Society The Donald J. Trump Show - 4 more years editions

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
61,508
56,783
Not only that obsessed about something they have no control over, none.
To be fair, the entire world has a vested interest in U.S. politics. As America goes, so goes the world. That being said, it's crazy to see people's over reactions. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of most of his policies as most of them are just same old establishment kicking the can down the road, but he's done some kickass stuff (land access) and as a fan of pure entertainment, he really is incredible.

People are kidding themselves if they think he's going to be remembered as the next Theodore Roosevelt, but he's also not running the country into the groun.
 

kneeblock

Drapetomaniac
Apr 18, 2015
12,433
22,931
To be fair, the entire world has a vested interest in U.S. politics. As America goes, so goes the world. That being said, it's crazy to see people's over reactions. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of most of his policies as most of them are just same old establishment kicking the can down the road, but he's done some kickass stuff (land access) and as a fan of pure entertainment, he really is incredible.

People are kidding themselves if they think he's going to be remembered as the next Theodore Roosevelt, but he's also not running the country into the groun.
I think you hit the nail on the head about Trumpito's entertainment value. He's really proof that despite the coiffed manners of past presidents, literally any moron could get up there and say whatever they want and our systems are set up so they can only minimally be restrained.

From a policy standpoint he's still not even close to as bad as Bush Jr. and in many ways is a weird hybrid of the worst of both Clinton and Reagan. His biggest flaw is he never really bought into the idea of being president and seeing the potential of the office. Too caught up in the performance of being powerful to actually know anything about wielding power and the lies and graft have been uniquely brazen. His policies have also been needlessly cruel, but that's not that different from the typical bootstraps GOP orthodoxy.

The thing about the US presidency is it functions rhetorically as much as materially. As you say, people around the world devote excessive amounts of energy to decoding American intentions in order to set their own policy. That's why his idiocy has been so actually damaging to various elements of the global order and I think it's something a lot of people don't really comprehend.

In many ways, I've welcomed his damage or rather his illumination of the various weak points in the order of things. The Democratic socialist movement that's developed arguably wouldn't have been possible if it had been a by the numbers liberal lulling people into slumber. The problem now is people have died and more people will die, so it's a lot less entertaining lately. Trolls can't really lead when the going gets tough. It's not what they're built for. What I'm most interested in is his post-presidential legacy, whether it's sooner or later. Will be continue to lead his troll army? What will they do? How will they eventually transform or disband? Will he continue to be a spanner in the works? If so, to what end?
 

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
61,508
56,783
The Democratic socialist movement that's developed arguably wouldn't have been possible if it had been a by the numbers liberal lulling people into slumber.
Just looking for some clarification, can you expand on this a little bit?
 

kneeblock

Drapetomaniac
Apr 18, 2015
12,433
22,931
Just looking for some clarification, can you expand on this a little bit?
I mean Trump's flouting of institutional norms has lain bare the fact that it doesn't matter if a guy smiles at you and uses lube if you don't want to be a bottom. Through his casual disregard of certain norms, he's exposed past failures to formally codify and limit power. These failures demonstrate how liberals talked about them and did little, mostly just offering empty rhetoric. Both the GOP and the Dems have been unabashed corporatists for their lifespan, but Trump just doesn't mince words about it whereas Dems often lull people with rhetorical gestures while still pursuing pro-corporatist policies. When Dems are in power you generally have to negotiate with them in incremental stages through their chosen institutions, but Republicans, and especially populists like Trump, arouse activists and lobbyists both for and against. That means the situation becomes ripe for both radical and reactionary politics to dominate the discourse. Bernie's ability to build a following is a function of harnessing that discourse and mapping it onto real circumstances in many people's everyday life. After his campaign ended, DSA saw a flood of sign-ups, though I'm still somewhat skeptical if that's the organization that will ever achieve electoral success, but I do like a lot of the work they're doing in local communities.

Now because there's a crisis, it matters a little less who's president for the purposes of movement building. There are plenty of people who will have motivations to directly address the state. It only matters at this point for technocratic reasons. The die is cast for the politics.
 

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
61,508
56,783
I mean Trump's flouting of institutional norms has lain bare the fact that it doesn't matter if a guy smiles at you and uses lube if you don't want to be a bottom. Through his casual disregard of certain norms, he's exposed past failures to formally codify and limit power. These failures demonstrate how liberals talked about them and did little, mostly just offering empty rhetoric. Both the GOP and the Dems have been unabashed corporatists for their lifespan, but Trump just doesn't mince words about it whereas Dems often lull people with rhetorical gestures while still pursuing pro-corporatist policies. When Dems are in power you generally have to negotiate with them in incremental stages through their chosen institutions, but Republicans, and especially populists like Trump, arouse activists and lobbyists both for and against. That means the situation becomes ripe for both radical and reactionary politics to dominate the discourse. Bernie's ability to build a following is a function of harnessing that discourse and mapping it onto real circumstances in many people's everyday life. After his campaign ended, DSA saw a flood of sign-ups, though I'm still somewhat skeptical if that's the organization that will ever achieve electoral success, but I do like a lot of the work they're doing in local communities.

Now because there's a crisis, it matters a little less who's president for the purposes of movement building. There are plenty of people who will have motivations to directly address the state. It only matters at this point for technocratic reasons. The die is cast for the politics.
What I honestly can't believe is how the voting public has just laid down and accepted the total screw job they were given by the DNC, I'm disappointed that Bernie, again, hasn't spoken out about it.
 

kneeblock

Drapetomaniac
Apr 18, 2015
12,433
22,931
What I honestly can't believe is how the voting public has just laid down and accepted the total screw job they were given by the DNC, I'm disappointed that Bernie, again, hasn't spoken out about it.
I don't really feel like it was a screw job. I think the mainstream democratic party is just better at institutional politics right now than the left flank. With time, the Left may get better, but the electoral process favors institutionalism, big spending, and cross-cutting demographics. Some of that could change eventually, but it would take years. The modern GOP coalitions were assembled over a 16 year period, but they're primed to blow once Trump's reign ends. The Democratic coalitions are more frayed now, but have basically been the same since 1976 and have aged poorly. I think because of the present crisis, coalitions may be a little less relevant come election time (if we have one) and things will be mostly decided based on perceived technical ability so everyone is falling in line on all sides to try to be part of whatever the apparatus is that arises to craft the eventual recovery.
 

kneeblock

Drapetomaniac
Apr 18, 2015
12,433
22,931
So why'd they change the rules several times to make sure Tulsi wouldn't be allowe to debate?
It's fairly common practice. The political parties have a number of mechanisms to narrow their debate field, once again all linked to fundraising which is a sure fire way to marginalize people who don't have broad corporate or other support. The party procedures change literally every election cycle, mostly engineered to help keep people with easy access to capital at the front of the political process. It's one of many reasons nothing changes until there's either serious campaign finance reform or a different approach to the nominating process. As it stands we can think of the debates as a corporate partnership between media industries and what you could call the political industrial complex, which includes the party leadership organs of both parties. The best way to think of debates is as Television shows featuring performers with the most sponsors, like most shows. Occasionally grass roots folks can break in, but it's a massive uphill slog. All of this needs to change.
 

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
61,508
56,783
It's fairly common practice. The political parties have a number of mechanisms to narrow their debate field, once again all linked to fundraising which is a sure fire way to marginalize people who don't have broad corporate or other support. The party procedures change literally every election cycle, mostly engineered to help keep people with easy access to capital at the front of the political process. It's one of many reasons nothing changes until there's either serious campaign finance reform or a different approach to the nominating process. As it stands we can think of the debates as a corporate partnership between media industries and what you could call the political industrial complex, which includes the party leadership organs of both parties. The best way to think of debates is as Television shows featuring performers with the most sponsors, like most shows. Occasionally grass roots folks can break in, but it's a massive uphill slog. All of this needs to change.
Out of curiosity, whom are you planning to vote for in the 2021 election?
 

kneeblock

Drapetomaniac
Apr 18, 2015
12,433
22,931
Out of curiosity, whom are you planning to vote for in the 2021 election?
Well, I'm hopeful the election will still be this year firstly. I'm voting for Biden, of course, mostly because from a technical standpoint, he and his people will be more efficient and effective at wielding the administrative state through this crisis. I don't really put a lot of stock in voting being some sacred moral process where we bring our ethics to the booth and shine as glistening exemplars of democracy. To me, voting is mostly about looking at the evidence and making an informed decision for which apparatus you want to deal with. The real politics happens between elections when we fight for the politics we believe in at both the local and national level. Bernie was a nice change of pace because he altered the discourse of what was politically possible and now that fight will have to continue in every city and state. With some luck and considered effort, people will be able to pivot from activism and electoralism to the much harder work of concrete policy planning and relentless advocacy.
 

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
61,508
56,783
Well, I'm hopeful the election will still be this year firstly. I'm voting for Biden, of course, mostly because from a technical standpoint, he and his people will be more efficient and effective at wielding the administrative state through this crisis. I don't really put a lot of stock in voting being some sacred moral process where we bring our ethics to the booth and shine as glistening exemplars of democracy. To me, voting is mostly about looking at the evidence and making an informed decision for which apparatus you want to deal with. The real politics happens between elections when we fight for the politics we believe in at both the local and national level. Bernie was a nice change of pace because he altered the discourse of what was politically possible and now that fight will have to continue in every city and state. With some luck and considered effort, people will be able to pivot from activism and electoralism to the much harder work of concrete policy planning and relentless advocacy.
A vote for Biden is a vote against everything Bernie tried to do. It's mind boggling to watch really smart people just vote for their team regardless how poor a decision it is.