US Politics December 2020: an uneventful month, overall

is what i'm hearing

Bless you Karl

quick question, i'm sure this may have been discussed:

do you all think we should be trying to incrementally work toward progress, or is it far past time for radical action? and those are always separate and mutually exclusive, right?

also, hillary clinton: we can all get behind her, righ?!

lol <3

nothing to report send emails receive emails order food wave at delivery driver watch netflix look at clock never change out of pajamas oh and politics are happening too

*Dr. Narcissism squeezes into the tightest possible spot between the clenching butt cheeks of the 1/3 of the USA that gives a fuck about other people*

ah yes, my home, where at least i recognize the smells

I like corn dogs

Closing my eyes and feelin' fine

oh we're still doing these?

this is now rolling brunch

yes good morning. the usual for me thanks

coffee and turds later for me, thank you

you know what - i'll have those turds to go

hot takes vs. hot carls

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRYvrDdntjA

though I know the movie well and know what is happening here, that still image makes it look like Superman got drunk and fell asleep on a pinball machine, and that he now wears outdoorsman clothes with the same colors instead of his usual spandex.

how much does it cost to repair a pinball machine? $13? keep the change

the pinball machine represents, um, the government, and

Superman represents CORPORATIONS

i'd vote for superman, but he didn't do the exact perfect thing that i wanted him to do so he can burn in hell

General Zod represents corporations:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iiq5tnzmLBM

wait a second, didn't superman sit on a board of advisors with the guy from Qualcomm? FUCK SUPERMAN

my sardonic attitude means that i am an unthinking drone and don't understand how deeply we need radical change

AND i get high all the time because i hate the world!

*COMBO*

isn't this back to racist "intention" vs. results?

― it bangs for thee (Simon H.), Tuesday, December 1, 2020 10:43 AM bookmarkflaglink

this legislation doesn't have a racist bone in its body!

― it bangs for thee (Simon H.), Tuesday, December 1, 2020 10:43 AM bookmarkflaglink

This is literally the dumbest possible conclusion you could have taken from my post. Congratulations.

The climate and situation around the Crime Bill was a good bit more complicated/complex than "a racist White man wanted to proudly legislate some racism" and reducing it to that via hindsight is extremely dumb and unhelpful. It was a terrible bill with terrible consequences that need to be remembered and redressed; no one on this site would disagree with that conclusion and dealing with the actual trail of events that led to its passage is vital to keep it from happening again. That is not the same thing as saying "they didn't intend for it to be racist, therefore it wasn't racist". Pointing out that you are using Biden as the avatar and sole driver of something that was a concerted effort generated by multiple people, many of whom would plausibly be described in many if not most other contexts as anti-racist is not making excuses for the Crime Bill or saying it was a good thing; it's saying you are not arguing from a position that seems to be informed by history, context, or even a desire to grapple with systemic racism. You just want to yell about a boogeyman.

you are using Biden as the avatar and sole driver of something that was a concerted effort generated by multiple people

I'm sure there are people who are doing this, but I did not that I can recall

other people did that

other people will continue to do that

not sure about whether you did, but lots of people did and will

things are much more simple if you reduce them down to an avatar

only the pure can lead. and no one is pure. which is why it all must be burned down. by someone who is pure

I'm not convinced that Joe Biden has ever been *a* main driver of any major historical current tbh

When Karl ends up running Tulsi Gabbard's successful 2024 campagin, we'll only have ourselves to blame

I'm not convinced that Joe Biden has ever been *a* main driver of any major historical current tbh

― it bangs for thee (Simon H.),

well, in the 2000s, Making MBNA Great Again.

PURE TULSI
SHE HAS NEVER BEEN WRONG

~a friendly face that has never been wrong~

Tulsi: because if you're not 100% right, you're part of the problem

CHUCK TODD: zach_tbd, how did you learn to run a campaign so effectively? your success is...astonishing

ME: i learned it on ilx

Karl how are you today

let me check...pure. no problems at all. reading my blood levels...yes, nothing has happened there, ever. i am detecting a decision that was made 20 years ago...could have been bad, let me check. nope! i made the perfect decision then, too! still fit for office, ready to lead. i feel confident

shit, hold on, code red

yes, a tough memory is coming up. it's a homeless person. i'm taking care of them and they have an abusive boyfriend. and an ankle monitor. but it's because her boyfriend abused her and then filed charges against her, even though she was defending herself. and now she can't get into a shelter because she has an ankle bracelet. and now she's asking to go home, back to her boyfriend again. what did i do? what could i do?

i'll tell you what i did: i made the perfect decision. and that's why i'm fit to lead this country with tulsi gabbard as America's Gal

how am i? i'm fucking TERRIBLE

everyone i know is doing fucking terrible

then i turn into this station and it's constant bullshit too

that was harsh, sorry. a lot of the bullshit comes from me.

i am just so sick of enormous problems that don't have simple answers. i can handle one or two at a time, but when i can't count them any more, i start to lose it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3IxhVDf3og

Aha! Wiley Trump still has an ace up his sleeve... complete abrogation of duty by complicit GOP flunkies:

...federal law gives individual members of the House and Senate the power to challenge the results from the floor — a rarely used mechanism meant to be the last of all last resorts to safeguard an election.
But several House Republican lawmakers and aides now tell POLITICO they’re considering this option to aid Trump’s quest.

“Nothing is off the table,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.).

xpost Sorry, that was meant to be a light commercial respite in the midst of Channel Bullshit

I appreciate you, KM. I didn’t intend to rehash a whole argument that’s been gone over ad nauseum. Just can’t stand it when it starts to look like the ILX conventional wisdom is that the Biden presidency is going to suck. But it’s probably just that those voices are the ones that keep going, after everyone else is sick of the argument.

Also vm appreciating DJP’s perspective in these threads today.

Isn’t Patriot Day what they named 9/11? I suppose that’s what they’ll fall back on after Biden gets inaugurated - don’t worry, the mass arrests will happen on the 20th anniversary of 9/11 and Trump will parachute back into the White House.

I could probably make some money selling P-Day themed merch, there’s lots of lead time.

the mass arrests will happen on the 20th anniversary of 9/11 and Trump will parachute back into the White House

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f1/Operation_dumbo_drop.jpg/220px-Operation_dumbo_drop.jpg

The incoming president will have a huge task before him. His primary tool should be an old one, somewhat in disuse at the White House in recent times: the truth.

hahaha

i mean there are thousands of problems, and "poor governance" (in the sense of not even doing a good job of the stuff everyone wants government to do) is in some ways the least of them, but it seems pretty foundational.

pareene makes the point here that _promising_ to fix that is good electoral politics https://newrepublic.com/article/159339/biden-democrats-2020-campaign-promise-good-governance. of course the trick is not just campaigning on it, but doing it. hahahaahahah fuuuuuck.

McConnell calling the $2,000 checks "socialism for the rich"

it's not just mcconnell - this is the standard GOP line (although they use different words). during the senate proceedings yesterday, one after another republican fought valiantly against the idea of giving money to rich people. they did this repeatedly, even though it was repeatedly pointed out that only people making less than 75K receive the full $600 (single person making 75K = $600; 80K = $350; 85K = $100; 90K = $0).

and of course, the obvious thing - if the GOP is so concerned about making sure that the covid relief money goes directly to the most vulnerable people instead of also including middle class people, where were they during the last 8 months?!?!!?!??!?!??!!?!!?! didn't they just spend the entire year promoting policies intended to KILL these same people?

His primary tool should be an old one

Well, that can hardly be avoided!

I shall miss this thread

“Running with the “do u wanna give millionaires free college” arguments of Democratic centrists.”

McConnell is probably appropriating something much older and less hyper specific than that when he says “socialism for the rich”

it's a totally fraudulent argument of course, and the actual dollar amount involved is tiny small. thanks to the comically asymmetrical income distribution, they're complaining about only a few rich recipients (~10% of the adult population iirc).

also fuck means testing benefits. i am a traveller from the welfare state and i'm here to tell you it's a classic wedge issue.

i guess my question is whether the truth is enough

Clearly not. The problem, which Trump greatly exacerbated, is the total disconnect of a third to half of the population from reliable sources of information. I know people have been saying this ever since the advent of Rush/Fox, but under Trump it's reached a critical mass that I honestly don't know what to do about. E.g., there's a local school board member here, a retired teacher, who I see on Facebook routinely sneering at the "MSM," and the other day she went off about how nobody with a brain believes Snopes. I have a friend who sent her an NYT article about the severity of COVID, and she wrote back curtly, "I don't consider the New York Times a credible source." This is a school board member for a district of nearly 60,000 students — one of the 70 largest districts in the country. When people literally only accept information from ideologically approved sources, it is a very real problem. (As we've seen throughout the pandemic.)

'they're complaining about only a few rich recipients"

they aren't even doing that. no single, six digit income people are eligible. married couples are, whether or not that income cutoff (which is like $160k for two people) makes you 'rich' depends on where you live. It's certainly anything but rich where I live.

Schumer makes McConnell an offer: Allow a vote on the House-passed CASH Act and he'll support a vote on Section 230, a voter fraud commission and "whatever right-wing conspiracy you'd like," even one that looks into whether Brad Raffensperger "has a brother named Ron."

— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) December 31, 2020

It’s 190k for couples filing jointly iirc, which puts you in the top decile of income nationally

The computer repair shop owner at the center of the Hunter Biden conspiracy continues to make his presence known on Fox News... pic.twitter.com/G2LE39sayZ

— Quint Forgey (@QuintForgey) December 31, 2020

well, he's a computer repairman, so obv he can take care of Twitter.

Sorry I know it’s related to anything I just thought the guy was funny looking

*it’s not related to anything

whether or not that income cutoff (which is like $160k for two people) makes you 'rich' depends on where you live. It's certainly anything but rich where I live.

I don't want to make the thread all about this, but why is it so hard to accept that a couple that makes $160k a year is rich? They might be rich and have unusually high expenses, e.g. if they have seven kids or live in Manhattan. But they have more income than 4/5 of American households. It's a national bill and what "rich" means has to be interpreted nationally. But why shouldn't some rich people get checks if that's what it takes to get the checks out? I think the right answer isn't "but I can think of somebody who makes that much money and still doesn't have enough money," it's "so the fuck what if a few people who don't need it get the money, most of the people who'll get it *do* need it and it's disingenuous as shit to pretend your opposition has to do with a few "undeserving" recipients."

Why is $600 going to rich ppl ok but $2000 not? Aren't they both "socialism for rich people"?? I know, lol at trying to apply logic to Mitch's bullshit

I’d be surprised if he cares either way tbh. He just doesn’t want a vote that would split and weaken the caucus he controls.

Peter Wehner (I know, I know) on the problem of a base utterly disconnected from reality: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/12/cowards-are-destroying-the-gop/617534/

The single most worrisome political fact in America right now is that a significant portion of the Republican Party lives in a fantasy world, a place where facts and truth don’t hold sway, where “owning the libs” is an end in itself, and where seceding from reality is a symbol of tribal loyalty, rather than a sign of mental illness. This is leading the party, and America itself, to places we’ve never been before, including the spectacle of a defeated president and his supporters engaging in a sustained effort to steal an election.

You can't say he's wrong. We've all been saying similar things for a long time now. Just like "increasingly isolated" always meant isolated from any kind of factual reality.

Actually the most depressing part about that essay is that this bit of hilarity is the best he can offer as an antidote:

Our collective hope should be that principled Republicans will find their voice and prevail—one courageous step at a time, one act of decency at a time, one year at a time.

i.e., we're pretty fucked.

I interview people for a living and am always looking around to see who I can learn from when it comes to the art of asking the right questions. These are some great ones. https://t.co/OyzsFxbWWX

— Isaac Chotiner (@IChotiner) December 31, 2020

second question a pretty standard interview question, I remember Carson usually opened with it

this bit of hilarity is the best he can offer as an antidote:

Maybe it would help to reinstate the FCC as an effective regulatory body. Maybe clamping down on open bribery of legislators would help a bit, too.

i wonder which direction - this complete detachment from reality - this will go after january 20th? when confronted with the failures of their predictions, doomsday prophets and their acolytes don't usually acknowledge reality. usually they just revise their prediction, pointing it in the same general weird direction, and then continue on with redoubled confidence.

then again perhaps principled Republicans will find their voice and prevail—one courageous step at a time, one act of decency at a time, one year at a time.

I'm sure a Bipartisan Commission on Reality could come up with some helpful suggestions. Like, for every true thing right-wingers agree to believe, people on the left agree to believe one false thing.

i wonder which direction - this complete detachment from reality - this will go after january 20th? when confronted with the failures of their predictions, doomsday prophets and their acolytes don't usually acknowledge reality. usually they just revise their prediction, pointing it in the same general weird direction, and then continue on with redoubled confidence.

Trump cannot fail, he can only be failed.

The narrative is already gelling that way - that the god-emperor was STABBED IN THE BACK by deep staters like Roberts, Barr, Kemp, McConnell, etc.

The "Pence card" vs. Hawley challenge narrative is convenient. Because when Pence declines to overturn the election, he becomes the MAGAnauts' Judas, forever. He will never be elected to anything again. Hawley, Wood, Powell, and Rudy are the heroes, because even if they fail (which they will), they were at least willing to fight, unlike the cowardly swamp creatures.

This will protect the red-hatters from too much cognitive dissonance. Brave patriots fought, but were undermined by spineless soy-pansies who got corrupted by DC and its cocktail parties.

I MAY have spent too much time hate-reading in this world.

Trump cannot fail, he can only be failed.

^ key insight there.

As he told us in his 2016 acceptance speech, he alone could save the nation from the horrors he identified. Those horrors didn't disappear and the Golden Age was not established. Trump the Savior could not be to blame for this, so the narrative can only be that his enemies brought him down and because, as POTUS, he was the Man in Charge and Maximum Leader, those enemies must have been a secret, dark, powerful underground cabal of traitors. It writes itself.

Man, Hawley’s Twitter is half people rightfully flipping him off, and a sad, scary other half tweeting pretty much exactly what YMP posits above. Happy new year and good luck USA.

Hawley, Wood, Powell, and Rudy are the heroes

I read this as “herpes” and I had to agree!

Hawley, Wood, Powell, and Rudy sounds like a one-off '70s butt rock supergroup.

happy new year everyone https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/31/us/politics/trump-coronavirus.html

Trump: "We're ordering a lot of different elements of medical."

— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) February 28, 2020

is the army delivering regeneron to people’s homes yet? didn’t he deliver an address where he promised that?

Only if he won, IIRC.

he told me to my fuckin face. right after he walked out of that hospital. the army was coming with the cure. ??? i’m starting to get the feeling this guy isn’t on the up and up

TS: "elements of medical" vs. "the cyber"

ICYMI there is a Gohmert-led lawsuit based on suing Mike Pence so that (checks notes) Mike Pence can have more power to overturn the election.

One person who has asked for it to be dismissed is... Mike Pence.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sasse-letter-electoral-college-ploy/2020/12/31/44da8dba-4b65-11eb-a9d9-1e3ec4a928b9_story.html

I know this is all dark and weird dead-end shit but it is still grimly entertaining, in a strange way

what would happen if the crazies had majorities in the house and the senate? could they just vote unilaterally to not count the electors from any states they felt like objecting to?

Maybe!

We’re going to find out in 2024.

that, to me, seems less than optimal

That's kind of a one-and-done thing. If you do it once, you're playing for everything, because you can't risk the other side ever being in the same position. I don't really think they would do it, but it would be the actual authoritarian takeover point. And that we can sit here and contemplate it as a possibility in 4 years isn't a great feeling in itself.

Something like that would end up at the Supreme Court, obviously, and I don't know enough about how the various constitutional election powers interact to have any idea how they'd rule.

“You’re killing me! This whole thing is! We’ve got all the damn cases,” Mr. Trump yelled at Jared Kushner, his son-in-law and senior adviser...

This was real, this whole thing really happened, we witnessed it happening

https://nyti.ms/38MNwp2

When it comes to Congress driving the democratic electoral process that deeply into the anti-democratic weeds, the constitution is very vague, mainly because the framers had a persistent mistrust of democracy and an implicit trust in the honor of gentlemen, so they refrained from explicitly prohibiting 'the best judgment of the best men' from overruling the democratic wishes of the people. they deliberately left that door cracked open for Congress to walk through. Lucky us.

Fingers crossed that not having the President and "leader" of the Republican party being a deranged conspiracy theorist will tamp down the "RIGGED ELEXTION!!" bullshit in the future

And Sleepy Joe Will Get The Credit: US Politics January 2021