PDA

View Full Version : The new civil war




Anti Federalist
04-08-2018, 11:56 AM
The author is right, there is no solving this politically.

His solution is simple: eliminate any competition and establish one party authoritarianism.

Very effective.

And he will get his wish this fall. The House, the Senate and many state governments, including NH's, will flip decisively toward progressive authoritarianism.



The Great Lesson of California in America’s New Civil War

https://medium.com/s/state-of-the-future/the-great-lesson-of-california-in-americas-new-civil-war-e52e2861f30

Why there’s no bipartisan way forward at this juncture in our history — one side must win

By Peter Leyden and Ruy Teixeira

The next time you call for bipartisan cooperation in America and long for Republicans and Democrats to work side by side, stop it. Remember the great lesson of California, the harbinger of America’s political future, and realize that today such bipartisan cooperation simply can’t get done.

In this current period of American politics, at this juncture in our history, there’s no way that a bipartisan path provides the way forward. The way forward is on the path California blazed about 15 years ago.

In the early 2000s, California faced a similar situation to the one America faces today. Its state politics were severely polarized, and state government was largely paralyzed. The Republican Party was trapped in the brain-dead orthodoxies of an ideology stuck in the past. The party was controlled by zealous activists and corrupt special interests who refused to face up to the reality of the new century. It was a party that refused to work with the Democrats in good faith or compromise in any way.

The solution for the people of California was to reconfigure the political landscape and shift a supermajority of citizens — and by extension their elected officials — under the Democratic Party’s big tent. The natural continuum of more progressive to more moderate solutions then got worked out within the context of the only remaining functioning party. The California Democrats actually cared about average citizens, embraced the inevitable diversity of 21st-century society, weren’t afraid of real innovation, and were ready to start solving the many challenges of our time, including climate change.

California today provides a model for America as a whole. This model of politics and government is by no means perfect, but it is far ahead of the nation in coming to terms with the inexorable digital, global, sustainable transformation of our era. It is a thriving work in progress that gives hope that America can pull out of the political mess we’re in. California today provides a playbook for America’s new way forward. It’s worth contemplating as we enter 2018, which will be a critical election year.

Understanding the Context of the New American Civil War

This is no ordinary political moment. Trump is not the reason this is no ordinary time — he’s simply the most obvious symptom that reminds us all of this each day.

The best way to understand politics in America today is to reframe it as closer to civil war. Just the phrase “civil war” is harsh, and many people may cringe. It brings up images of guns and death, the bodies of Union and Confederate soldiers.

America today is nowhere near that level of conflict or at risk of such violence. However, America today does exhibit some of the core elements that move a society from what normally is the process of working out political differences toward the slippery slope of civil war. We’ve seen it in many societies in many previous historical eras, including what happened in the United States in 1860.

Two Systems at Odds

America’s original Civil War was not just fought to emancipate slaves for humanitarian reasons. The conflict was really about the clash between two very different economic systems that were fundamentally at odds and ultimately could not coexist. The Confederacy was based on an agrarian economy dependent on slaves. The Union was based on a new kind of capitalist manufacturing economy dependent on free labor. They tried to somehow coexist from the time of the founding era, but by the middle of the 19th century, something had to give. One side or the other had to win.

America today faces a similar juncture around fundamentally incompatible energy systems. The red states held by the Republicans are deeply entrenched in carbon-based energy systems like coal and oil. They consequently deny the science of climate change, are trying to resuscitate the dying coal industry, and recently have begun to open up coastal waters to oil drilling.

The blue states held by the Democrats are increasingly shifting to clean energy like solar and installing policies that wean the energy system off carbon. In the era of climate change, with the mounting pressure of increased natural disasters, something must give. We can’t have one step forward, one step back every time an administration changes. One side or the other has to win.

Two Classes at Odds

Another driver on the road to civil war is when two classes become fundamentally at odds. This usually takes some form of rich versus poor, the wealthy and the people, the 1 percent and the 99 percent. The system gets so skewed toward those at the top that the majority at the bottom rises up and power shifts.

The last time America was in that position was in the 1930s, during the Great Depression. We were on the road of severe class conflict that could have continued toward civil war, but we worked out a power shift that prevented widespread violence. Franklin Roosevelt, the so-called traitor to his class, helped establish a supermajority New Deal coalition of Democrats that rolled all the way through the postwar boom. The conservative Republicans who had championed a politics that advantaged the rich throughout the 1920s and promoted isolationism in the 1930s were sidelined for two generations — close to 50 years.

Today’s conservative Republicans face the same risk. Since 1980, their policies have engorged the rich while flatlining the incomes of the majority of Americans, from the presidency of Ronald Reagan through to last December’s tax overhaul, which ultimately bestows 83 percent of the benefits over time to the top 1 percent. Make no mistake: A reckoning with not just Trump, but conservatism, is coming.

Two Cultures at Odds

The differences between two economic systems or two classes that are fundamentally at odds could conceivably get worked out through a political process that peacefully resolves differences. However, culture frequently gets in the way. That’s especially true when pressures are building for big system overhauls that will create new winners and losers.

Two different political cultures already at odds through different political ideologies, philosophies, and worldviews can get trapped in a polarizing process that increasingly undermines compromise. They see the world through different lenses, consume different media, and literally live in different places. They start to misunderstand the other side, then start to misrepresent them, and eventually make them the enemy. The opportunity for compromise is then lost. This is where America is today.

At some point, one side or the other must win — and win big. The side resisting change, usually the one most rooted in the past systems and incumbent interests, must be thoroughly defeated — not just for a political cycle or two, but for a generation or two. That gives the winning party or movement the time and space needed to really build up the next system without always fighting rear-guard actions and getting drawn backwards. The losing party or movement will need that same time to go through a fundamental rethink, a long-term renewal that eventually will enable them to play a new game.

Today’s American Civil War

Trump is doing exactly what America needs him to do right now. He’s becoming increasingly conservative and outrageous by the day. Trump could have come into office with a genuinely new agenda that could have helped working people. Instead, he has spent the past year becoming a caricature of all things conservative — and in the meantime has alienated most of America and certainly all the growing political constituencies of the 21st century. He is turning the Republican brand toxic for millennials, women, Latinos, people of color, college-educated people, urban centers, the tech industry, and the economic powerhouses of the coasts, to name a few.

The Republican Party is playing their part perfectly, too. They completely fell for the Trump trap — and that’s exactly what America needed them to do. The Republican Party could have maintained some distance from Trump and kept a healthy check on him through Congress. Instead, they fully embraced him in a group bear hug that culminated in a deeply flawed tax law in the waning days of 2017. This mess of a law, thrown together without traditional vetting, is riddled with outrageous loopholes that benefit the crony donor class and line the pockets of many of the politicians who passed it. The law is hugely unpopular, and everyone who voted for it is marked for the election of 2018.

Perfect.

Now the entire Republican Party, and the entire conservative movement that has controlled it for the past four decades, is fully positioned for the final takedown that will cast them out for a long period of time in the political wilderness. They deserve it.

Let’s just say what needs to be said: The Republican Party over the past 40 years has maneuvered itself into a position where they are the bad guys on the wrong side of history. For a long time, they have been able to hide this fact through a sophisticated series of veils, invoking cultural voodoo that fools a large enough number of Americans to stay in the game. However, Donald Trump has laid waste to that sophistication and has given America and the world the raw version of what current conservative politics is all about.

The Republican Party is all about rule by and for billionaires at the expense of working people. Trump is literally the incarnation of what the party stands for: shaping laws for the good of billionaires and the 1 percent. His cabinet is stuffed with them.

The Republican Party is the party of climate change denial. Trump is the denier-in-chief, but there are 180 climate science deniers in the current Congress (142 in the House and 38 in the Senate), and none of them are Democrats. More than 59 percent of Republicans in the House and 73 percent of Republicans in the Senate deny the scientific consensus that climate change is happening, that human activity is the main cause, and that it is a serious threat. Another way to say it is that the Republican Party is in the pocket of the oil and carbon energy industry. Trump just cut through the crap and named Exxon’s CEO as our secretary of state to unravel the United Nations climate accords. No beating around that bush for the sake of appearances — Trump burned the bush down.

The Republican Party for the past 40 years has mastered using dog whistles to gin up racial divides to get their white voters to the polls. Trump just disposes of niceties and flatly encourages white nationalists, bans Muslims, walls off Mexicans, and calls out “shithole” countries.

Trump is just making clear to all what was boiling under the surface for decades, and that’s exactly what we need him to do. Why? Because America finally needs to take the Republican Party down for a generation or two. Not just the presidency. Not just clear out the U.S. House. Not just tip back the Senate. But fundamentally beat the Republicans on all levels at once, including clearing out governorships and statehouses across the land.

The Dramatic Collapse of Republicans in California

Could such as collapse of the Republican Party really happen? Won’t it take decades of trench warfare to put the GOP on the run? Not at all. A political collapse could happen very fast, as it did in California.

California was a model of governmental dysfunction in the 1990–2005 period, with Democrats and Republicans at each other’s throats and little being accomplished. The political atmosphere became so toxic that Democratic governor Gray Davis was recalled in 2003 and replaced with populist Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger, who then proceeded to up the ante on polarization by pushing a series of conservative ballot initiatives in a special election in 2005.

They were all handily defeated by the voters, marking the zenith of conservative Republican attempts to control California.

After that point, it was all downhill for the conservative GOP agenda in California. Schwarzenegger understood the sea change early and dumped right-wing populism and became far more moderate, going along with many progressive priorities. He soon started working with Democrats in the legislature on infrastructure, culminating in the passage of Proposition 1B in 2006 ($20 billion for roads and public transportation). Also in 2006, he and the legislature allocated an additional $150 million to stem cell research, supported a successful move to raise the minimum wage, and passed the Global Warming Solutions Act, which targeted a reduction of 25 percent in greenhouse gas emissions in the next 20 years. And in 2008, voters passed Prop 1A, authorizing $10 billion for high-speed rail.

Meanwhile, even though Schwarzenegger remained governor, the Democrats steadily expanded their majority in the state assembly. Then, in 2010, Democrat Jerry Brown was elected governor, and with the 2012 election, Democrats finally attained a supermajority in both houses of the state legislature. This was critical for overriding constant Republican filibusters and passing tax revenue laws (which still required a supermajority by Prop 13 dictates). The supermajority attained in 2012 was the first California legislative supermajority since 1933 and the first one for the Democrats since 1883. This is remarkable considering that in the dysfunctional 1990s, the state assembly and senate were closely divided between Republicans and Democrats, seemingly light-years away from the supermajority Democrats really needed to get things done.

Alongside these developments, Democratic domination of California representation in the U.S. House of Representatives steadily increased. Back in the 1990s, under Republican governor Pete Wilson, there was essentially parity between Republicans and Democrats in Congress. Today, there is almost a 3:1 split (39–14) in favor of the Democrats. Plus, they control both U.S. Senate seats and every single statewide elected office. There are no longer any
Republicans able to mount a credible statewide election.

So, going from the zenith of right-wing populism to progressive domination in California did not take very long. That could easily happen in the country as a whole. The national GOP, after the 2016 election, controlled the presidency, the House, the Senate, and a strong majority of governorships and state legislatures. Since then, President Trump has become historically unpopular among American voters and the GOP Congress and its actions have become widely detested. Very quickly, their 2016 triumphs have morphed into a poisonous electoral environment where the GOP in 2018 is probably going to lose control of the House of Representatives and possibly the Senate, lose governorships and many hundreds of state legislative seats. And while the 2020 election is still a couple years away, an early forecast from political scientist Eric R.A.N. Smith has Trump (assuming his unpopularity continues) netting only

41 percent of electoral votes in that election.

In short, political change is slow until it’s very fast. The fall of the GOP is likely to be no different.

Life on the Other Side of Democratic One-Party Rule

There is life on the other side of that Republican political collapse. There is a clear way forward in the land of Democratic, progressive supermajorities. California is thriving right now, the economy is booming, state government budgets are setting aside surpluses, and the public is happy with its political leaders (as we have laid out in other articles in this series). California is leading the world in technological innovation and creative policies to counter climate change.

What about the need for checks and balances? Many Americans might be wary of trusting a political environment where one party has complete control of political power. How does society process the range of differences in political opinions in elections and in forming policies?

Californians faced those same questions and dealt with that new reality. In 2008, voters passed Proposition 11, which created a Citizens Redistricting Commission to redraw state legislative districts that over time had been heavily gerrymandered to protect incumbents of both political parties. That commission was insulated from politics and changed districts along more rational lines that took into consideration natural geography and longstanding contiguous communities. Then, in 2010, the voters passed Proposition 20, which applied a similar logic to congressional redistricting.

Alongside that effort, voters in 2010 also passed Proposition 14, a state constitutional amendment that established a top-two primary system in which all candidates, regardless of party, are placed on the same primary ballot, and the top two vote-getters, regardless of party, head into the general election. The immediate result was to bolster competition within almost all districts. In a district populated by Democrats, the voters still got a choice between, say, a more progressive candidate and a moderate candidate.

Politics in California today still has a range of political differences that get worked out within political bodies. The city council of San Francisco is made up of all Democrats but is often trapped in fierce policy battles between supervisors who are more left of center than their colleagues who are more moderate and supportive of the tech industry. However, everyone on that city council is a Democrat and would be considered a progressive Democrat in the national context. They all embrace creating a diverse society, fighting climate change, etc. The California Legislature holds a similar range of political opinions, from very left to pro-business Democrat, but they almost all operate within a worldview that shares much common ground — a worldview that is not shared by the few remaining Republicans still in the chambers.

In short, California has a supermajority of 60 percent of the population, and thus a supermajority of elected officials, who share a common vision of a general way forward. Their differences are worked out within the confines of that general vision. California Republicans, like their conservative national colleagues, don’t share that general vision, and so they have been pushed out of serious political discourse. They were beaten, and beaten badly. And they almost certainly won’t be part of that discourse until they go through a lengthy process of reform over many years.

The Final Battle Begins in 2018

America is desperate for a functioning political supermajority that can break out of our political stasis and boldly move ahead and take on our many 21st-century challenges. The nation can’t take much more of our one step forward, one step back politics that gets little done despite the need for massive changes.

America today has many parallels to America in the 1850s or America in the 1930s. Both of those decades ended with one side definitively winning, forming a political supermajority that restructured systems going forward to solve our problems once and for all. In the 1850s, we fought the Civil War, and the Republican Party won and then dominated American politics for 50 years. In the 1930s, the Democratic Party won and dominated American politics for roughly the same amount of time.

America today is in a similar position. Our technologies, our economy, our geopolitics are going through fundamental changes. We are facing new challenges, like climate change and massive economic inequality, that must be addressed with fundamental reforms.

America can’t afford more political paralysis. One side or the other must win. This is a civil war that can be won without firing a shot. But it is a fundamental conflict between two worldviews that must be resolved in short order.

California, as usual, resolved it early. The Democrats won; the Republicans lost. The conservative way forward lost; the progressive way forward began. As we’ve laid out in this series, California is the future, always about 15 years ahead of the rest of the country. That means that America, starting in 2018, is going to resolve it, too.

oyarde
04-08-2018, 12:24 PM
Consider that california is a failed state and will never recover .

spudea
04-08-2018, 12:48 PM
typical elitist attitude. meanwhile California dams are breaking, still don't have high speed rail after 20 years of planning and billions down the drain, homeless tent cities, income inequality near highest in the nation, net emigration fleeing to states like Texas.

Anti Federalist
04-08-2018, 12:58 PM
typical elitist attitude. meanwhile California dams are breaking, still don't have high speed rail after 20 years of planning and billions down the drain, homeless tent cities, income inequality near highest in the nation, net emigration fleeing to states like Texas.

I suggest we adopt the same idea.

One party rule, without the authoritarianism.

Seize freedom and to hell with the rest of statists.

Swordsmyth
04-08-2018, 01:11 PM
I suggest we adopt the same idea.

One party rule, without the authoritarianism.

Seize freedom and to hell with the rest of statists.

We will have multiple parties, libertarians can't agree on much of anything.

phill4paul
04-08-2018, 01:20 PM
I suggest we adopt the same idea.

One party rule, without the authoritarianism.

Seize freedom and to hell with the rest of statists.

All ten of us will have the best party ever. Freedom is not popular.

tod evans
04-08-2018, 01:46 PM
income inequality

Puke!

Swordsmyth
04-08-2018, 02:13 PM
The chief executive officer of Twitter, one of the big social media titans, has declared on his own Twitter account that a long, grotesque screed about driving Republicans from public life and turning the whole political configuration of the U.S. into California is a "great read (https://twitter.com/jack/status/982096889930657792)." One of his board members thought so, too, tweeting it first and calling it "interesting (https://twitter.com/ev/status/980992737133568000)."

This from the guy who claims that his social media site is non-partisan and wouldn't dream of censoring others.
It rather goes beyond the realm of one man's opinion in his case. What we are seeing here is a mask coming off, a social media titan vowing that his agenda is to eliminate an entire side of the political spectrum, and Twitter finally admitting that it's an operation all about actively promoting left-wingery, as the continuous bans and shadow-bans of conservatives show.

More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-08/twitter-ceo-endorses-leftist-blueprint-drive-conservatives-public-life

Origanalist
04-08-2018, 02:16 PM
Puke!

Where's muh equality??????!!!!

Anti Globalist
04-08-2018, 05:09 PM
California just becomes more embarrassing by the minute. Only good thing they have going for them is the good weather they have year round.

Raginfridus
04-08-2018, 05:19 PM
All ten of us will have the best party ever. Freedom is not popular.

There must be a thousand of us somewhere...

Anti Federalist
04-08-2018, 05:53 PM
All ten of us will have the best party ever. Freedom is not popular.

I reckon there is not one in a hundred of "us" among the general population.

That's 3.3 million people.

That could fuck up a lot of shit.

Anti Federalist
04-09-2018, 11:37 AM
The model Uni-Party state is now proposing that all online content be "approved" by state "fact checkers" before being posted. (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?521181-It-Begins-California-Senator-Introduces-Bill-to-Kill-Free-Speech-Requires-State-Sanctioned-F)

Brian4Liberty
04-09-2018, 12:29 PM
The solution for the people of California was to reconfigure the political landscape and shift a supermajority of citizens ...

...via immigration.


The California Democrats actually cared about average citizens,

It is hard to be more blind, deluded and delusional than that.

wizardwatson
04-09-2018, 01:10 PM
This authors great insight is that "like the civil war was about economics", aka slave dependent vs. not, the current economic underlying reality is about coal/oil vs. solar/wind? That's what's tearing us apart? LOL

He does point out a real problem though, albeit ironically. A real problem we have is over-educated pseudo intellectuals who are gatekeepers for the status quo who understand $%@-all about economics.

Brian4Liberty
04-11-2018, 10:56 AM
There is a clear way forward in the land of Democratic, progressive supermajorities. California is thriving right now, the economy is booming, state government budgets are setting aside surpluses, and the public is happy with its political leaders (as we have laid out in other articles in this series). California is leading the world in technological innovation and creative policies to counter climate change.

I, for one, welcome our new Big Mother overlords.

acptulsa
04-11-2018, 11:11 AM
Today’s conservative Republicans face the same risk. Since 1980, their policies have engorged the rich while flatlining the incomes of the majority of Americans, from the presidency of Ronald Reagan through to last December’s tax overhaul, which ultimately bestows 83 percent of the benefits over time to the top 1 percent. Make no mistake: A reckoning with not just Trump, but conservatism, is coming.

Is that really the whole point of this goofy screed? Is he really just in this to try to stick the genie back in the bottle, and pretend that Democrat politicians are on the side of the lower classes? What about the regulations that favor corporations and stifle small business? What about Solyndra, the poster child for Democratic Party corruption? What about the liberal fascination for fiat money, and the harm it has done to us all? Does he really expect us to believe that both parties' shit doesn't stink?


And in 2008, voters passed Prop 1A, authorizing $10 billion for high-speed rail.

Oh, here we go. Yes, we should all praise this boondoggle from hell. Because when it breaks California's budget irreparably and still isn't up and running, maybe we will get some relief from these tools holding the Land of Fruits and Nuts up as something we should all aspire to emulate.

At the end of the day, when the Establishment is fomenting a civil war, they can only have a totalitarian regime as their goal. And We, the People had better open up lines of communication with each other quick, or we will give them the very victory over us that they seek.

Anti Federalist
04-11-2018, 11:42 AM
And We, the People had better open up lines of communication with each other quick, or we will give them the very victory over us that they seek.

How?

Honest question, no snark, no bullshit.

Just how are "we" supposed to do that, when every effort to promote freedom, property and individual liberty is rebuffed and rejected out of hand, at every turn, over and over and over again, by the vast, vast majority of our fellow citizens?

Like a bad relationship, would it not be better to just walk away?

fisharmor
04-11-2018, 11:47 AM
We will have multiple parties, libertarians can't agree on much of anything.
Oh, but we can. It just depends on how you define "libertarian", and how you phrase the question we're supposed to be agreeing on.

Libertarians as I understand them, those interested in maximizing liberty in our lives, phrase the fundamental question in this way:
"For what reasons am I willing to take responsibility for ending the life of my neighbor?"

I don't think anyone should be surprised that a lot of people calling themselves libertarian would immediately and without much consideration, categorically reject the idea of taking responsibility for ending the lives of people who refuse to finance the forcible ejection of nonviolent, unconvicted, and even unaccused people from a particular geographical area.

That is but one example.

Here's another.

I don't think anyone should be surprised when libertarian men and women of principle encounter shrieking, appeal to emotion arguments in favor of killing those who don't want to finance said programs, and, immediately and without much consideration, denounce such calls for violent political action as the same, old, tired, abject bullshit that got us to this point.

I think quite a lot of us agree that Tammany Hall nonsense - using groups of people as props to cement power, and never really getting to the "liberty" bit - is not the way forward.

I think most of us are laughing openly at those who actually thought things were going to be different with Trump. I think most of us recognize those who supported him as hopeless cases, and that until those people end their recalcitrance and ask forgiveness for doing so, they can expect to continue to be called out.

I think quite a lot of libertarians know that the political reindeer games stand zero chance of getting us any net increase in liberty, until a massive education campaign takes place (and is allowed to continue). I think a lot of us don't give a flying fuck whether pseudolibertarians make fun of our noses and refuse to let us play those games. We don't even want to.

I think a lot of us still believe that if liberty isn't popular, it's only because nobody is selling it. I think a lot of us realize we're holding all the cards right now. I think as soon as all the AntiFederalists and Phil4Pauls in the US recognize we hold all the cards, we might be able to get all these ridiculous pseudolibertarians to shut the fuck up and listen to how the game is going to be played, and that it's going to involve not playing at all.

acptulsa
04-11-2018, 11:58 AM
How?

Honest question, no snark, no bull$#@!.

Just how are "we" supposed to do that, when every effort to promote freedom, property and individual liberty is rebuffed and rejected out of hand, at every turn, over and over and over again, by the vast, vast majority of our fellow citizens?

Like a bad relationship, would it not be better to just walk away?

The first step is to realize that the shrieking we are hearing is not the people, it's the astroturf. Just as the media was given to the Establishment, the internet has now been given to the Astroturf. We, the People have no accurate gauge of what We, the People are thinking. Yes, many people are susceptible enough to such herd tactics, and little enough able to think for themselves, that they will hold the opinions they hear the most. But now that the Internet Revolution has been Irrevocably Tamed, the Great Silent Majority is more silent than ever. We are not finding a way to gauge how effective we are. But that does not mean we aren't being effective.

You cannot offer me solid proof that our ideas actually were rebuffed out of hand. You cannot offer yourself solid proof of it.

It may take a measure of faith to keep on keeping on. But that is what must be done.

Anti Federalist
04-11-2018, 12:30 PM
The first step is to realize that the shrieking we are hearing is not the people, it's the astroturf. Just as the media was given to the Establishment, the internet has now been given to the Astroturf. We, the People have no accurate gauge of what We, the People are thinking. Yes, many people are susceptible enough to such herd tactics, and little enough able to think for themselves, that they will hold the opinions they hear the most. But now that the Internet Revolution has been Irrevocably Tamed, the Great Silent Majority is more silent than ever. We are not finding a way to gauge how effective we are. But that does not mean we aren't being effective.

You cannot offer me solid proof that our ideas actually were rebuffed out of hand. You cannot offer yourself solid proof of it.

It may take a measure of faith to keep on keeping on. But that is what must be done.

https://media1.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2018_04/2307901/data_download_1_2018_01_28_8d51dcd05dff87c44759fb0 fe2050ed1.fit-560w.jpg

https://media4.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2018_04/2307906/data_download_3_2018_01_28_1d5800a85612fdaf57bf740 53a77deee.fit-560w.jpg

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/poll-americans-want-government-do-more-n841731

acptulsa
04-11-2018, 12:49 PM
https://media1.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2018_04/2307901/data_download_1_2018_01_28_8d51dcd05dff87c44759fb0 fe2050ed1.fit-560w.jpg

https://media4.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2018_04/2307906/data_download_3_2018_01_28_1d5800a85612fdaf57bf740 53a77deee.fit-560w.jpg

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/poll-americans-want-government-do-more-n841731

It would be fun to pick apart the methodology used in this poll. But there's a hitch. The methodology doesn't seem to be available.

Maybe if I was on the computer there would be a link to the analytics. But as it is, I have nothing to go on but NBC's and Murdoch's reputations.

I still say we don't know where we stand. But I do know this. If good news ever does come our way, we won't hear it from the smirking lips of Chuck Todd.

Hell, just the vagueness of the question is enough to lead me to dismiss this poll. Where is the poll that asks questions like these?

Should the government do less in Syria so it can do more for domestic infrastructure?

Should the federal government do less--and tax less--so state governments can do more?

If government could reduce inflation by doing more or by doing less, which tack should it take?

Ask questions like that, and see what you get.

pcosmar
04-11-2018, 01:08 PM
Puke!

Inequity hmm,,

and here I am learning to be very comfortably homeless...

And I'm pretty sure it was Gun Control hindering my employment..

Just try arguing that case some time.. and both sides jump ya.

fisharmor
04-11-2018, 02:05 PM
https://media1.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2018_04/2307901/data_download_1_2018_01_28_8d51dcd05dff87c44759fb0 fe2050ed1.fit-560w.jpg
https://media4.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2018_04/2307906/data_download_3_2018_01_28_1d5800a85612fdaf57bf740 53a77deee.fit-560w.jpg

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/poll-americans-want-government-do-more-n841731

Go to any black person, at random, and ask the following:

"If we had a court system that had fewer laws but you knew black people had equal access to justice, would you support that idea?"

Or maybe

"Would you give up affirmative action programs in exchange for a legal system that never targeted black people, trapped them in the system, and forced them to comply with ridiculous courses and fees?"

Does anyone doubt what answer we'd get? I'm not talking about the rabble-rousing chair of the African studies department at your local community college: I'm talking about the 27 year old college dropout with dreds who is working at Jiffy Lube.
You know, the guy that African Studies professor claims to speak for.

That's literally all the education program would need to do. Two years of community outreach, talking to black people about this sort of thing, and that 75% would plummet to about 20. And it would only be that high because we wouldn't convince the African Studies professors to end their gravy train.

The smartest thing the liberty crowd could do is figure out a way to pay Eric July to go door-to-door.

Swordsmyth
04-11-2018, 02:11 PM
Go to any black person, at random, and ask the following:

"If we had a court system that had fewer laws but you knew black people had equal access to justice, would you support that idea?"

Or maybe

"Would you give up affirmative action programs in exchange for a legal system that never targeted black people, trapped them in the system, and forced them to comply with ridiculous courses and fees?"

Does anyone doubt what answer we'd get? I'm not talking about the rabble-rousing chair of the African studies department at your local community college: I'm talking about the 27 year old college dropout with dreds who is working at Jiffy Lube.
You know, the guy that African Studies professor claims to speak for.

That's literally all the education program would need to do. Two years of community outreach, talking to black people about this sort of thing, and that 75% would plummet to about 20. And it would only be that high because we wouldn't convince the African Studies professors to end their gravy train.

The smartest thing the liberty crowd could do is figure out a way to pay Eric July to go door-to-door.

Muh reparations and Muh welfare has too strong of a hold on their minds.
Immigrants from socialist countries are just as bad.

acptulsa
04-11-2018, 02:28 PM
Muh reparations and Muh welfare has too strong of a hold on their minds.

Oh? And what percentage said so in your poll? Was this a phone poll? Landlines only? How does it break down demographically? What is the margin of error? How many participants? Did you collect data on age, income and affiliation? How many states did you poll?

Have you ever talked to either a Californian or a black person in your life?

Swordsmyth
04-11-2018, 02:32 PM
Oh? And what percentage said so in your poll? Was this a phone poll? Landlines only? How does it break down demographically? What is the margin of error? How many participants? Did you collect data on age, income and affiliation? How many states did you poll?
I'll answer that when Fishy backs up his post with statistics, if you want to evangelize minorities and immigrants with libertarian philosophy be my guest, let me know when black stop voting Demoncrat at a 90%+ rate, if you can pull it off we might get some LP candidates elected.
I have more productive things to do.

Ender
04-11-2018, 02:40 PM
Go to any black person, at random, and ask the following:

"If we had a court system that had fewer laws but you knew black people had equal access to justice, would you support that idea?"

Or maybe

"Would you give up affirmative action programs in exchange for a legal system that never targeted black people, trapped them in the system, and forced them to comply with ridiculous courses and fees?"

Does anyone doubt what answer we'd get? I'm not talking about the rabble-rousing chair of the African studies department at your local community college: I'm talking about the 27 year old college dropout with dreds who is working at Jiffy Lube.
You know, the guy that African Studies professor claims to speak for.

That's literally all the education program would need to do. Two years of community outreach, talking to black people about this sort of thing, and that 75% would plummet to about 20. And it would only be that high because we wouldn't convince the African Studies professors to end their gravy train.

The smartest thing the liberty crowd could do is figure out a way to pay Eric July to go door-to-door.

I don't know any black person that wouldn't say "Hell, yea!" to your questions- just as I don't know any Mexican that's not a hard worker.

And, I'm from California, that, contrary to forum belief, is not filled with lazy immigrants who want to take over the nation and have everyone feed them. Cali has been grabbed by the political PTB and has been used to lead the nation towards more handouts & socialism. Still, most people I personally know there do NOT want this- they are just stuck on WTH to do- especially since it is so expensive in the cities and you have to work 24/7 just to pay rent.

Anti Federalist
04-11-2018, 03:47 PM
I don't know any black person that wouldn't say "Hell, yea!" to your questions- just as I don't know any Mexican that's not a hard worker.

And, I'm from California, that, contrary to forum belief, is not filled with lazy immigrants who want to take over the nation and have everyone feed them. Cali has been grabbed by the political PTB and has been used to lead the nation towards more handouts & socialism. Still, most people I personally know there do NOT want this- they are just stuck on WTH to do- especially since it is so expensive in the cities and you have to work 24/7 just to pay rent.

So who is voting for these super majorities in California?

Should I accept the premise that voting and polling is utterly and totally rigged and not to be believed in any way?

And again, I'm not trying to be snarky or shitty, these are honest questions.

I have made my stand very clear: freedom is not popular and most people do not want it and will actively fight against your efforts to achieve it.

I can back that up with 50 years of polling and voting to prove it.

The only liberty that has taken root and managed to withstand the winds and storms that rage against it are gun rights.

I have stated numerous times, the liberty movement should adopt the same tactics and models for all the rest of our rights as well.

But if I am wrong about that, convince me, prove me wrong, show me I am being too harsh and cynical, that the population across the board is anxious and willing to adopt freedom and liberty and limited government and is just waiting for the chance.

I am, quite frankly, hoping you can do it.

Ender
04-11-2018, 07:17 PM
So who is voting for these super majorities in California?

Should I accept the premise that voting and polling is utterly and totally rigged and not to be believed in any way?

And again, I'm not trying to be snarky or $#@!ty, these are honest questions.

I have made my stand very clear: freedom is not popular and most people do not want it and will actively fight against your efforts to achieve it.

I can back that up with 50 years of polling and voting to prove it.

The only liberty that has taken root and managed to withstand the winds and storms that rage against it are gun rights.

I have stated numerous times, the liberty movement should adopt the same tactics and models for all the rest of our rights as well.

But if I am wrong about that, convince me, prove me wrong, show me I am being too harsh and cynical, that the population across the board is anxious and willing to adopt freedom and liberty and limited government and is just waiting for the chance.

I am, quite frankly, hoping you can do it.

I believe the day before the Hildago treaty was signed, ending the Mexican American War, gold was discovered. California was not heavily populated at the time but gold & railroads changed that. This changed the whole scope of California to the feds and made it their go-to place for experimenting on the locals and issuing in Big Gov in the West and later to compliment the freedoms lost from the Civil War.

Nowadays, many people don't vote because they feel like it doesn't count.

I also think that much of the voting/polling shite comes from government education, not a persons ethnic background. The schools were formed for this very reason & if we want to break out of the Matrix, the first thing we have to do is get gov out of education. Because of this "schooling" many people think they are supporting "Americanism" by following the public school rulebook.

I'm not sure about Cali but when Utah territory was taken over by the feds, the people were forced into gov schools to become "un"doctrinated.

A lot of young people in the west were beginning to wake up with Ron Paul & I think they would welcome real freedom.

Swordsmyth
04-11-2018, 07:23 PM
I believe the day before the Hildago treaty was signed, ending the Mexican American War, gold was discovered. California was not heavily populated at the time but gold & railroads changed that. This changed the whole scope of California to the feds and made it their go-to place for experimenting on the locals and issuing in Big Gov in the West and later to compliment the freedoms lost from the Civil War.

Nowadays, many people don't vote because they feel like it doesn't count.

I also think that much of the voting/polling $#@!e comes from government education, not a persons ethnic background. The schools were formed for this very reason & if we want to break out of the Matrix, the first thing we have to do is get gov out of education. Because of this "schooling" many people think they are supporting "Americanism" by following the public school rulebook.

I'm not sure about Cali but when Utah territory was taken over by the feds, the people were forced into gov schools to become "un"doctrinated.

A lot of young people in the west were beginning to wake up with Ron Paul & I think they would welcome real freedom.

We will never end public socialist education indoctrination by allowing in more socialists.