WWTBAM Bored

Small things sometimes matter, and [Susan] Collins is among the smallest of things in the political world. And yet, she helped me finally to accept what I had been denying. Her speech on the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh convinced me that the Republican Party now exists for one reason, and one reason only: for the exercise of raw political power, and not even for ends I would otherwise applaud or even support.

It was Collins, however, who made me realize that there would be no moderates to lead conservatives out of the rubble of the Trump era. Senator Jeff Flake is retiring and took a pass, and with all due respect to Senator Lisa Murkowski—who at least admitted that her “no” vote on cloture meant “no” rather than drag out the drama—she will not be the focus of a rejuvenated party.

As an aside, let me say that I have no love for the Democratic Party, which is torn between totalitarian instincts on one side and complete political malpractice on the other. As a newly minted independent, I will vote for Democrats and Republicans I think are decent and well-meaning people; if I move back home to Massachusetts, I could cast a ballot for Republican Governor Charlie Baker and Democratic Representative Joe Kennedy and not think twice about it.

But during the Kavanaugh dumpster fire, the performance of the Democratic Party—with some honorable exceptions like Senators Chris Coons, Sheldon Whitehouse, and Amy Klobuchar—was execrable. The Republicans, however, have now eclipsed the Democrats as a threat to the rule of law and to the constitutional norms of American society. They have become all about winning. Winning means not losing, and so instead of acting like a co-equal branch of government responsible for advice and consent, congressional Republicans now act like a parliamentary party facing the constant threat of a vote of no-confidence.

That it is necessary to place limitations, including self-limitations, on the exercise of power is—or was—a core belief among conservatives. No longer. Raw power, wielded so deftly by Senator Mitch McConnell, is exercised for its own sake, and by that I mean for the sake of fleecing gullible voters on hot-button social issues so that Republicans may stay in power. Politics is about the exercise of power. But the new Trumpist GOP is not exercising power in the pursuit of anything resembling principle, and certainly not for conservative or Republican principles.

A robust foreign policy? Not only have Republicans abandoned their claim to being the national-security party, they have managed to convince the party faithful that Russia—an avowed enemy that directly attacked our political institutions—is less of a threat than their neighbors who might be voting for Democrats. Respect for law enforcement? The GOP is backing Trump in attacks on the FBI and the entire intelligence community as Special Counsel Robert Mueller closes in on the web of lies, financial arrangements, and Russian entanglements known collectively as the Trump campaign.

And most important, on the rule of law, congressional Republicans have utterly collapsed. They have sold their souls, purely at Trump’s behest, living in fear of the dreaded primary challenges that would take them away from the Forbidden City and send them back home to the provinces. Yes, an anti-constitutional senator like Hirono is unnerving, but she’s a piker next to her Republican colleagues, who have completely reversed themselves on everything from the limits of executive power to the independence of the judiciary, all to serve their leader in a way that would make the most devoted cult follower of Kim Jong Un blush.

But whatever my concerns about liberals, the true authoritarian muscle is now being flexed by the GOP, in a kind of buzzy, steroidal McCarthyism that lacks even anti-communism as a central organizing principle. The Republican Party, which controls all three branches of government and yet is addicted to whining about its own victimhood, is now the party of situational ethics and moral relativism in the name of winning at all costs. So, I’m out. The Trumpers and the hucksters and the consultants and the hangers-on, like a colony of bees who exist only to sting and die, have swarmed together in a dangerous but suicidal cloud, and when that mindless hive finally extinguishes itself in a blaze of venom, there will be nothing left.

I think Trump has turned the Republican project that was conceptualized during the Reagan era as positive. Now it's we no longer have things to achieve. Here are the people I'm going to punish and get even with. Republicans don't like to talk about this, I think, but some of that radicalization happened after eight years of Barack Obama. Some of this is racial resentment. It's the sense that the information age has produced a gap between people with education and people who can manage in this 21st century economy and people who can't.

I think it's a combination of things. There was always a latent racial tension. There was always a latent class tension and a difficulty of dealing with, again, the elites, the intellectuals and so on. Trump really took that and ran and said everybody is against you. This is one of the reasons -- one thing that I think made Republicans and conservatives different from liberals in the '70s and '80s, we were the party of optimism. We didn't think of ourselves as victims. Now we are the party of eternal victimhood. Trump supporters are constantly complaining about how they're looked down upon, and they're forgotten, and nobody loves them enough. And I find that just amazing from people who control all the branches of government.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:I think the bat-phone is ringing off the hook again.

I first heard about this new focus group thing from bob-tel on the other thread. Now we have this one and aSSShole repeating it.

Now all of a sudden the repubs are all about getting POWER, and will do ANYTHING to gain power and rule over all of us. That's the newest sky-is-falling mantra that is being put out on the bat-phone for the denizens of the echo chamber. You will undoubtedly hear this from the useful idiot pundits on all the leftist media and websites.

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:I think the bat-phone is ringing off the hook again.

I first heard about this new focus group thing from bob-tel on the other thread. Now we have this one and aSSShole repeating it.

Now all of a sudden the repubs are all about getting POWER, and will do ANYTHING to gain power and rule over all of us. That's the newest sky-is-falling mantra that is being put out on the bat-phone for the denizens of the echo chamber. You will undoubtedly hear this from the useful idiot pundits on all the leftist media and websites.

Beebs and BiT have been saying for a while that what Republicans are doing is just fine because they have the power/are playing by the rules and if Democrats don't like what's happening, tough nougies.

Right now, a minority of this country is imposing policies that are opposed by the majority with ever-increasing vigor. That's not compatible with a healthy democracy. Either Republicans will dial themselves back voluntarily or the political blowback will be epic. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:I think the bat-phone is ringing off the hook again.

I first heard about this new focus group thing from bob-tel on the other thread. Now we have this one and aSSShole repeating it.

Now all of a sudden the repubs are all about getting POWER, and will do ANYTHING to gain power and rule over all of us. That's the newest sky-is-falling mantra that is being put out on the bat-phone for the denizens of the echo chamber. You will undoubtedly hear this from the useful idiot pundits on all the leftist media and websites.

Beebs and BiT have been saying for a while that what Republicans are doing is just fine because they have the power/are playing by the rules and if Democrats don't like what's happening, tough nougies.

Right now, a minority of this country is imposing policies that are opposed by the majority with ever-increasing vigor. That's not compatible with a healthy democracy. Either Republicans will dial themselves back voluntarily or the political blowback will be epic. --Bob

flockofseagulls104 wrote:https://www.walkawaycampaign.com/

https://walkawaymarch.com/

A few more are leaving the dem party

Bob Juch wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:https://www.walkawaycampaign.com/

https://walkawaymarch.com/

A few more are leaving the dem party

That is a Russian-run campaign.

The #WalkAway movement that began in May with hairstylist Brandon Straka explaining why he was leaving the Democratic Party has sprung into a national force, with tens of thousands of reformed, former Dems taking to social media to explain why they, too, think liberalism has gone off the deep end and why they, too, have turned the corner toward conservatism — or at least, toward free thought.

And apparently, liberals are beginning to shake in their boots about the growing effect of #WalkAway.

They need a counter-punch. And fast.

Enter CNN with this headline: “Russian bots are using #WalkAway to try to wound Dems in midterms.”

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Enter CNN with this headline: “Russian bots are using #WalkAway to try to wound Dems in midterms.”

silverscreenselect wrote:And finding one person who's willing to front for the "movement" doesn't make it an actual movement.

Estonut wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:And finding one person who's willing to front for the "movement" doesn't make it an actual movement.

How is this NOT what you, yourself, were doing with the Tom Nichols article?

[T]he four other evangelical moms standing around a kitchen island began to buzz with excitement. All of them go to similarly conservative churches in Dallas. All are longtime Republican voters, solely because they oppose abortion rights. Only one broke ranks to vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016. But this November, they have all decided to vote for Mr. O’Rourke, the Democratic upstart who is on the front line of trying to upend politics in deep-red Texas.

The women, who are all in their 30s, described Mr. O’Rourke as providing a stark moral contrast to Mr. Trump, whose policies and behavior they see as fundamentally anti-Christian, especially separating immigrant children from their parents at the border, banning many Muslim refugees and disrespecting women. “I care as much about babies at the border as I do about babies in the womb,” said Tess Clarke, one of Ms. Mooney’s friends, confessing that she was “mortified” at how she used to vote, because she had only considered abortion policy. “We’ve been asleep. Now, we’ve woke up.” When an older white evangelical man recently told her that she couldn’t be a Christian and vote for Mr. O’Rourke, Ms. Clarke was outraged.

Still, Ms. Mooney and her friends may represent an under-the-radar web of white, evangelical women in Texas whose vote in November may be more up for grabs than at any time in the recent past. They are angry with many of Mr. Trump’s policies, and frustrated because they feel their faith has been weaponized to support his agenda. Sarah Damoff, who is a court-appointed special advocate for children, voted a straight Republican ticket after Kermit Gosnell, a Pennsylvania physician, was indicted in 2011 for murdering babies born alive in botched abortions. But she was moved watching Mr. O’Rourke sit with migrant women separated from their children, and reflected on her own vulnerability growing up with a single mother who was blind. “How does my vote represent the little girl that I used to be?” she said. “The Republicans used to be the party of family, and morals and values, and now they are not.”

At times, however, their support feels hush-hush. A few of their other friends who support Mr. O’Rourke are married to men who support Mr. Cruz and have refused to let them speak about it publicly. One friend said she wanted to protect her marriage, and worried she’d be “crucified, burned at the stake” if people found out, Ms. Clarke said.

silverscreenselect wrote:Here are a few more, in BiT's backyard who are going to vote for his next Senator, Beto O'Rourke:

A few of their other friends who support Mr. O’Rourke are married to men who support Mr. Cruz and have refused to let them speak about it publicly.

silverscreenselect wrote:

Estonut wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:And finding one person who's willing to front for the "movement" doesn't make it an actual movement.

How is this NOT what you, yourself, were doing with the Tom Nichols article?

Because I've posted several similar articles in the past few months.

On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 @ 4:51 pm, silverscreenselect wrote:Anecdotes, especially carefully curated anecdotes, aren't a substitute for research and statistical studies.

Estonut wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:

Estonut wrote:How is this NOT what you, yourself, were doing with the Tom Nichols article?

Because I've posted several similar articles in the past few months.

On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 @ 4:51 pm, silverscreenselect wrote:Anecdotes, especially carefully curated anecdotes, aren't a substitute for research and statistical studies.

silverscreenselect wrote:

Estonut wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:Because I've posted several similar articles in the past few months.

On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 @ 4:51 pm, silverscreenselect wrote:Anecdotes, especially carefully curated anecdotes, aren't a substitute for research and statistical studies.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2 ... can-party/

There are plenty more studies like this.

Estonut wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:

Estonut wrote:

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2 ... can-party/

There are plenty more studies like this.

https://www.voterstudygroup.org/publica ... ty-hoppers

There are plenty more studies like this.

silverscreenselect wrote:https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2 ... can-party/

Brookings wrote:How can we explain what looks to be a long-term decline for the Republican brand? Age, for one thing. From the beginning of the Trump administration the oldest Americans, those aged 50 and over, have consistently given Trump his highest approval ratings while young people aged 18–29 have consistently given him his lowest approval ratings.

jarnon wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2 ... can-party/

Brookings wrote:How can we explain what looks to be a long-term decline for the Republican brand? Age, for one thing. From the beginning of the Trump administration the oldest Americans, those aged 50 and over, have consistently given Trump his highest approval ratings while young people aged 18–29 have consistently given him his lowest approval ratings.

If the Republican base is so much older, it will shrink as its oldest members die, maybe in greater numbers than they switch parties. (Democrats die too, but we keep on voting anyway! )

silverscreenselect wrote:

Estonut wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2 ... can-party/

There are plenty more studies like this.

https://www.voterstudygroup.org/publica ... ty-hoppers

There are plenty more studies like this.

Nowhere in your study does it mention the net number of voters who have switched parties. The Republican base is shrinking.

Estonut wrote: To my inferior intelligence, that means that, although many (13%) have switched parties in the last 5 years, the number in each party has remained roughly the same. How do you twist that sentence?

silverscreenselect wrote:

Estonut wrote: To my inferior intelligence, that means that, although many (13%) have switched parties in the last 5 years, the number in each party has remained roughly the same. How do you twist that sentence?

The only specific that I could find was a discussion of the vote in Virginia, where they said "The precinct-level results from Virginia’s 2017 gubernatorial election, for example, were highly correlated with the presidential results we saw in 2016."

So, I looked up the figures:

2016:

Clinton - 49.7%
Trump - 44.4% (remainder to third parties)

2017:

Northam (D) - 53.9%
Gillespie (R) - 45.0%

That's a gain for the Democrats of 3.5% in one year, even given the supposed tendency of Republicans to turn out in greater numbers for off-year elections. And that figure mirrors what fivethirtyeight is showing of a Democratic advantage of 8% currently in the generic vote. Due to gerrymandered districts, that may not translate as well in the total number of Congressional seats, but it's an indication of how the parties are faring.