Ezra Klein of the NYT published a podcast episode yesterday that speaks to your point Cryn.
EK echoes your conclusion by noting an unfortunate advantage, but perhaps weakness (electorally) of the Trump administration. Trump’s willingness to inflict pain and wield cruelty as a cudgel exceeds the capacity of a pro-democracy consensus to see others suffer at the hands of it.
The CAPITULATING EIGHT! Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Angus King (I-ME), Catherine Cortez Maestro (D-NV), John Letterman (D-PA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Jack Rosen (D-NV), Tim Kaine (D-VA)
These names represent the fundamental failing of America's democracy because it's a trust-based, centralized approach that encourages and facilitates corruption at every level. We essentially elect representative leaders who are then placed in a paradigm of politics where truth, integrity, and loyalty to the constituency is not rewarded with compensation, respectability, or retention. We then have the audacity to be outraged when the very same politicians fail to deliver on the policies that We the People elected them to achieve, and election cycle after election cycle the promises remain, but the progress itself never lives up to the potential.
If you're interested in a potential solution to this paradigm of politics read my upcoming essay, Democracy's Software Patch: Could the Theory Behind Bitcoin be the Future of Freedom?
"So, while it is broadly true that Democrats folded, and this is the reaction across the party base, what has folded is the corporate Democratic Leadership Council wing of the party, in British terms, the Liberal Democrats. In Mexican terms, the new PRI. In other words, a pro-corporate centrist-right party."
I agree with the counter-strategy argument. First off, the cruelty had to be stopped, and the danger was about to accelerate. The political calculation could well turn out as described here. For those who say, What if?…—the reality is, everything is a risk.
The Democrats’ ideal outcomes are: continue subsidies; next reveal all Epstein documents, which would lead to maga diehards *finally* seeing Trump as a problem; and upon the reopening of the government, the voting public blames everything on Republicans! Would it turn out that way if Dems held out? Not necessarily, because everything is a risk, outcomes are not predestined.
Every course would lead to someone suffering, who and how many is the real question. Also: the voting public has shown it has a short memory; only vivid events get remembered, and even then the causes are up for grabs. Planes colliding would be rather vivid, and something makes me think that somehow, some way, it would be decided that it’s all Dems’ fault after all.
This is only what I make of it, I hope it turns out for the best (possible that is). FutureVision hasn’t been invented yet!
'Planes colliding' is my biggest fear, especially when we are approaching the most traveled season of the year. Obviously there is no best answer to what is being presented to Congress, sometimes there is no good choice, but maybe doing something will be better? I'm hopefull for better and ready to keep the pressure on the opposition to our democratic ideals.
I listened to a Bulwark podcast with Tim Miller and Will Saletan, who made an argument similar to your second point. They talked me off the ledge. The Dems were in a no win situation as the Repubs were never going to negotiate. I do think the Dems need new leadership in both Senate and House, who are better at communicating to the American public. And the reality is that Dems are far more likely to take actions that do the least harm to people vs the Repubs, whose cruelty is their point.
I think this is a very generous take. Also very well one that these people might claim to have had and potentially really had.
I see it as a total capitulation. I don't think people would have blamed the democrats - the votes of November 4 can be taken as an indication in that direction. They have given away their leverage. About a month before things came to pass.
I think it is rightly seen as a betrayal of their base. Once again. The first, of course, was in March.
This is one of the most thoughtful and even-handed takes I’ve seen on the eight Democrats who voted to end the shutdown. You acknowledge the outrage without inflaming it and look at the decision through both moral and strategic reasoning. I’ve been seeing angry Democrats all day across my feed, furious but not fully understanding the broader context. Your point about the ACA subsidies and leverage helps explain what might actually be at play behind those votes.
Thanks, Wendy. I think the counterstrategy is an interesting theory. I realize people are infuriated about the Dems reopening the government, but I thought I'd at least share it as a counterweight.
Good leadership wins in the long run. I saw this as a reality when Trump won last election. It is The People by voting that own the cause & problem and the solution.
Cryn: didn't realize you were changing careers to a comedian.
To the brunch libs (not you Cryn): The dems ARE the nazis. This is like the zillionth time they have fooled you brunch libs. I guess it'll be a zillion and one next week. And you idiots keep voting for them. It's so pathetic.
Appreciate this perspective Cryn.
Ezra Klein of the NYT published a podcast episode yesterday that speaks to your point Cryn.
EK echoes your conclusion by noting an unfortunate advantage, but perhaps weakness (electorally) of the Trump administration. Trump’s willingness to inflict pain and wield cruelty as a cudgel exceeds the capacity of a pro-democracy consensus to see others suffer at the hands of it.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-ezra-klein-show/id1548604447?i=1000736144216
The CAPITULATING EIGHT! Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Angus King (I-ME), Catherine Cortez Maestro (D-NV), John Letterman (D-PA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Jack Rosen (D-NV), Tim Kaine (D-VA)
These names represent the fundamental failing of America's democracy because it's a trust-based, centralized approach that encourages and facilitates corruption at every level. We essentially elect representative leaders who are then placed in a paradigm of politics where truth, integrity, and loyalty to the constituency is not rewarded with compensation, respectability, or retention. We then have the audacity to be outraged when the very same politicians fail to deliver on the policies that We the People elected them to achieve, and election cycle after election cycle the promises remain, but the progress itself never lives up to the potential.
If you're interested in a potential solution to this paradigm of politics read my upcoming essay, Democracy's Software Patch: Could the Theory Behind Bitcoin be the Future of Freedom?
I spotted this:
"So, while it is broadly true that Democrats folded, and this is the reaction across the party base, what has folded is the corporate Democratic Leadership Council wing of the party, in British terms, the Liberal Democrats. In Mexican terms, the new PRI. In other words, a pro-corporate centrist-right party."
https://open.substack.com/pub/nadinabbott/p/the-end-of-the-shutdown-what-the
I agree with the counter-strategy argument. First off, the cruelty had to be stopped, and the danger was about to accelerate. The political calculation could well turn out as described here. For those who say, What if?…—the reality is, everything is a risk.
The Democrats’ ideal outcomes are: continue subsidies; next reveal all Epstein documents, which would lead to maga diehards *finally* seeing Trump as a problem; and upon the reopening of the government, the voting public blames everything on Republicans! Would it turn out that way if Dems held out? Not necessarily, because everything is a risk, outcomes are not predestined.
Every course would lead to someone suffering, who and how many is the real question. Also: the voting public has shown it has a short memory; only vivid events get remembered, and even then the causes are up for grabs. Planes colliding would be rather vivid, and something makes me think that somehow, some way, it would be decided that it’s all Dems’ fault after all.
This is only what I make of it, I hope it turns out for the best (possible that is). FutureVision hasn’t been invented yet!
'Planes colliding' is my biggest fear, especially when we are approaching the most traveled season of the year. Obviously there is no best answer to what is being presented to Congress, sometimes there is no good choice, but maybe doing something will be better? I'm hopefull for better and ready to keep the pressure on the opposition to our democratic ideals.
I listened to a Bulwark podcast with Tim Miller and Will Saletan, who made an argument similar to your second point. They talked me off the ledge. The Dems were in a no win situation as the Repubs were never going to negotiate. I do think the Dems need new leadership in both Senate and House, who are better at communicating to the American public. And the reality is that Dems are far more likely to take actions that do the least harm to people vs the Repubs, whose cruelty is their point.
Pinning your hopes on a vote that isn't likely to happen seems disingenuous.
I’m not. As I said, I’m presenting another side.
You're not what? What did I say? Were you responding to someone else?
I think this is a very generous take. Also very well one that these people might claim to have had and potentially really had.
I see it as a total capitulation. I don't think people would have blamed the democrats - the votes of November 4 can be taken as an indication in that direction. They have given away their leverage. About a month before things came to pass.
I think it is rightly seen as a betrayal of their base. Once again. The first, of course, was in March.
The only way this can become acceptable is if Grijalva is sworn in and the Epstein vote happens and passes. That would be winning strategy.
That makes sense to me.
This is one of the most thoughtful and even-handed takes I’ve seen on the eight Democrats who voted to end the shutdown. You acknowledge the outrage without inflaming it and look at the decision through both moral and strategic reasoning. I’ve been seeing angry Democrats all day across my feed, furious but not fully understanding the broader context. Your point about the ACA subsidies and leverage helps explain what might actually be at play behind those votes.
Thanks, Wendy. I think the counterstrategy is an interesting theory. I realize people are infuriated about the Dems reopening the government, but I thought I'd at least share it as a counterweight.
I was furious at first…and my lizard brain has calmed down after looking at the bigger picture.
Good leadership wins in the long run. I saw this as a reality when Trump won last election. It is The People by voting that own the cause & problem and the solution.
So, what do you see as solutions now?
Cryn: didn't realize you were changing careers to a comedian.
To the brunch libs (not you Cryn): The dems ARE the nazis. This is like the zillionth time they have fooled you brunch libs. I guess it'll be a zillion and one next week. And you idiots keep voting for them. It's so pathetic.
So, I take it that you see it as capitulation (lol).