General politics

[Badsmerf]

I agree. Those numbers are pretty dramatic in my mind. Over 10% losses in membership in about 20 years is a lot. Plus, these numbers are independent of people moving... since they aren't only talking about rural churches. This is membership nation wide and state wide. I consider religion as something passed down through generations, and the importance of church seems to be diminishing. People are more connected with the internet and finding sermons or podcasts they relate to is so easy. My wife listened to all of Rob bell's podcasts, and finds his teaching much better than our rural hard social conservative pastors in Iowa.

[ashbury]

The Pew studies show 7% in 7 years, you don't consider that pretty rapid?

No. Not from the standpoint of politics, which is the topic of this thread. It's a shift in how people may describe themselves. They're just a little mushier, with the decline in Christian affiliations being approximately matched by the increase in people opting for the phrase the survey summarizes as "nothing in particular", which covers a lot of theological ground .

 

It has implications for the churches themselves, of course. I just think it's unwise to expect very much change in politics corresponding.

 

I also expect a survey like this to fluctuate a lot from one taking to the next.

[TheLeviathan]

I

 

Maybe not, but those numbers indicate a growing trend of the under 40 generations abandoning organized religion. I think that will have political ramifications over time.

[ashbury]

Maybe not, but those numbers indicate a growing trend of the under 40 generations abandoning organized religion. I think that will have political ramifications over time.

Just when I thought I was out, you pull me back in.

 

I feel compelled to reiterate that the age demographic who was voting for Clean Gene in '68 voted for Trump in '16. Spotting "a growing trend of the under 40 generations" requires care that's beyond my pay grade.

 

"If you're not a socialist at the age of 20 you have no heart. If you're not a conservative at the age of 40, you have no head." The link gives an interesting little bit of research on the origin of this cliche.

[Craig Arko]

I’ll call this the opposite of politics representing human nature at its best: eight of the trapped kids in Thailand have been rescued; five to go including the coach. Racing against the monsoon, of course.

[TheLeviathan]

I think this was a really fascinating read.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I think this was a really fascinating read.

So good. It mixes so many ideas and really challenges where this country is going, mostly in a good way.

[Mike Sixel]

I think this was a really fascinating read.

My sister lives there. I see a lot of Facebook posts from her left wing friends. They hate the socialists...

[TheLeviathan]

My sister lives there. I see a lot of Facebook posts from her left wing friends. They hate the socialists...

I couldn’t help but really empathize with the restaurant owner. Too many like him are being swallowed alive by today’s politics.

[Mike Sixel]

Wow. From Numlock newsletter I get daily:

 

Total U.S. farm profits are at their lowest level since 2006, which means that for the people who grow our food this may not be a super great time to pick a trade war. Farm profits are projected to be less than $60 billion this year, down from $123 billion in 2006. New punitive tariffs will fall heavily on Farm Belt states, particularly regions that backed the President in the 2016 election. Every one of the 30 congressional districts hardest hit by new tariffs on soybeans broke for Trump.

[TheLeviathan]

Yup, during the great recession farming was pretty good.  (It tends to be inverse - when the economy is going well in general, farming struggles and vice versa)  Corn prices were great.  Farmers had finally hit a point where they could make money.

 

The problem is that it immediately caused land rental prices, equipment, seed, and other costs of production to rise.  Those costs have stayed high despite crop and livestock prices falling back to previous levels.  

 

So...yeah, these trade wars are going to literally bankrupt families.  And, subsequently, hurt the small towns that rely heavily on the farm economy.  It's going to become a crisis really, really fast.  

 

It's an opportunity for the Democrats they simply cannot pass up.  And people are in genuine need of help.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Yup, during the great recession farming was pretty good.  (It tends to be inverse - when the economy is going well in general, farming struggles and vice versa)  Corn prices were great.  Farmers had finally hit a point where they could make money.

 

The problem is that it immediately caused land rental prices, equipment, seed, and other costs of production to rise.  Those costs have stayed high despite crop and livestock prices falling back to previous levels.  

 

So...yeah, these trade wars are going to literally bankrupt families.  And, subsequently, hurt the small towns that rely heavily on the farm economy.  It's going to become a crisis really, really fast.  

 

It's an opportunity for the Democrats they simply cannot pass up.  And people are in genuine need of help.

 

Of course, Obama was POTUS during much of this time......so, ya.....

 

No one has an answer, because there is no good answer in a society that is this capitalist based for small towns......imo, they are not compatible with what capitalism would say happens over the long term (not a value judgement, I like small towns).

[TheLeviathan]

 

Of course, Obama was POTUS during much of this time......so, ya.....

 

No one has an answer, because there is no good answer in a society that is this capitalist based for small towns......imo, they are not compatible with what capitalism would say happens over the long term (not a value judgement, I like small towns).

 

That is the irony and something we've talked about a lot: people being conned into voting against their own interests.

[Mike Sixel]

Golfed with a proud Trump supporter today.....they aren't changing their minds no matter what. The only way the Dems win is by actually showing people a reason to show up.

[Mr. Brooks]

Golfed with a proud Trump supporter today.....they aren't changing their minds no matter what. The only way the Dems win is by actually showing people a reason to show up.

Yep, it really is amazing how Trump has mesmerized his followers. He takes them places that would have been totally off limits to conservative voters for anyone else. Disparaging war heroes, cozying up to a Russian dictator, tariffs, etc.

There is nowhere these people won't follow him. And that should scare us all.

There are actual procedural checks and balances, sure. But, much of our political system is built around the honor system.

What if Trump refuses to leave office when his term(s) is over? What if his people are prepared to violently revolt if he's forced to? What if he declares martial law as a means to avoid checks and balances that limit his power? What if he creates a false flag attack to gain support for a lifetime term?

 

These are things I believe are realistically possible with Trump. More so because his supporters would loyal through all of it, and would, IMO, be prepared to violently fight to support him.

[ashbury]

There is nowhere these people won't follow him. And that should scare us all.

There are actual procedural checks and balances, sure. But, much of our political system is built around the honor system.

What if Trump refuses to leave office when his term(s) is over? What if his people are prepared to violently revolt if he's forced to? What if he declares martial law as a means to avoid checks and balances that limit his power? What if he creates a false flag attack to gain support for a lifetime term?

 

These are things I believe are realistically possible with Trump. More so because his supporters would loyal through all of it, and would, IMO, be prepared to violently fight to support him.

As an historical footnote, essentially all these things were said about Obama by his opponents, too. That was why Obama was comin' fer yer guns, dontchaknow.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Golfed with a proud Trump supporter today.....they aren't changing their minds no matter what. The only way the Dems win is by actually showing people a reason to show up.

The thing is that the next Dem needs to gain just 100,000 votes in the right places to beat the guy.

 

Trump is a menace, for sure... He has his rabid supporters, for sure... But he lost the popular vote and won only because he skimmed by in several key states. Of course, now he has the incumbent advantage but it's not going to take much to remove him from office, the Dems just need to not be idiots (which is, unfortunately, a pretty high bar for them to clear lately).

[PseudoSABR]

The “do what you want” theory of politics: Why embracing “Abolish ICE” and Medicare-for-all won’t doom the Democrats.

 

Interesting article that speaks to some the ideas we've been bandying about the last couple weeks.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

The “do what you want” theory of politics: Why embracing “Abolish ICE” and Medicare-for-all won’t doom the Democrats.

 

Interesting article that speaks to some the ideas we've been bandying about the last couple weeks.

Good article. It reinforces the concept I've had over the past few years that one of the best things that could happen is to see Roe v Wade overturned (which won't happen outright, the decision will unfortunately be chipped away at). Remove 5% of the most active GOP base and things buckle in a hurry.

 

If you placate the rabid cross-section of conservatives who are currently motivated to vote solely on that issue and give them a reason to sit out for awhile as they do a victory lap, the country turns bright blue in a hurry and for quite some time. Not that I believe that will solve all our problems because modern liberalism has a host of problems... but things would get a hell of a lot better than they are now.

Not that I *really* want to see this happen, but I think it would do far more good than harm in the grand scheme of things.

[TheLeviathan]

 

The “do what you want” theory of politics: Why embracing “Abolish ICE” and Medicare-for-all won’t doom the Democrats.

 

Interesting article that speaks to some the ideas we've been bandying about the last couple weeks.

 

It's interesting, but he seems to draw a conclusion that doesn't quite match up with the context of campaigning.  As I read it, he says once you're in power to embrace whatever policies you want, public opinion be damned.  I think he's probably right about that.  However, when you're campaigning, the story is a little different.  Even in his article he shows how being viewed as "extreme" has devastating effects on results.

 

It seems to me his point is a good call for action once majority power is achieved, but not the best advice on the road to achieving that power.

 

I did like the sections about how irrelevant policy really is to your average voter.  Between that and the Ezra Klein article he linked to, it speaks to how all-important it is that people perceive you as the solution, even if you offer nothing in the way of actual solutions.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Good article. It reinforces the concept I've had over the past few years that one of the best things that could happen is to see Roe v Wade overturned (which won't happen outright, the decision will unfortunately be chipped away at). Remove 5% of the most active GOP base and things buckle in a hurry.

 

If you placate the rabid cross-section of conservatives who are currently motivated to vote solely on that issue and give them a reason to sit out for awhile as they do a victory lap, the country turns bright blue in a hurry and for quite some time. Not that I believe that will solve all our problems because modern liberalism has a host of problems... but things would get a hell of a lot better than they are now.

Not that I *really* want to see this happen, but I think it would do far more good than harm in the grand scheme of things.

I've thought about that--just conceding abortion.  But really, this is only a tactic conceived among men...

 

But what you are pointing to is the redmeat issues that the uber-rich continue to draw upon for generations to get people to vote against their interest.  Very sad how complicit religion, or evangelism, is with the uber-rich. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I've thought about that--just conceding abortion.  But really, this is only a tactic conceived among men...

 

But what you are pointing to is the redmeat issues that the uber-rich continue to draw upon for generations to get people to vote against the interest.  Very sad how complicit religion, or evangelism, is with the uber-rich. 

First paragraph: yep.

 

Second paragraph: yep.

[Mike Sixel]

another potential message to build on:

 

In 2017, 9 percent of the federal budget ($375 billion) was spent on children younger than 19, a figure that is projected to drop to 6.9 percent over the next decade. Of the projected $1.6 trillion increase in federal spending in the next ten years, only 1 cent out of each dollar will go to children’s programs. Scoff all you want, that’s just plain good policy: no society ever gained by investing resources in its children, and history shows us the best way to run a government is to devote most of its resources towards the construction of a gilded sarcophagus for its richest and oldest citizens.

[Mike Sixel]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/19/opinion/trump-corporations-white-working-class.html

 

Opinion piece, sure......but rings partly true based on the anecdotes I know...

[PseudoSABR]

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/19/opinion/trump-corporations-white-working-class.html

 

Opinion piece, sure......but rings partly true based on the anecdotes I know...

I think there's a lot of conflation of who liberals are in that piece.  I don't think progressive/socialist liberals have blind spots about working class rights, I think such liberals feel they can advocate for them.  The piece does seem to concede this as the author admits his father has more in common with Ocasio-Cortez than the GOP; but I think there is a whole wing of Democrats who recognize that and are trying to push their message to the forefront of the party (not sure why there's so much resistance to it beyond need to hold onto power).

 

It's more Clinton's 'basket of deplorables' that shows the blind spot in this regard, than necessarily liberals.  

[ashbury]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/19/opinion/trump-corporations-white-working-class.html

 

Opinion piece, sure......but rings partly true based on the anecdotes I know...

OK, I'll play devil's advocate a little:

 

'“What’s so special about the royals?” he told me over the phone from a cheap motel after work. “But they’ll get the best health care, the best education, the best food. Meanwhile I’m in Marion, Arkansas. All I want is some chickens and a garden and place to go fishing once in a while.”'

 

Lack of ambition should equate to what's immediately afterward summarized as "a society in which everyone can get by"? He's inadvertently describing a hobby farm. At no time in history was this the norm, except as bare subsistence.

 

I'll stop with that line of discussion here, because I found very little else of substance in the article.

 

I try to keep an open mind, and gravitate toward articles trying to explain the Trump vote, but every time I go into the details, I sense a fundamental dishonesty, for lack of a better term. There's a large amount of make-believe and wishful thinking that Trump succeeded in exploiting and more honest politicians like (yes) Hillary can't bring themselves to do. So the Hillarys of the world stammer and hem and haw when trying to campaign to this segment of the voting populace. Because they have no better idea than I do how to communicate with them.

 

I was counseled when dealing with my Alzheimer's-afflicted mother than you can't argue with her about the false reality she knows she is seeing. These articles make me view these other people about the same way. It's collective schizophrenia.

[TheLeviathan]

There wasn't much meat to that post and I'm not sure I agree with large chunks of it, but this is a point the left needs to think about:

 

I think it is true that many rural whites agree with your policy positions more often than not.  So what are you doing or saying to turn them so ardently against your political party?

 

My personal belief?  The Republicans can be disgusting, hateful, awful, hypocritical, and many other negative adjectives.  But they got nothin' on how obnoxious the left can be.  Especially to blue collar, hard working, common sense type people. Yes, it's a broad brush, but the left's ability to be insufferable is really something to behold.  People can handle agreeing with a jerk, it's a lot harder with a persistent irritant.

[Badsmerf]

I enjoyed the article. I took it more as a personal experience story than a neat and potatoes opinion piece. And, stories have value. It was well written and discussed a topic at a deeper level than is usually done. Sure, we discuss it, because we live here...

 

Levi I adamantly disagree with you. I think you should reevaluate how you view political agendas. If being hateful, disgusting and other adjectives can be outweighed by the obnoxious left, I think you should consider intent and the impact on others these initiatives have? Greenpeace can be obnoxious, peta can be obnoxious, but never would I say they are worse for our society than the Breitbarts or Americans for prosperity. The latter organizations do real damage to individuals and our democracy. Extreme leftism can be pesky and obnoxious (but also do real positive things for their passions), but I'd take insufferable over malicious.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Levi I adamantly disagree with you. I think you should reevaluate how you view political agendas. If being hateful, disgusting and other adjectives can be outweighed by the obnoxious left, I think you should consider intent and the impact on others these initiatives have? Greenpeace can be obnoxious, peta can be obnoxious, but never would I say they are worse for our society than the Breitbarts or Americans for prosperity. The latter organizations do real damage to individuals and our democracy. Extreme leftism can be pesky and obnoxious (but also do real positive things for their passions), but I'd take insufferable over malicious.

 

I'm not saying it's right or that I do it personally....but I understand it.  Nothing you said about the damage the right does is inaccurate from where I sit, but for many people they don't care.  They'll look past that, because the alternative is to side with someone who says and does things that are mind-boggling.  

 

Again,not saying that's right.  Just making a claim about what I think is a factor.  

 

Let me give an example....I know a guy who wanted to vote for Bernie the last election.  He was all about Bernie.  On policy, he is pretty hard left in what he believes.  Highly anti-corporate, in favor of UBI, all about universal health care, wants to tax the wealthy, heavier regulation, good with gay marriage, etc.

 

But his experience working with left-wing college kids has driven him to such degrees of irritation he started listening to Ben Shapiro and other right-wingers lately and has become more and more sympathetic to Trump voters.

 

So, just like in the article, his policy beliefs have next to nothing to do with these new sentiments, but he just can't rationally deal with the obnoxiousness of some liberals that he's being driven away from voting with them.

 

Yes, it's anecdotal.  It's a bit more extreme than what I think is happening in many parts of rural America....but it's related.  IMO.

[TheLeviathan]

I don't know how to properly introduce this.

 

But....wow.  Well done by Cohen....that was horrifying and hilarious at the same time.