Mark Blyth, the economist who's making sense

Status
Not open for further replies.

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
No wonder America wants Julian Assange locked up- so they can shut him up;

https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/878773715147902977

Why the Democratic party is doomed:

1. The Democratic establishment has vortexed the party’s narrative energy into hysteria about Russia (a state with a lower GDP than South Korea). It is starkly obvious that were it not for this hysteria insurgent narratives of the type promoted by Bernie Sanders would rapidly dominate the party’s base and its relationship with the public. Without the “We didn’t lose–Russia won” narrative the party’s elite and those who exist under its patronage would be purged for being electorally incompetent and ideologically passé. The collapse of the Democratic vote over the last eight years is at every level, city, state, Congressional and presidential. It corresponds to the domination of Democratic decision making structures by a professional, educated, urban service class and to the shocking decline in health and longevity of white males, who together with their wives, daughters, mothers, etc. comprise 63% of the US population (2010 census). Unlike other industrialized countries US male real wages (all ethnic groups combined) have not increased since 1973. In trying to stimulate engagement of non-whites and women Democrats have aggressively promoted identity politics. This short-term tactic has led to the inevitable strategic catastrophe of the white and male super majorities responding by seeing themselves as an unserviced political identity group. Consequently in response to sotto-voce suggestions that Trump would service this group 53% of all men voted for Trump, 53% of white women and 63% of white men (PEW Research).

2. The Trump-Russia collusion narrative is a political dead end. Despite vast resources, enormous incentives and a year of investigation, Democratic senators who have seen the classified intelligence at the CIA such as Senator Feinstein (as recently as March) are forced to admit that there is no evidence of collusion
[
]. Without collusion, we are left with the Democratic establishment blaming the public for being repelled by the words of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic party establishment. Is it a problem that the public discovered what Hillary Clinton said to Goldman Sachs and what party elites said about fixing the DNC primaries against Bernie Sanders? A party elite that maintains that it is the “crime of the century” for the public and their membership to discover how they behave and what they believe invites scorn.

3. The Democrat establishment needs the support of the security sector and media barons to push this diversionary conspiracy agenda, so they ingratiate themselves with these two classes leading to further perceptions that the Democrats act on behalf of an entrenched power elite. Eventually, Trump or Pence will ‘merge’ with the security state leaving Democrats in a vulnerable position having talked up two deeply unaccountable traditionally Republican-aligned organizations, in particular, the CIA and the FBI, who will be turned against them. Other than domestic diversion and geopolitical destabilization the primary result of the Russian narrative is increased influence and funding for the security sector which is primarily GOP owned or aligned.

4. The twin result is to place the primary self-interest concerns of most Americans, class competition, freedom from crime and ill health and the empowerment of their children, into the shadows and project the Democrats as close to DC and media elites. This has further cemented Trump’s anti-establishment positioning and fettered attacks on Trump’s run away embrace of robber barons, dictators and gravitas-free buffoons like the CIA’s Mike Pompeo.

5. GOP/Trump has open goals everywhere: broken promises, inequality, economy, healthcare, militarization, Goldman Sachs, Saudi Arabia & cronyism, but the Democrat establishment can’t kick these goals since the Russian collusion narrative has consumed all its energy and it is entangled with many of the same groups behind Trump’s policies.

6. The Democratic base should move to start a new party since the party elite shows no signs that they will give up power. This can be done quickly and cheaply as a result of the internet and databases of peoples’ political preferences. This reality is proven in practice with the rapid construction of the Macron, Sanders and Trump campaigns from nothing. The existing Democratic party may well have negative reputational capital, stimulating a Macron-style clean slate approach. Regardless, in the face of such a threat, the Democratic establishment will either concede control or, as in the case of Macron, be eliminated by the new structure.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
No wonder America wants Julian Assange locked up- so they can shut him up;

https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/878773715147902977

Why the Democratic party is doomed:

1. The Democratic establishment has vortexed the party’s narrative energy into hysteria about Russia (a state with a lower GDP than South Korea). It is starkly obvious that were it not for this hysteria insurgent narratives of the type promoted by Bernie Sanders would rapidly dominate the party’s base and its relationship with the public. Without the “We didn’t lose–Russia won” narrative the party’s elite and those who exist under its patronage would be purged for being electorally incompetent and ideologically passé. The collapse of the Democratic vote over the last eight years is at every level, city, state, Congressional and presidential. It corresponds to the domination of Democratic decision making structures by a professional, educated, urban service class and to the shocking decline in health and longevity of white males, who together with their wives, daughters, mothers, etc. comprise 63% of the US population (2010 census). Unlike other industrialized countries US male real wages (all ethnic groups combined) have not increased since 1973. In trying to stimulate engagement of non-whites and women Democrats have aggressively promoted identity politics. This short-term tactic has led to the inevitable strategic catastrophe of the white and male super majorities responding by seeing themselves as an unserviced political identity group. Consequently in response to sotto-voce suggestions that Trump would service this group 53% of all men voted for Trump, 53% of white women and 63% of white men (PEW Research).

2. The Trump-Russia collusion narrative is a political dead end. Despite vast resources, enormous incentives and a year of investigation, Democratic senators who have seen the classified intelligence at the CIA such as Senator Feinstein (as recently as March) are forced to admit that there is no evidence of collusion
[
]. Without collusion, we are left with the Democratic establishment blaming the public for being repelled by the words of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic party establishment. Is it a problem that the public discovered what Hillary Clinton said to Goldman Sachs and what party elites said about fixing the DNC primaries against Bernie Sanders? A party elite that maintains that it is the “crime of the century” for the public and their membership to discover how they behave and what they believe invites scorn.

3. The Democrat establishment needs the support of the security sector and media barons to push this diversionary conspiracy agenda, so they ingratiate themselves with these two classes leading to further perceptions that the Democrats act on behalf of an entrenched power elite. Eventually, Trump or Pence will ‘merge’ with the security state leaving Democrats in a vulnerable position having talked up two deeply unaccountable traditionally Republican-aligned organizations, in particular, the CIA and the FBI, who will be turned against them. Other than domestic diversion and geopolitical destabilization the primary result of the Russian narrative is increased influence and funding for the security sector which is primarily GOP owned or aligned.

4. The twin result is to place the primary self-interest concerns of most Americans, class competition, freedom from crime and ill health and the empowerment of their children, into the shadows and project the Democrats as close to DC and media elites. This has further cemented Trump’s anti-establishment positioning and fettered attacks on Trump’s run away embrace of robber barons, dictators and gravitas-free buffoons like the CIA’s Mike Pompeo.

5. GOP/Trump has open goals everywhere: broken promises, inequality, economy, healthcare, militarization, Goldman Sachs, Saudi Arabia & cronyism, but the Democrat establishment can’t kick these goals since the Russian collusion narrative has consumed all its energy and it is entangled with many of the same groups behind Trump’s policies.

6. The Democratic base should move to start a new party since the party elite shows no signs that they will give up power. This can be done quickly and cheaply as a result of the internet and databases of peoples’ political preferences. This reality is proven in practice with the rapid construction of the Macron, Sanders and Trump campaigns from nothing. The existing Democratic party may well have negative reputational capital, stimulating a Macron-style clean slate approach. Regardless, in the face of such a threat, the Democratic establishment will either concede control or, as in the case of Macron, be eliminated by the new structure.
what a pile of retarded crap.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
.... And here's the Democrats scuttling single payer health insurance in California, despite having a super majority with which to pass it;

http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/democrats-help-corporate-donors-block-california-health-care-measure-progressives

And people wonder why I'm skeptical of the party and why I still think that all those millions in campaign cash actually have some effect.
the decision to shelve it has absolutely nothing to do with "campaign cash" and everything to do with it being a hollow bill and them having no idea how to pay for it.

jesus christ, it's like nuance doesn't even exist in your world. there are many, many facets to this bill. at least pada read up on it. read the ibtimes article he posted somewhere else.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
the decision to shelve it has absolutely nothing to do with "campaign cash" and everything to do with it being a hollow bill and them having no idea how to pay for it.

jesus christ, it's like nuance doesn't even exist in your world. there are many, many facets to this bill. at least pada read up on it. read the ibtimes article he posted somewhere else.
I'll look for it.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
.... And here's the Democrats scuttling single payer health insurance in California, despite having a super majority with which to pass it;

http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/democrats-help-corporate-donors-block-california-health-care-measure-progressives

And people wonder why I'm skeptical of the party and why I still think that all those millions in campaign cash actually have some effect.
The bill was just for show this time around. It got the conversation going. It wasn't complete. Regardless of how I think universal healthcare is the right answer, if I had to vote on a bill that didn't cover the costs, I'd vote no on it too. There is too much at stake to put a footnote at the bottome with a promise to "figure something out" to cover a 400 billion dollar liability.

I hope a more finished product is vetted next time.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
The bill was just for show this time around. It got the conversation going. It wasn't complete. Regardless of how I think universal healthcare is the right answer, if I had to vote on a bill that didn't cover the costs, I'd vote no on it too. There is too much at stake to put a footnote at the bottome with a promise to "figure something out" to cover a 400 billion dollar liability.

I hope a more finished product is vetted next time.
i think vermont tried to go ahead once with an incomplete bill like this one and it ended in disaster. i should look for the details.

if youre gonna do something like this, do it right.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
i think vermont tried to go ahead once with an incomplete bill like this one and it ended in disaster. i should look for the details.

if youre gonna do something like this, do it right.
Some people think symbolic acts are more important than competence. :dunce:

Some others think that Democrats are losing to Republicans because of Democrats won't put an incomplete healthcare measure up for a floor vote. :dunce:

Some California Democrats want to tell voters in other states what they should support :dunce::dunce::dunce::dunce::dunce::dunce::dunce::dunce::dunce::dunce::dunce::dunce:
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
No wonder America wants Julian Assange locked up- so they can shut him up;

https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/878773715147902977

Why the Democratic party is doomed:

1. The Democratic establishment has vortexed the party’s narrative energy into hysteria about Russia (a state with a lower GDP than South Korea). It is starkly obvious that were it not for this hysteria insurgent narratives of the type promoted by Bernie Sanders would rapidly dominate the party’s base and its relationship with the public. Without the “We didn’t lose–Russia won” narrative the party’s elite and those who exist under its patronage would be purged for being electorally incompetent and ideologically passé. The collapse of the Democratic vote over the last eight years is at every level, city, state, Congressional and presidential. It corresponds to the domination of Democratic decision making structures by a professional, educated, urban service class and to the shocking decline in health and longevity of white males, who together with their wives, daughters, mothers, etc. comprise 63% of the US population (2010 census). Unlike other industrialized countries US male real wages (all ethnic groups combined) have not increased since 1973. In trying to stimulate engagement of non-whites and women Democrats have aggressively promoted identity politics. This short-term tactic has led to the inevitable strategic catastrophe of the white and male super majorities responding by seeing themselves as an unserviced political identity group. Consequently in response to sotto-voce suggestions that Trump would service this group 53% of all men voted for Trump, 53% of white women and 63% of white men (PEW Research).

2. The Trump-Russia collusion narrative is a political dead end. Despite vast resources, enormous incentives and a year of investigation, Democratic senators who have seen the classified intelligence at the CIA such as Senator Feinstein (as recently as March) are forced to admit that there is no evidence of collusion
[
]. Without collusion, we are left with the Democratic establishment blaming the public for being repelled by the words of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic party establishment. Is it a problem that the public discovered what Hillary Clinton said to Goldman Sachs and what party elites said about fixing the DNC primaries against Bernie Sanders? A party elite that maintains that it is the “crime of the century” for the public and their membership to discover how they behave and what they believe invites scorn.

3. The Democrat establishment needs the support of the security sector and media barons to push this diversionary conspiracy agenda, so they ingratiate themselves with these two classes leading to further perceptions that the Democrats act on behalf of an entrenched power elite. Eventually, Trump or Pence will ‘merge’ with the security state leaving Democrats in a vulnerable position having talked up two deeply unaccountable traditionally Republican-aligned organizations, in particular, the CIA and the FBI, who will be turned against them. Other than domestic diversion and geopolitical destabilization the primary result of the Russian narrative is increased influence and funding for the security sector which is primarily GOP owned or aligned.

4. The twin result is to place the primary self-interest concerns of most Americans, class competition, freedom from crime and ill health and the empowerment of their children, into the shadows and project the Democrats as close to DC and media elites. This has further cemented Trump’s anti-establishment positioning and fettered attacks on Trump’s run away embrace of robber barons, dictators and gravitas-free buffoons like the CIA’s Mike Pompeo.

5. GOP/Trump has open goals everywhere: broken promises, inequality, economy, healthcare, militarization, Goldman Sachs, Saudi Arabia & cronyism, but the Democrat establishment can’t kick these goals since the Russian collusion narrative has consumed all its energy and it is entangled with many of the same groups behind Trump’s policies.

6. The Democratic base should move to start a new party since the party elite shows no signs that they will give up power. This can be done quickly and cheaply as a result of the internet and databases of peoples’ political preferences. This reality is proven in practice with the rapid construction of the Macron, Sanders and Trump campaigns from nothing. The existing Democratic party may well have negative reputational capital, stimulating a Macron-style clean slate approach. Regardless, in the face of such a threat, the Democratic establishment will either concede control or, as in the case of Macron, be eliminated by the new structure.
Isn't Julian Assange Swedish? Also on the payroll of the Russian intelligence agency or at least sponsored by them?

What office of responsibility has Assange ever held? Hallway monitor, maybe?

Re posting this shit has an air of desperation to it. Assange's opinion validates nothing.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Why would Rendon choose to shelve it until after 2017 instead of debate the issues he has with it as it is? The majority of Californians support it, it passed through the assembly 24/14 (I think) and one man chose to halt its progress completely instead of debate his issues with it.

Do his financial connections to opposition groups of single payer hold any credibility?
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Why would Rendon choose to shelve it until after 2017 instead of debate the issues he has with it as it is? The majority of Californians support it, it passed through the assembly 24/14 (I think) and one man chose to halt its progress completely instead of debate his issues with it.

Do his financial connections to opposition groups of single payer hold any credibility?
@UncleBuck wants us to overlook any connection to all those millions in campaign contributions.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
@UncleBuck wants us to overlook any connection to all those millions in campaign contributions.
How could anyone overlook that?

It's all legal, sure, that's not the issue. Why would opposition groups to single payer be funding his campaigns? Why would he accept those funds if he supports single payer? Are Democratic politicians impervious to financial influence from special interests in Bucks mind?
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
How could anyone overlook that?

It's all legal, sure, that's not the issue. Why would opposition groups to single payer be funding his campaigns? Why would he accept those funds if he supports single payer? Are Democratic politicians impervious to financial influence from special interests in Bucks mind?
It's not an obvious way to kick the single payer can down the road another year, either.

It's okay, only a few will die.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
It's not an obvious way to kick the single payer can down the road another year, either.

It's okay, only a few will die.
I think he shelved it because single payer is getting a LOT of attention right now, next year the conversation will likely die down a little bit, or at least that's what he's banking on, enough to stifle it without as much opposition. It's the 'Cory Booker' defense, "c'mon guys, I totally support it, but it just wasn't complete... Otherwise I totally would have actually supported it when the time mattered...". If constituents keep the fire under his ass, you'll see him squirm just like Booker did when he realized he made the wrong choice in supporting the pharmaceutical industry over his own constituents.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top