Culture Wars Era - is it moving into its final phase?

[David Horn]

(01-18-2017, 08:19 AM)Odin Wrote: Things are too polarized on a national level for coherent action on a federal level, I think most of the action is going to happen on the state level.

Democrats have a demographics problem that makes state-level solutions very hard.  Most states maintain a bias toward the suburban and rural, which is not the Dems strong suit.  Every election cycle, Virginia tallies more votes for Democrats vying for Federal House and state Legislature seats, but the GOP still maintains dominance over both.  Based on nationwide results, this is not uncommon.

[SomeGuy]

(01-18-2017, 12:12 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-17-2017, 01:16 PM)SomeGuy Wrote:

(01-17-2017, 12:44 PM)The Wonkette Wrote:

(01-16-2017, 05:59 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: Am not seeing environmental action this turning, though it will continue to be a greater and greater issue going forward.  It is worthwhile to point out that if it doesn't happen this turning, it doesn't have to wait till the second.  Most of Britain's modern social-insurance got rammed through under Attlee after the 4T was over.

IIRC, there are those, such as David Kaiser, who believe that the UK's 4T didn't end until the late 40s or early 50s.  In that case, the National Health and other British social insurance programs would have been implemented in a 4T.

Late '40s I can believe, 50s seems like it would be pushing it.  But I dunno, if Kaiser or Chas were here I could probably get a decent explanation for it.

Either way, it doesn't preclude a Dem (or whatever) sliding in and pushing some stuff through in the '29 to '30 timeframe.

I read a comment somewhere that the push to kill the ACA may be the only way to get a single payer system in place.  We'll see.

Which goes back to your earlier comment about the seed being sown now.  Remember, Trump has expressed support of Canadian style health care in the past.  If the Dems can get the upper-hand back in Congress, I would not be surprised to see Donald Trump tack back in that direction.  We will really have to wait and see, it's not like he's a real ideological guy.

[Eric the Green]

(01-18-2017, 12:17 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 08:19 AM)Odin Wrote: Things are too polarized on a national level for coherent action on a federal level, I think most of the action is going to happen on the state level.

Democrats have a demographics problem that makes state-level solutions very hard.  Most states maintain a bias toward the suburban and rural, which is not the Dems strong suit.  Every election cycle, Virginia tallies more votes for Democrats vying for Federal House and state Legislature seats, but the GOP still maintains dominance over both.  Based on nationwide results, this is not uncommon.

Is this because of gerrymandering?

How can gerrymandering be eliminated in VA?

[David Horn]

(01-18-2017, 12:20 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: Which goes back to your earlier comment about the seed being sown now.  Remember, Trump has expressed support of Canadian style health care in the past.  If the Dems can get the upper-hand back in Congress, I would not be surprised to see Donald Trump tack back in that direction.  We will really have to wait and see, it's not like he's a real ideological guy.

When asked yesterday, Joe Biden said, "We don't' know what the hell he'll do".  Wisdom there!

[David Horn]

(01-18-2017, 03:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 12:17 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 08:19 AM)Odin Wrote: Things are too polarized on a national level for coherent action on a federal level, I think most of the action is going to happen on the state level.

Democrats have a demographics problem that makes state-level solutions very hard.  Most states maintain a bias toward the suburban and rural, which is not the Dems strong suit.  Every election cycle, Virginia tallies more votes for Democrats vying for Federal House and state Legislature seats, but the GOP still maintains dominance over both.  Based on nationwide results, this is not uncommon.

Is this because of gerrymandering?

How can gerrymandering be eliminated in VA?

If you kill gerrymandering, the bias gets better but remains in place.  Mostly, it's due to the distribution of Progressive voters.  Most pile-up in urban areas, so the votes are a lot like California: too many in too few places.

[sbarrera]

(01-18-2017, 12:20 PM)SomeGuy Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 12:12 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-17-2017, 01:16 PM)SomeGuy Wrote:

(01-17-2017, 12:44 PM)The Wonkette Wrote:

(01-16-2017, 05:59 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: Am not seeing environmental action this turning, though it will continue to be a greater and greater issue going forward.  It is worthwhile to point out that if it doesn't happen this turning, it doesn't have to wait till the second.  Most of Britain's modern social-insurance got rammed through under Attlee after the 4T was over.

IIRC, there are those, such as David Kaiser, who believe that the UK's 4T didn't end until the late 40s or early 50s.  In that case, the National Health and other British social insurance programs would have been implemented in a 4T.

Late '40s I can believe, 50s seems like it would be pushing it.  But I dunno, if Kaiser or Chas were here I could probably get a decent explanation for it.

Either way, it doesn't preclude a Dem (or whatever) sliding in and pushing some stuff through in the '29 to '30 timeframe.

I read a comment somewhere that the push to kill the ACA may be the only way to get a single payer system in place.  We'll see.

Which goes back to your earlier comment about the seed being sown now.  Remember, Trump has expressed support of Canadian style health care in the past.  If the Dems can get the upper-hand back in Congress, I would not be surprised to see Donald Trump tack back in that direction.  We will really have to wait and see, it's not like he's a real ideological guy.

This would be the scenario of - first, wreck the state; next, build a new one on the rubble.

[Eric the Green]

(01-18-2017, 05:59 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 03:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 12:17 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 08:19 AM)Odin Wrote: Things are too polarized on a national level for coherent action on a federal level, I think most of the action is going to happen on the state level.

Democrats have a demographics problem that makes state-level solutions very hard.  Most states maintain a bias toward the suburban and rural, which is not the Dems strong suit.  Every election cycle, Virginia tallies more votes for Democrats vying for Federal House and state Legislature seats, but the GOP still maintains dominance over both.  Based on nationwide results, this is not uncommon.

Is this because of gerrymandering?

How can gerrymandering be eliminated in VA?

If you kill gerrymandering, the bias gets better but remains in place.  Mostly, it's due to the distribution of Progressive voters.  Most pile-up in urban areas, so the votes are a lot like California: too many in too few places.

That may well be true. I wonder though; isn't the margin of Republican power in VA pretty small? One resignation changed the balance of power, iirc.

Are the urban areas in VA too full of progressives, while the rural areas also have some? Or vice-versa? I'm not very clear on how this happens.

Of course, on the state level, California has now escaped this problem. The urban areas are just way more populated than the rural in CA, and so it has a veto-proof 2/3 Democratic majority (though the Democrats are not all reliably progressive).

[flbones too]

I was surprised to read that President Truman in 1945 advocated for a national health insurance system. Then the war ended and Republicans began associating national health care system with socialism which led to the Russians. During that time there was the Red scare going on and that led to the demise of national healthcare. It reappeared again in the 1960s and 1970s but again died out with Raegan and it's been a muddy road ever since. It appears to be making a resurgence. A recent Pew survey showed increased support for national healthcare, support almost doubling among Republicans in one year alone. Hopefully healthcare will be a topic we can tackle...

[SomeGuy]

(01-18-2017, 01:18 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(01-17-2017, 01:17 PM)SomeGuy Wrote:

(01-17-2017, 01:13 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: Actual Rightists who've been duped by foreign agents and the faux (Alt) "Right" have unwisely latched onto a sad amalgam of Nazi notions and other revolutionary bullshit. To be fair, the New Left repeatedly poked the Rightists and this resulted in backlash. This backlash combined with how unappealing Clinton was resulted in Trump.

The Right may think they are now winning the Culture War and may think they have successfully rolled back the 4T and restored their 3T comfort zone. However it is an illusion. The Right have not won, they've merely made a deal with The Devil. Now that they are the SCO's bitch, the SCO will call everything due. We all lose.

Dude, you thought Y2K was a Russian plot, too.

Nope. But I was concerned that with the West distracted by Y2K hysteria, but more importantly, a acrimonious election going on, the Russians / Chinese might exploit the opportunity to undertake a surprise attack.

How did that work out?

[SomeGuy]

(01-18-2017, 05:57 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 12:20 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: Which goes back to your earlier comment about the seed being sown now.  Remember, Trump has expressed support of Canadian style health care in the past.  If the Dems can get the upper-hand back in Congress, I would not be surprised to see Donald Trump tack back in that direction.  We will really have to wait and see, it's not like he's a real ideological guy.

When asked yesterday, Joe Biden said, "We don't' know what the hell he'll do".  Wisdom there!

I don't think that's quite fair, Joe Biden doesn't quite know what he'll do from minute to the next. 

[SomeGuy]

(01-18-2017, 06:32 PM)taramarie Wrote:

(01-16-2017, 02:27 PM)David Horn Wrote: Without quoting Steve's post, I have to agree with the general thrust.  Even more to the point, I don't see the 4T resolving in normal fashion, with a near stand-off between the two visions for Future America being proposed models but not actual solutions.  Maybe this is due to my long-held view that the generational assembly during this 4T isn't up to resolving anything.  The 1T will arrive, and a truce, of sorts, will quell any further action by either side.  The 1T will muddle along, with the two sides cloistered in their urban and rural settings, neither able to bring the other along, but both able to survive in their enclaves.

The next 2T will drag all this out into the public square, and a resolution will finally emerge.  If the call to the barricades is triggered by an environmental catastrophe, the resolution is predictable.  Otherwise, its up for grabs.

I agree and believe that is why your next group will be Apollonians like myself. They will fix it. Dionysians are only good for messing things up it seems as that is their role.

Oh, do you fix things?  My fridge is the fritz again, could you help out? 

[Odin]

(01-18-2017, 12:17 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 08:19 AM)Odin Wrote: Things are too polarized on a national level for coherent action on a federal level, I think most of the action is going to happen on the state level.

Democrats have a demographics problem that makes state-level solutions very hard.  Most states maintain a bias toward the suburban and rural, which is not the Dems strong suit.  Every election cycle, Virginia tallies more votes for Democrats vying for Federal House and state Legislature seats, but the GOP still maintains dominance over both.  Based on nationwide results, this is not uncommon.

And the Dems have the usual "I won't vote unless the candidate is perfect and wipes my own ass" problem.

[David Horn]

(01-18-2017, 03:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 12:17 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 08:19 AM)Odin Wrote: Things are too polarized on a national level for coherent action on a federal level, I think most of the action is going to happen on the state level.

Democrats have a demographics problem that makes state-level solutions very hard.  Most states maintain a bias toward the suburban and rural, which is not the Dems strong suit.  Every election cycle, Virginia tallies more votes for Democrats vying for Federal House and state Legislature seats, but the GOP still maintains dominance over both.  Based on nationwide results, this is not uncommon.

Is this because of gerrymandering?

How can gerrymandering be eliminated in VA?

If you kill gerrymandering, the bias gets better but remains in place.  Mostly, it's due to the distribution of Progressive voters.  Most pile-up in urban areas, so the votes are a lot like California: too many in too few places.

[David Horn]

(01-18-2017, 08:44 PM)SomeGuy Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 05:57 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 12:20 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: Which goes back to your earlier comment about the seed being sown now.  Remember, Trump has expressed support of Canadian style health care in the past.  If the Dems can get the upper-hand back in Congress, I would not be surprised to see Donald Trump tack back in that direction.  We will really have to wait and see, it's not like he's a real ideological guy.

When asked yesterday, Joe Biden said, "We don't' know what the hell he'll do".  Wisdom there!

I don't think that's quite fair, Joe Biden doesn't quite know what he'll do from minute to the next. 

The comment still stands.  Trump has said everything about everything.  He's for/against NATO, trading with China, you name it.  He's the definition of a loose cannon ... and, unlike Biden, he'll be in charge very soon.

[David Horn]

(01-19-2017, 08:07 AM)Odin Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 12:17 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 08:19 AM)Odin Wrote: Things are too polarized on a national level for coherent action on a federal level, I think most of the action is going to happen on the state level.

Democrats have a demographics problem that makes state-level solutions very hard.  Most states maintain a bias toward the suburban and rural, which is not the Dems strong suit.  Every election cycle, Virginia tallies more votes for Democrats vying for Federal House and state Legislature seats, but the GOP still maintains dominance over both.  Based on nationwide results, this is not uncommon.

And the Dems have the usual "I won't vote unless the candidate is perfect and wipes my own ass" problem.

Agreed.  I'm not sure how this resolves.  The neoliberal solution has a extremely low probability of being successful, but you can't oppose something with nothing.

[Eric the Green]

(01-19-2017, 10:31 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 03:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 12:17 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-18-2017, 08:19 AM)Odin Wrote: Things are too polarized on a national level for coherent action on a federal level, I think most of the action is going to happen on the state level.

Democrats have a demographics problem that makes state-level solutions very hard.  Most states maintain a bias toward the suburban and rural, which is not the Dems strong suit.  Every election cycle, Virginia tallies more votes for Democrats vying for Federal House and state Legislature seats, but the GOP still maintains dominance over both.  Based on nationwide results, this is not uncommon.

Is this because of gerrymandering?

How can gerrymandering be eliminated in VA?

If you kill gerrymandering, the bias gets better but remains in place.  Mostly, it's due to the distribution of Progressive voters.  Most pile-up in urban areas, so the votes are a lot like California: too many in too few places.

I thought I responded to this, maybe on another thread?

It could be true in VA, though not in CA itself. Gerrymandering does not have the same effect as the federal electoral college. But I thought the margin in VA was so close that one resignation has shifted the balance of power. Not so?

I'm not sure how that works without gerrymandering either. Are urban areas where all the progressives are, although conservatives are spread throughout the state? Or vice versa?

Also, I'm still wondering what your take on VA Gov. McAuliffe is. Would he make a good presidential candidate in your eyes?

(he probably has the best horoscope score of any potential Democratic candidate now)

[pbrower2a]

I have little question that the economic policies of Donald Trump will do the common man any good, direct (the direct good will go entirely to the Master Class) or indirect (trickle-down does not work so long as people are competing just to survive.

Mike Pence will push cultural values that please only a minority -- evangelical and fundamentalist Protestants, the sorts of people who believe the Bible down to the chronology of Genesis.  If anyone wants a culture war, there you have it -- between those who accept rational science as useful and those who will sacrifice it to save souls. The next four years will be perfectly good for life in America -- if one has already Made It. I would rather be an expat in the next four years.

Economic growth? It will come at a price, most likely privatization of the public sector that makes life far more costly. See two-lane blacktop -- and see it as a toll road. 

World peace? I see the Putin-Trump relationship as abusive and exploitative. That sort of relationship usually ends badly.

So what can go right? Obviously we will be unable to undo any deaths that result from poverty and denied medical care, or crippling or fatal wounds from any unjustifiable War for Profit -- or any terrorism that the President inspires. But even with that caveat we can get a Regeneracy -- one that rejects the destructive, exploitative, and divisive tendencies of the President and his Congressional stooges.

I read the transcript of his inaugural address... which is about as much as I could stand to do... and I could make a snide parody of John F. Kennedy's "Ask not..."; with Donald Trump it would morph into "Ask what your country can do to you!"

We will have to become good enough as a people to be better than our government. We will need to bypass the government to get any good out of life. We will need to start looking out for each other, especially when the Government becomes little more than enforcer of the will of Big Business. We will need to strike and protest against oppression, exploitation, and corruption that will be endemic in America.

It will be tough. But we have a model to emulate.
 
The alternative is 'every man for himself', basically the Law of the Jungle. If we endorse that, then we will neveer escape the pernicious influence of Donald Trump, who will become the Founding Father of an Evil Empire as odious at the least as Ronald Reagan the "evil

 empire" that extended from Kaliningrad to the Bering Strait.

[flbones too]

I don't understand why the GOP consntly puts out tax plans that favor the rich. What's up with that? Are they really that retarded?

[pbrower2a]

(01-21-2017, 06:54 PM)flbones too Wrote: I don't understand why the GOP consntly puts out tax plans that favor the rich. What's up with that? Are they really that retarded?

That's where the financial backing comes from, and those who give the money expect results.  Rapacious plutocrats want to get command of every aspect and control everyone possible, and they are willing to buy the political system to make that possible. Confederate States of America with high technology.

[Warren Dew]

(01-21-2017, 06:54 PM)flbones too Wrote: I don't understand why the GOP consntly puts out tax plans that favor the rich. What's up with that? Are they really that retarded?

They don't.  They put out tax plans that help everyone, and the Democrats reinstate the taxes on everyone but the billionaires.