has failed, Schumer has failed, Pelosi has failed. And for sure Booker will fail he won't get past the purity test.
Obama is the only true leader and I worry for him tbh
You mean the candidate who won't emerge on anyone's radar for another two years? Stay tuned!
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Democrats are doing the right thing, don't guve Trump a scapegoat.
Zok310
Banned
Lead by all neoliberal losers, any wonder they got their ass kicked by republicans.
sugarhigh4242
Banned
Yeah, it's a neoliberal party filled with neoliberal losers.
If we want an alternative, we have to build it.
Man Called Aerodynamics
Member
That really worked out poorly for them in the end. Oh wait.
The Party of No now controls all three branches. The idea that the public will not accept blanket obstruction has been proven false, and I don't get how it makes it impossible to spotlight specific issues either. Now it's the Democrats turn to be the ruthless opposition, and early signs are not encouraging that their coalition has the fortitude to do so.
Red Blaster
Member
bams was smart enough to run as a populist before turning to the center
those other dumbfucks cant even figure that step out
They only became the Party of No when they had that power! The Democrats do not have that power (yet). The only power they have is to make public media spectacles out of what the GOP and Trump are doing or proposing.
edit: and I'm talking purely about areas where there's no filibuster. For legislation and SCOTUS picks, the Dems do have the power to obstruct and should use it smartly, even if it leads the GOP to nuke it eventually.
Carpe Libertatem
Member
Voting no on a few relatively inoffensive cabinet nominees isn't even obstruction. It's a symbolic gesture that literally means nothing. The Democrats have zero power to do anything in the Senate re: executive nominees apart from SCOTUS.
If Democrats start supporting repeal of ACA or let Trump's SCOTUS nominee go through, then you can say the early returns aren't encouraging. Right now, nothing has even really happened.
Revisionist history. It was the strategy from the beginning. From a NYT article in 2010, prior to the midterms:
Senate G.O.P. Leader Finds Weapon in Unity
that's worked so well for Democrats. Democrats gave the Republicans, what, emails? Look how far they ran with that nothing.
Trump doesn't need anything to make scapegoats. Hell I'd prefer if he was going to find scapegoats at least it would actually be goats taking the fall and not the sheep. There is a war within our country, human decency is the fight. And Democrats are losing badly.
Which progressive candidates did better this year? They got trounced up and down the ballot. "Neoliberals" have gained control of the party by being wildly more electable than the party's progressive wing, year after year after year. When the progressive wing actually gets their way over the party platform, and looks they could actually achieve their goals, they find reasons to be pissy and stay home, setting back their policy objectives, time and time again.
That's exactly what their approvals are doing though. They will be used as a shield later on to deflect claims of authoritarianism.
And the best way to make a public spectacle, something the GOP learned ages ago, is to loudly stand up and shout "NO!". Legitimizing any of his cabinet positions with a vote: 1. Makes the democrats who voted for them complicit and accountable for any bad decisions that cabinet member might make. 2. Legitimizes the opinions and choices of a president that it would benefit them to view as illegitimate as their base does.
Neato_Jinkins
Banned
love seeing the people who claim to be experts at the realpolitik optics game downplay the optics of collaborating with trumpism.
everything has already happened. you're just too tied up in the false narrative of slow american governance to fucking see it.
primary voters who went for bernie overwhelmingly supported clinton in the general so this is a blatant lie
the people who stayed home were the rust belt/midwest working class (white or otherwise) who have been politically abandoned by the party over the last 30 years and were told by clinton that america is already great
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
It's up to all of us whether we're mulling public office ourselves or supporting existing candidates to pull the Democratic party into the 21st Century. My feeling is that it's too great a network of legacy, money, and manpower to abandon it for a third party. If you are a liberal independent, now is the time to engage this party and maybe define its future.
As a Hillary supporter, I think it's now clear Bernie's movement showed the seeds of the future have already sprouted, they just need to be identified and nurtured. Many of us older folks can't see the forest for the trees sometimes and instead trample the seedlings when trying to protect the hub trees. The canopy has burned, it's time to reprioritize.
As a Hillary supporter, I think it's now clear Bernie's movement showed the seeds of the future have already sprouted, they just need to be identified and nurtured. Many of us older folks can't see the forest for the trees sometimes and instead trample the seedlings when trying to protect the hub trees. The canopy has burned, it's time to reprioritize.
They cannot obstruct nominees without help from GOPers.
Most will get through. They're saving ammo for Sessions because he's by far the most dangerous nominee, and DeVos is already wounded.
Any SC nominee will be fillibustered. Laws will be fillibustered. They don't have that option on the table with executive branch nominations.
Once Kennedy died they had that power because Dems didn't nuke the fillibuster like they should have.
Yikes you are right.
See, look everybody, the White House is bipartisan. Look at all these democrat votes for my cabinet. They also approved this and that. Your claims are fake news.
Neato_Jinkins
Banned
it should be a perpetual shame to all democratic voters that noted imbecile Rand fucking Paul has more courage in his convictions than their chosen heroes.
Younger voters stayed home relative to '08/'12
Turns out that when you campaign on a platform that the Democratic Party is the problem, you can't just magically say "just kidding" after you lose.
Just like Ben Nelson in '09, Rand Paul has leverage. He + 1 other GOP vote will stop anything in its tracks.
It's not revisionist history. Those were legislative battles, where the GOP had (and where Dems still have) the filibuster. There is no filibuster for non-SCOTUS executive appointments anymore.
However legitimate or not you think Trump's election is, he is still the president and will still assemble the cabinet he wants. As long as that's happening, the Democrats should loudly acknowledge who the problem children are; it's not literally all of them, so don't treat the situation like it's all of them.
You're looking for meaningless gestures. I'm looking for more meaningful action.
Zok310
Banned
I can almost bet that Cory, Warren, Chuck, and Pelosi are going to be amongst the neolibs that will convince the party that we have to compromise with republicans to cut social security, Medicare and repeal Obamacare.
Watch that shit happen I can fucking taste it.
And thats why we need to get them out, primary all of them. They are too currupt, weakness is not the issue here, it's their corruption, corrupt beyond repair. And if anyone have faith in them doing the right thing after 30 years then maybe you deserve Trump.
Carpe Libertatem
Member
The ACA has been repealed already? Trump appointed a SCOTUS justice already?
We've had three cabinet nominees and another executive position be approved. Two more got out of committee. Democrats had absolutely zero leverage in any of these. If you care so much about a symbolic "no" vote, you need to get your priorities in order and I hope you show up when the Democrats actually have leverage with legislation and SCOTUS nominees.
the democratic party IS the problem. young voters didn't write the ACA, young voters didn't drop 24,000 bombs on africa and the middle east in 2016, young voters didn't nominate the worst presidential candidate in modern history, young voters didn't make sure the response to the recession was to drive up foreclosures and ensure that big banks make a profit, young voters didn't abandon the 50 state strategy and operate a series of campaigns that were so inept it literally gave the entire country to fascists.
if you do all that shit and then blame the voters then all i can do is laugh because we're all fucked.
StrikeNinja24
Banned
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/trump-congress/514085/
An interesting read, not sure if it's been posted yet.
An interesting read, not sure if it's been posted yet.
No, they just sat out because "both sides are the same", because they got comfortable under 8 years of Obama.
I will blame the (white, male) voters I knew who sat out this election because they're causing people a world of pain because they refused to own up to the consequences of their inaction.
Man, Elizabeth Warren went from progressive champion to corrupt beyond repair practically overnight.
It's really hard to take posts like these seriously, partly because I know when someone says "we need to get rid of all of them!" I know they're usually not going to do a damn thing about it anyway.
I don't see how you think that blatant resistance and obstructionism isn't meaningful action. It sends a message of solidarity to the base that they hear us and that they won't pretend like any of this is normal. As said before, all of those nominations are likely to go through without the Dems help with the exception of DeVos, maybe Tillerson, and possibly Sessions. If you want to energize the base, you have to show that you won't capitulate when it doesn't matter. That doesn't give off strength or unity. It can be argued that this election was won and lost in part due to meaningless gestures and lip service.
Hasphat'sAnts
Member
Look, Kelly, Mattis, and Pompeo are all defensible votes.
But a vote for Sessions is spitting on the face of the Demcratic base.
Anyone who votes for him to be AG needs to be primaried. Full stop
But a vote for Sessions is spitting on the face of the Demcratic base.
Anyone who votes for him to be AG needs to be primaried. Full stop
Tillerson has the votes, Graham/McCain/Rubio aren't flipping.
Agreed.
pompeo is an extremist christian nutjob who thinks we're at war with all of islam and is very pro-torture
Actually if you'd bothered to read the very next sentence you would have seen that I explained why this turned out to be a good strategy for them.
The most embarrassing part about the Democrats' weakness has to be the piece of platform the lost the the Republicans-economic populism. Somehow they let a conman hijack what is arguably their most important (certainly in terms of peoples perceptions) set of principles. The messaging problem of the Clinton campaign was not one that only applied to her, but its one that really could be blanketed to the entire party. And the weakness expressed here will only continue if the Democrats don't change their ways. Ironically enough, they have in many ways become the "conservative" party (as in maintaining the status quo) whereas the Republicans have become full blown reactionaries.
I am not saying Democrats should obstruct everything Trump does to spite him (the TPP for example is one piece of draconian legislation we could all do without) but in opposing Trump, Democrats need to have a clear, easily digestible message, one that appeals to the masses- and one that doesn't compromise their liberal principles.
I am not saying Democrats should obstruct everything Trump does to spite him (the TPP for example is one piece of draconian legislation we could all do without) but in opposing Trump, Democrats need to have a clear, easily digestible message, one that appeals to the masses- and one that doesn't compromise their liberal principles.
Neato_Jinkins
Banned
you're absolutely fooling yourself if you believe there is any leverage in any of these upcoming "battles." the republicans can easily get rid of the filibuster, or at the very least threaten to do so. every vote, from now until doomsday, is effectively "symbolic" in nature, because there is no stopping what's coming. symbolism is all we've got at this point, and it's going to matter who did and didn't do the right thing when we're sifting through the rubble of this shitshow in a decade.
that being said, i can also promise you there are enough blue dog democrats left clinging to their seats like fucking dingleberries that ACA will be revoked without much effort.
All of the cabinet choices are going to go through. It only takes 50 votes and the GOP has 52. That's it. All Dems can do is try to attack and publicly shame some nominees into withdrawing their names, which doesn't seem like it's going to happen either.
Not capitulating when it doesn't matter doesn't energize me, it just feels pointless. And personally, I want more moderate influences like Mattis or Kelly in there. That doesn't describe the majority of Trump's cabinet picks, but it does describe most of the ones who have gone through.
I mostly agree, though the Dems voting for Sessions will be like the Joe Machins of the Senate.
Yeah, she didn't endorse anyone in the primary, thus instantly negating all of the work she has done and continues to do to advance progressivism. These arbitrary purity tests that we have elevated above all other metrics and holistic evaluation of candidates have really made unity on the left virtually impossible.
legacyzero
Banned
We the VOTERS need to grow that spine for 2018 and put in some fuckin strength to balance Trump, before we dump his ass in 2020. #JusticeDemocrats
Carpe Libertatem
Member
There's been enough establishment Republicans who have said they aren't interested in giving up the filibuster (because they realize the tables can easily be turned). They'd need to avoid all but 2 defections, which would be hard to do with people like Hatch, McCain, Graham. Even Rand Paul is probably not interested in getting rid of the filibuster.
The only way they would get rid of it would be if Democrats were being as obstructionist as possible, fwiw. If Dems won't obstruct, as you said will happen, why even get rid of the filibuster?
Related to this: Many just don't trust Trump.
If this were say, JEB!, it'd probably be dead already.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Idiots learned absolutely nothing from the obstruction tactics of the last eight years employed by the GOP. I hope all of them lose their seats come election time.
Hasphat'sAnts
Member
Views unfortunately espoused by a significant portion of the Republican Party.
Sessions on the other hand, is an existential threat to our democracy
Nothing they can use a fillibuster on has come up yet.
Splash Wave
Member
I love that people in this thread think that Dems who voted in favor of Trump's appointments will be gaining any kind of leverage with Republicans. They don't give a flying fuck.
Neato_Jinkins
Banned
the problem with relying on republicans is that they are republicans. see: the recent HB2 repeal debacle in north carolina. they, unlike democrats, snap into line when they're told to do so by their geriatric mutant ninja turtle leader mitch mcconnell.
if a republican offers you his hand, you should spit on it.
I can respect that opinion. Gestures mean different things to different people. To me, as a queer-identifying person, it has symbolic meaning that my party has a unified message and is there to fight, no matter what the argument may be. Does it mean that Warren is now this corrupt dog of wallstreet? Absolutely not. Aside from Mattis, who actually needed the dem votes, it would have just been the kind of hardline stance I would like to see taken that shows that the party itself is capable of meaningful action. Just like Ellison and Perez are not corrupt for going to fundraisers instead of the Women's March. It is just an action that I am displeased with and because I respect them and trust them enough to know that they will listen to me, I am voicing my displeasure.
- Status