Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[froot loops]

In your view, what are the social justice issues you talk about talent? Is it gay rights for marriage, trying to help the poor with things like the ACA. I know you don't Black Lives Matter, but if you read the Justice department report on Ferguson, it was pretty damning. Is it telling these constituencies to sit down and shut up because you are offending the silent majority?

[Wild Hoss]

I think Talent is saying "You have to dance with the one who brung ya". These so-called social justice issues (Har) are wedges...they attract some voters, and run off others. The ones they tend to run off are those, in his view, that are critical to consistently winning legislative seats.

[froot loops]

I understand what a wedge issue is, but the question remains the same. Do you tell those constituents to sit down and shut up?

[Dr. Strangelove]

The White House is denying this story strongly but a memo from inside DHS has leaked that shows they are at least considering the use of 100,000 national guard troops to round up and deport illegals

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-national-guard-immigration-20170217-story.html

[hack]

IMO you bang on financial reform. The facts are easy and tweetable, the solution is just, and it helps everybody save for a very small group of people who are largely not entitled to anyone's sympathy or aid. IMO you give lip service to the narrow interests and pivot back as soon as possible to talking about how you're focused on helping all Americans, and this is the one thing that does it. Find the politically acceptable way to tell people that they can feel marginalized like every other damn group in America, or they can feel marginalized like every other damn group in America but also have some extra bucks in their pockets.

[Da Geezer]

Keith Oberman said:

Our governmental system places a heavy emphasis on geographical location and the Dems voters are concentrated in too few locations. This doesn't change the fact that they are, as of 2016 at any rate, the MAJORITY.

On the other hand, what you have termed "white", "rural" voters are mostly citizens of the United States.....

Hillary carried CA by 4.3 million votes.

[hack]

The state most crucial to the economy has made it pretty clear what it wants.

[Wild Hoss]

I understand what a wedge issue is, but the question remains the same. Do you tell those constituents to sit down and shut up?

Not unless you can dominate with the other group. Generally speaking, running off parts of your constituency isn't beneficial though.

The real question to ask is how you can get a significant-enough portion of both groups under your tent. The answer, as hack has noted, is economics; paying bills trumps social distaste in most cases. Currently, the Ds are losing the "Ohio Vote" on both grounds- economics and social justice issues- and are getting crushed. If they can get some wins on the former, they can pry loose voters and start winning legislative elections again.

[Dr. Strangelove]

I'd post a link to the WSJ story but it's behind a paywall...but something we don't really talk about with re: The Wall...it would also likely require one of the most widespread uses of eminent domain in US history.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Supply chain for a "Made in the USA" Boeing 787

[entropy]

I understand what a wedge issue is, but the question remains the same. Do you tell those constituents to sit down and shut up?

I think you focus on what unites rather than divide. It's about poverty not white privilege.

[Da Geezer]

I'd post a link to the WSJ story but it's behind a paywall...but something we don't really talk about with re: The Wall...it would also likely require one of the most widespread uses of eminent domain in US history.

Hopefully so. Mile wide and an inch deep.

I predict it will be done with a regulatory taking, national defense and all that.

[SeattleLionsFan]

At least it will be useless.

[hack]

I think you focus on what unites rather than divide. It's about poverty not white privilege.

I think there's a right way and a wrong way. Ds have been focusing on ``uniting'' for a long time, and all it seems they've done is to highlight how some liberals are actually really and truly inauthentic. I'm all for dividing myself. We've done enough damage to the country by acutally trying to unite ourselves. IMO pay lip service to it, like successful Rs do, and otherwise completely ignore it. It's just nonsense anyways. Most of the people you'd be trying to convince of their own self-interest aren't gonna listen anyways.

[Da Geezer]

Hack, the Dems have focused on identity politics for at least the last 25 years. Identity politics, by its very nature, pits one group against another and divides. LBJ was the first to split the country, and it has gotten progressively worse since then.

I simply don't remember the Dems ever trying to unite the country, with the exception of JFK. In today's politics, JFK would be considered a conservative, or worse, by the Dems. It is instructive that the last SC nominee that the Dems have "missed" in terms of political leanings was Whizzer White, by JFK.