Yes, the article is very telling. If this is what the Republican "thinkers" are thinking then 2016 should see more Democrats at the federal office level.
The author seems to be suffering from delusions caused by living in the RW bubble. The GOP has a serious problem caused by talking only among themselves resulting in their complete unmooring from the mainstream of America.
Yes, the article is very telling. If this is what the Republican "thinkers" are thinking then 2016 should see more Democrats at the federal office level.
Y'know, there's a whole Congressional election between now and then...
The Republicans are also suffering from the Sunlight Effect.
In the old days, the far right could say one thing to its base, and another thing publicly. The base would be assured of continued racism or homophobia or whatever, and would write off the more moderate statements to the public as the necessary evil to get the moderates on board.
But now, when they say the things that their base wants to hear, there is video. The ridiculous things they have to say to get their base to follow them destroys their chances in any general election outside of a heavily gerrymandered district.
In the old days, the far right could say one thing to its base, and another thing publicly. The base would be assured of continued racism or homophobia or whatever, and would write off the more moderate statements to the public as the necessary evil to get the moderates on board.
But now, when they say the things that their base wants to hear, there is video. The ridiculous things they have to say to get their base to follow them destroys their chances in any general election outside of a heavily gerrymandered district.
Was this not the case in the 70s? In the 80s? How is this new?
The author seems to be suffering from delusions caused by living in the RW bubble. The GOP has a serious problem caused by talking only among themselves resulting in their complete unmooring from the mainstream of America.
Could the same not be said for politicical parties in general? Each side is wrapped up in what they want/think and deamonising the opposition that they don't step back and look at the big picture. That is to say that the Republicans, or at least leading elements, seem very wrapped up in themselves but could the same be said for the Democrats?
Not really. The Democrats are a coalition party of everything from center-right to center and even the far center. They're the "everybody but the racists and super religious people" party at this point.
It's not demonizing to actually call Republicans out on their ridiculous social policies.
I think in general the Democrats have done a great job of completely sidelining their radical wing. Notice PETA members, greenpeace members and the like don't rise to high elected office and have very little sway. The republican's problem is they have the equivalent of PETA members in the freaking senate (Ted Cruz among others). The left used to have one or two weird congressmen like Dennis Kucinich (now retired), however they were generally powerless within the system while the right has like 50 of them....
I think as the republican party continued it's purification process instead of ending up in the center (where the democrats move towards) they ended up further to the right. Their electorate either quit the party, became a democrat (me) or moved with them further to the right (my dad).
If you read around you'll see a lot of analysis that both parties have little overlap and that would make you think that they are both becoming more isolated and echo chambered, However look at most of what the Democrats have put forward, usually a already compromised position leaning towards what was conservative ideas. I mean Obama wants to modify Social Security. His Healthcare Plan was modeled after 90's conservative models. The D's couldn't pass Single payer because of the Democrats mostly, (I mean they couldn't get the one or two republicans they need, but at the same time they also didn't have all the D's either.)
The Dirty jobs guy talking about how we kinda forgot about the skilled trades. (I put this here) because he's getting some negative press for appearing on Glenn Beck's Show and people are freaking out. But the man is definitely saying what we've been talking about. By calling skilled labor "alternative" we've short changed the fact that skilled labor is really important and necessarily.
Mike Rowe's point is that he is trying to bring his message to people who he can not otherwise reach. It is much like When George Takei went on Howard Stern.
I have been seeing more of the "taking vs paying" debate about how much eaach state pays to the feds in taxes compared to what it gets back in spending. One thing I have not seen addressed is the issue of people who work in paying states and then retire in taking states. Is the impact large enough to be an issue worth investigating?
That was interesting. On the Daily Show's extended interview with Debbie Wasserman Shultz she said to Stewart that 18-34 year olds will be getting cheaper insurance through the exchange. Did she forget that up to age 26 you can stay on your parents insurance plan? Half of the age group she mentioned can stay on their parents plan! If the plan was to have 18-26 year olds enter the pool to subsidize everyone else then... WTF?
But yea, I always found that to be strange. however it's super true they can get cheaper insurance obviously through their parents who got their's on the exchange :-p
My parents' shitty insurance only covers emergency coverage when you're outside of NY. My job next year will, in all likelihood, be on the west coast, and my employer has good coverage.
Comments
In the old days, the far right could say one thing to its base, and another thing publicly. The base would be assured of continued racism or homophobia or whatever, and would write off the more moderate statements to the public as the necessary evil to get the moderates on board.
But now, when they say the things that their base wants to hear, there is video. The ridiculous things they have to say to get their base to follow them destroys their chances in any general election outside of a heavily gerrymandered district.
It's not demonizing to actually call Republicans out on their ridiculous social policies.
I think as the republican party continued it's purification process instead of ending up in the center (where the democrats move towards) they ended up further to the right. Their electorate either quit the party, became a democrat (me) or moved with them further to the right (my dad).
If you read around you'll see a lot of analysis that both parties have little overlap and that would make you think that they are both becoming more isolated and echo chambered, However look at most of what the Democrats have put forward, usually a already compromised position leaning towards what was conservative ideas. I mean Obama wants to modify Social Security. His Healthcare Plan was modeled after 90's conservative models. The D's couldn't pass Single payer because of the Democrats mostly, (I mean they couldn't get the one or two republicans they need, but at the same time they also didn't have all the D's either.)
The Dirty jobs guy talking about how we kinda forgot about the skilled trades. (I put this here) because he's getting some negative press for appearing on Glenn Beck's Show and people are freaking out. But the man is definitely saying what we've been talking about. By calling skilled labor "alternative" we've short changed the fact that skilled labor is really important and necessarily.
Bill Marr is just a douche bag.
And saying he gets along with Penn Gillette isnt exactly a testament to his over looked pro-social side.
But yea, I always found that to be strange. however it's super true they can get cheaper insurance obviously through their parents who got their's on the exchange :-p
No shit I won't be on my parents' plan.