Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19324
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Jaymann »

Just the next step on the way to the Presidency.
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by El Guapo »

Is there much reason to think that she would beat Schumer? Last time I checked Schumer had like an 81% approval rating among NY Democrats.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51303
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by hepcat »

I like Ocasio-Cortez but this country couldn't handle such an extreme shift. We're already fighting the GOP extremists whose message is that America is doomed if the progressives take power. Putting one of the heads of that progressive movement in power would just amplify that message. I know it's an unpopular view, but moderates are the way to go for now, in my opinion. Baby steps until the people on the fence who could be swayed by the GOP message campaign see that the world isn't ending due to liberalism.
Covfefe!
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Defiant »

Let's take a look at the polling. Unfortunately, there's not much polling for on the two that polls NY State and breaks down respondents by party so that we can take a look at the Democrats opinion, but here goes.

From May, a Zogby (ugh) poll said Schumer would win a primary with AOC 54% to 21%

https://zogbyanalytics.com/news/937-the ... rban-women

From Feb, a Marist poll that showed Schumer at a low, with 57% of NY Democrats thinking Schumer was doing a good or excellent job (vs 35% that said fair or poor)

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content ... 1307-1.pdf

And then, we have to go back several decades, to 2019 to get a poll (and one that has the bonus of having both of them polled), which gives Schumer 73%-22% favorability among NY Democrats, while AOC gets 47%-30%

https://scri.siena.edu/wp-content/uploa ... s_4837.pdf

Schumers (not-Democratic specific) NY polling (not broken down) has gone up since the beginning of the year (going from 45%-39% to 50%-38%), and my assumption would be that is due to support growing among Democrats, so I think he's probably back up from the low above.

Of course, that's just numbers that are well past their expiration dates. Schumer should take care not to ignore the potential threat.
User avatar
Combustible Lemur
Posts: 3961
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:17 pm
Location: houston, TX

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Combustible Lemur »

hepcat wrote:I like Ocasio-Cortez but this country couldn't handle such an extreme shift. We're already fighting the GOP extremists whose message is that America is doomed if the progressives take power. Putting one of the heads of that progressive movement in power would just amplify that message. I know it's an unpopular view, but moderates are the way to go for now, in my opinion. Baby steps until the people on the fence who could be swayed by the GOP message campaign see that the world isn't ending due to liberalism.
Heh, that makes you a conservative.

And me too. And all of the gen x gen y gen z who for the current times cant imagine voting republican. And i can't see myself voting for them in the future.

But...

I had whole long post, but it boils down to.
Im getting older and I'm increasingly seeing incrementalism as wise and not a weak willed inability to force a think police utopia right now.

I can't see myself voting for a conservative party as long as white supremacy, zero tax, anti science/intellectualism and uregulated business are the litmus tests. If they weren't? I often find myself disagreeing with the hard progressive caucus.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

Is Scott home? thump thump thump Crash ......No.
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Defiant »

While I can find plenty of issues where I differ with the far-left (eg, I want affordable college, not free college, I want a hybrid universal healthcare, not single payer, etc) a far bigger issue is with their *approach*. The purity tests, the all-or-nothing approach, letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, lack of pragmatism, etc. Their attacks on the Democratic party, and less than diplomatic approaches. Their approach to addressing climate change, where they tried to fit things that had nothing to do with addressing the issue (while they didn't include nuclear energy). And lets not forget the various controversial or offensive things individual members have said.

Give me an Elizabeth Warren over an AOC, Sanders or the other high profile examples. I may not agree with her on the issues, but she's responsible, she does her homework, she works well with others, she's pragmatic and she's not trying to court controversy.
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Zaxxon »

hepcat wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 12:45 pm I like Ocasio-Cortez but this country couldn't handle such an extreme shift. We're already fighting the GOP extremists whose message is that America is doomed if the progressives take power.
I don't disagree with your view of the reality, or of Defiant's. But it's quite clear that America is actually doomed if the progressives don't take power soon, from climate change if nothing else. The current proposals are just woefully inadequate, and this with Ds ostensibly in control of both chambers and the Presidency. We ain't got another 4, 8, or 12 years to get going on this.

Or, to put it more succinctly, we're fucked.
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51303
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by hepcat »

I also don't disagree with you about the importance of progressives in light of the climate change crisis, however rushing things could result in a complete collapse of any chance they get their stuff on the table for generations to come.

We are fucked, that's for sure. Now it's down to seeing just HOW fucked the world's children will be. It's more a matter of making things somewhat livable for them now. The point of no return has come and gone on preventing a climate disaster, in my opinion.
Last edited by hepcat on Mon Aug 09, 2021 2:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Covfefe!
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Zaxxon »

hepcat wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 2:04 pm I also don't disagree with you about the importance of progressives in light of the climate change crisis, however rushing things could result in a complete collapse of any chance they get their stuff on the table for generations to come.
Thankfully, that's not a relevant concern. We either get it right soon, or generations to come will be debating over much more mundane issues, like avoiding starvation for the masses or being able to exist out of doors in much of the country.
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51303
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by hepcat »

Sorry, I added a little extra to my original post while you were writing that reply.
Covfefe!
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Zaxxon »

hepcat wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 2:06 pm Sorry, I added a little extra to my original post while you were writing that reply.
Boy, the next time we're together for an OctoCon we can drown our sorrows in beer. At least then we'd have beer.
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51303
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by hepcat »

I'm more a margarita kind of guy.
Covfefe!
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Zaxxon »

Zaxxon wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 2:05 pm
hepcat wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 2:04 pm I also don't disagree with you about the importance of progressives in light of the climate change crisis, however rushing things could result in a complete collapse of any chance they get their stuff on the table for generations to come.
Thankfully, that's not a relevant concern. We either get it right soon, or generations to come will be debating over much more mundane issues, like avoiding starvation for the masses or being able to exist out of doors in much of the country.
Not to put too fine a point on this, at least in this thread rather than the climate change thread, but...
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by malchior »

Yeah I was about to post about that too. It is crazy we just seem to be beaten around the ears with never ending bad news. I'd think it was some plot if we hadn't been told this was our course decades ago, ignored it, can see it outside our windows - like when my skies were hazy for days because of fires on the other side of the continent, and essentially are *still ignoring it*. I think incrementalism makes sense except it does't work. I suspect eventually we'll be instead forced into rapid change scenarios which will be devastating.
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Zaxxon »

malchior wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 3:17 pmI suspect eventually we'll be instead forced into rapid change scenarios which will be devastating.
Yep. Every time I see push-back to climate action as complaints about the costs, I have to chuckle. The choice is pay a lot now, or pay a whole lot more in the near future, without prior planning.
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55316
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Zaxxon wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 3:19 pm
malchior wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 3:17 pmI suspect eventually we'll be instead forced into rapid change scenarios which will be devastating.
Yep. Every time I see push-back to climate action as complaints about the costs, I have to chuckle. The choice is pay a lot now, or pay a whole lot more in the near future, without prior planning.
You mean kick the can down the road? Like we have done happily for decades with nearly every substantial problem? I'm pretty sure what we'll "choose."
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Zaxxon »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 3:28 pm
Zaxxon wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 3:19 pm
malchior wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 3:17 pmI suspect eventually we'll be instead forced into rapid change scenarios which will be devastating.
Yep. Every time I see push-back to climate action as complaints about the costs, I have to chuckle. The choice is pay a lot now, or pay a whole lot more in the near future, without prior planning.
You mean kick the can down the road? Like we have done happily for decades with nearly every substantial problem? I'm pretty sure what we'll "choose."
Indeed. Hence the beer.
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 23583
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Pyperkub »

Zaxxon wrote:
malchior wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 3:17 pmI suspect eventually we'll be instead forced into rapid change scenarios which will be devastating.
Yep. Every time I see push-back to climate action as complaints about the costs, I have to chuckle. The choice is pay a lot now, or pay a whole lot more in the near future, without prior planning.
Basically, show me a competitive alternative. The GND may not be the path, but it is the only thing other than the ostrich approach which has ANY traction, and the problem isn't that we don't have some really good ideas on what needs doing, it's that we don't have the political will behind anything else.

We would be better off with some competition in this space of ideas and implementation, but we have none. As such, we'll continue to lurch along the GND path.

Not necessarily the optimal solution, but better than the only alternative competing solution of doing nothing.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!

Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Kurth »

This is the fundamental problem with a broken two party system where only one of the two parties is functioning at a nominally rational state.

It's also why every time I hear people cheering the demise of the GOP, I grimace.

We'd be so much better off if we had a competing GOP policy option to address the climate. That policy option would likely be moderate (probably too incremental) and business-friendly (probably too friendly), but at least we could have an alternative view that was still worthy of debate. Instead, we have a party that avoids even uttering the words "climate" and "change" in the same sentence.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Zaxxon »

Kurth wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:01 pmWe'd be so much better off if we had a competing GOP policy option to address the climate. That policy option would likely be moderate (probably too incremental) and business-friendly (probably too friendly), but at least we could have an alternative view that was still worthy of debate. Instead, we have a party that avoids even uttering the words "climate" and "change" in the same sentence.
See also: healthcare. "OBAMACARE IS KILLING AMERICA!" ... Our plan will be ready in 2 weeks, forever.

We really need a three-party system. We've shown that we can't handle having only two, as every single issue becomes either life-or-death own-the-libs or pork pork pork.
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70101
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by LordMortis »

Zaxxon wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:05 pm
Kurth wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:01 pmWe'd be so much better off if we had a competing GOP policy option to address the climate. That policy option would likely be moderate (probably too incremental) and business-friendly (probably too friendly), but at least we could have an alternative view that was still worthy of debate. Instead, we have a party that avoids even uttering the words "climate" and "change" in the same sentence.
See also: healthcare. "OBAMACARE IS KILLING AMERICA!" ... Our plan will be ready in 2 weeks, forever.

We really need a three-party system. We've shown that we can't handle having only two, as every single issue becomes either life-or-death own-the-libs or pork pork pork.
I would love a three party system, I think. But how does it work practically? Every time something begins to rise, it is co opted to give additional strength to one side or the other. Occupy was beginning to carve a political niche and then became part of the progressive democrats. Tea party was beginning to carve a niche and then they took over the GOP. In both cases, they pushed me further to the left and I'm still centrist with both some far right and some some far left leanings (though those far right leanings are increasingly seeing dirt thrown on their graves)
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by El Guapo »

LordMortis wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:36 pm
Zaxxon wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:05 pm
Kurth wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:01 pmWe'd be so much better off if we had a competing GOP policy option to address the climate. That policy option would likely be moderate (probably too incremental) and business-friendly (probably too friendly), but at least we could have an alternative view that was still worthy of debate. Instead, we have a party that avoids even uttering the words "climate" and "change" in the same sentence.
See also: healthcare. "OBAMACARE IS KILLING AMERICA!" ... Our plan will be ready in 2 weeks, forever.

We really need a three-party system. We've shown that we can't handle having only two, as every single issue becomes either life-or-death own-the-libs or pork pork pork.
I would love a three party system, I think. But how does it work practically? Every time something begins to rise, it is co opted to give additional strength to one side or the other. Occupy was beginning to carve a political niche and then became part of the progressive democrats. Tea party was beginning to carve a niche and then they took over the GOP. In both cases, they pushed me further to the left and I'm still centrist with both some far right and some some far left leanings (though those far right leanings are increasingly seeing dirt thrown on their graves)
The electoral rules would need to be changed - either ranked choice voting or some other reform.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Zaxxon »

LordMortis wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:36 pm
Zaxxon wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:05 pm
Kurth wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:01 pmWe'd be so much better off if we had a competing GOP policy option to address the climate. That policy option would likely be moderate (probably too incremental) and business-friendly (probably too friendly), but at least we could have an alternative view that was still worthy of debate. Instead, we have a party that avoids even uttering the words "climate" and "change" in the same sentence.
See also: healthcare. "OBAMACARE IS KILLING AMERICA!" ... Our plan will be ready in 2 weeks, forever.

We really need a three-party system. We've shown that we can't handle having only two, as every single issue becomes either life-or-death own-the-libs or pork pork pork.
I would love a three party system, I think. But how does it work practically? Every time something begins to rise, it is co opted to give additional strength to one side or the other. Occupy was beginning to carve a political niche and then became part of the progressive democrats. Tea party was beginning to carve a niche and then they took over the GOP. In both cases, they pushed me further to the left and I'm still centrist with both some far right and some some far left leanings (though those far right leanings are increasingly seeing dirt thrown on their graves)
I'm not sure it can work in the USA. But it works elsewhere.

Edit - Guapoed.
User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19324
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Jaymann »

Maybe AOC should run for governor.
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 23583
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Pyperkub »

Jaymann wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 1:00 pm Maybe AOC should run for governor.
IMHO this would be a good thing for her development. Not so good for the needed changes nationwide in Congress.

It would be helpful for all of us if she had to actually govern responsibly and have to deal firsthand with any/all consequences of her policies and gained that governing experience that she could then bring to the Federal Gov't.

However, she has displayed leadership in a Congress which desperately needs that kick in the pants and without that leadership, a LOT of things which need doing will have no functioning advocates/leadership.

Tough call and basically still a function of how messed up the GOP is.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!

Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 23583
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Pyperkub »

Damn, AOC is really branching out. Who knew that her Among Us streams were going to be a kickoff for new Hardware ;)
AOC launches 4K 144Hz gaming display with updated technologies for the future of desktop gaming
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!

Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19324
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Jaymann »

I want to buy what she's selling.
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Exodor
Posts: 17196
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:10 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Exodor »

Kurth wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:01 pm This is the fundamental problem with a broken two party system where only one of the two parties is functioning at a nominally rational state.

It's also why every time I hear people cheering the demise of the GOP, I grimace.

We'd be so much better off if we had a competing GOP policy option to address the climate. That policy option would likely be moderate (probably too incremental) and business-friendly (probably too friendly), but at least we could have an alternative view that was still worthy of debate. Instead, we have a party that avoids even uttering the words "climate" and "change" in the same sentence.
I think the problem is the fundamentally broken nature of our government. A system that grants equal representation to Wyoming (pop 578K) and California (39.5M) is laughably broken. There's more consensus on issues than it seems but because the minority has such an outsized voice nothing can get accomplished. The filibuster only makes the problem worse.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by El Guapo »

Exodor wrote: Wed Dec 08, 2021 10:59 am
Kurth wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:01 pm This is the fundamental problem with a broken two party system where only one of the two parties is functioning at a nominally rational state.

It's also why every time I hear people cheering the demise of the GOP, I grimace.

We'd be so much better off if we had a competing GOP policy option to address the climate. That policy option would likely be moderate (probably too incremental) and business-friendly (probably too friendly), but at least we could have an alternative view that was still worthy of debate. Instead, we have a party that avoids even uttering the words "climate" and "change" in the same sentence.
I think the problem is the fundamentally broken nature of our government. A system that grants equal representation to Wyoming (pop 578K) and California (39.5M) is laughably broken. There's more consensus on issues than it seems but because the minority has such an outsized voice nothing can get accomplished. The filibuster only makes the problem worse.
Yeah, I think the biggest problem is that all of the anti-democratic elements of our system have the combined effect that GOP leadership can have a near total veto on almost all U.S. laws and policy just by commanding a majority of the Republican / Trump base (and a significant portion of the time will get to set laws and policy). Which means that they have little incentive to compromise outside of the Fox News base.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Kurth »

Exodor wrote: Wed Dec 08, 2021 10:59 am
Kurth wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:01 pm This is the fundamental problem with a broken two party system where only one of the two parties is functioning at a nominally rational state.

It's also why every time I hear people cheering the demise of the GOP, I grimace.

We'd be so much better off if we had a competing GOP policy option to address the climate. That policy option would likely be moderate (probably too incremental) and business-friendly (probably too friendly), but at least we could have an alternative view that was still worthy of debate. Instead, we have a party that avoids even uttering the words "climate" and "change" in the same sentence.
I think the problem is the fundamentally broken nature of our government. A system that grants equal representation to Wyoming (pop 578K) and California (39.5M) is laughably broken. There's more consensus on issues than it seems but because the minority has such an outsized voice nothing can get accomplished. The filibuster only makes the problem worse.
I hear you. But isn't that a feature, not a bug?

I'm leaning on my high school civics class here (joke - we live in the U.S.A. where we don't teach high school civics!), but isn't the basic, original idea that we get to include sparsely populated/small states like Wyoming (or Delaware) and bind them to the union by giving them equal representation in the Senate but greatly reduced, population-based representation in the House?

Yes, Wyoming has 2 senators, exactly the same as CA. But Wyoming also has only 1 representative in the house compared to 53 reps for CA. So, I'm not sure I understand the proposition that CA has "equal representation" to Wyoming.

From where I sit, our government isn't fundamentally broken from a structural perspective. That structure has served us (more or less) well for a few hundred years. At the least, it's done better than most others that we've seen rise and fall in that time. What's fundamentally broken, from where I sit, is our culture. We've fractured into a primitive, tribalistic society in which compromise is automatically pegged as weakness and "bipartisan" is a dirty word guaranteed to get you primaried. If all of this isn't the direct result of the internet and our addiction to social media and insta-news, it's certainly been turbocharged by it.

In the end, I'm not sure there's a problem with our system of government. There's a problem with us.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
Ænima
Posts: 788
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:48 pm
Location: New Plymouth, New Zealand

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Ænima »

There is a whole lot of software that has features that maybe were good ideas at the time, but haven't aged well.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by malchior »

Kurth wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 2:31 amI hear you. But isn't that a feature, not a bug?
Sorta. It was a compromise/kludge to get everyone to sign on but that kludge has grown over time to be a nation killing problem.
From where I sit, our government isn't fundamentally broken from a structural perspective. That structure has served us (more or less) well for a few hundred years.
But did it? This isn't the first time we've had a problem with the Senate blowing up the country. It happened before the civil war too. The Senate was twisted in knots dealing with slavery. During Reconstruction the Senate was the mechanism that foiled recovery and eventually was unable to stop the formation of Jim Crow. The Senate then stopped nearly all civil rights legislation for decades. The Senate has been a fundamental institution of white supremacy in the United States. The Senate in particular keeps finding itself at the heart of eventual crises. Maybe our current political instability will be overcome but it will be in spite of the Senate.
In the end, I'm not sure there's a problem with our system of government. There's a problem with us.
In the big picture sense I find it hard to defend the design of the Senate as well thought out and instead place the square blame on culture. Our culture is indeed savage, inherently unfair to certain classes of people, and just plain gross. However, is that culture solely driving the mess in the Senate? I find that hard to argue when the Senate is so disproportionately unrepresentative. It isn't like the Senate in any way represents the will of the people anymore. Well it is surely magnifying the power of certain people. That's why it really hard to defend it in my view. Further, as mentioned this falls apart when you recognize that the Senate is the time-honored mechanism used by our most problematic actors to make sure that we can't improve ourselves.

Edit (Much later after some thought): One thing I do find interesting are the myths we tell ourselves about ourselves. The notion that the Senate design is a feature not a bug is one that seemingly can't die. I used to think it myself but as I read more and more, looked at it over and over, I couldn't help but come to the conclusion that it is a creation myth. Something we tell ourselves and are taught in schools that isn't even close to accurate when you drill into the details.
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by noxiousdog »

malchior wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 7:36 am Edit (Much later after some thought): One thing I do find interesting are the myths we tell ourselves about ourselves. The notion that the Senate design is a feature not a bug is one that seemingly can't die. I used to think it myself but as I read more and more, looked at it over and over, I couldn't help but come to the conclusion that it is a creation myth. Something we tell ourselves and are taught in schools that isn't even close to accurate when you drill into the details.
That's because you can't comprehend why small states want to protect themselves from large states. In 1776 people didn't want democracy, they wanted a republic.

I'm not endorsing it. At a minimum, the president should be elected by popular vote only. But I do sympathize.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by malchior »

noxiousdog wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 9:27 am
malchior wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 7:36 am Edit (Much later after some thought): One thing I do find interesting are the myths we tell ourselves about ourselves. The notion that the Senate design is a feature not a bug is one that seemingly can't die. I used to think it myself but as I read more and more, looked at it over and over, I couldn't help but come to the conclusion that it is a creation myth. Something we tell ourselves and are taught in schools that isn't even close to accurate when you drill into the details.
That's because you can't comprehend why small states want to protect themselves from large states.
I get it more than you give me credit for but the tradeoff between protecting them and the centuries of negative impact haven't balanced. We're seeing the failure of this flawed design happening in real-time now.
In 1776 people didn't want democracy, they wanted a republic.
I never argued differently. But the fact remains that the Republic was built out of compromises. Those compromises have led to a Senate that has been a constant issue throughout our history. It isn't like we need a direct participatory democracy which is what they actually feared. (Oh and they thought women and black people didn't deserve a voice either). They more importantly wanted a representational government to distill opinion and cool tempers. And we don't even have one anymore. When some of us talk about how undemocratic it is, it isn't just one vote, one voice sense. It is about the representational problem we face where small state voices are dramatically amplified in a way that our founders couldn't comprehend, that we can see is now completely unworkable, and encourages political instability and violence as we face now.
I'm not endorsing it. At a minimum, the president should be elected by popular vote only. But I do sympathize.
The question is why though? It isn't like they've used that power for good. This "power" has been used to entrench white supremacy, oppress minorities, prevent progress at all costs, and rebel constantly. That's why I believe the defenses here buy into a mythological spirit that covers for a deeply dysfunctional and flawed system.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by El Guapo »

Governor Morris

It had been one of our greatest misfortunes that the great objects of the nation had been sacrificed constantly to local views; in like manner as the general interests of States had been sacrificed to those of
the Counties. What is to be the check in the Senate? none; unless it be to keep the
majority of the people from injuring particular States. But particular States ought to be
injured for the sake of a majority of the people, in case their conduct should deserve
it. Suppose they should insist on claims evidently unjust, and pursue them in a manner
detrimental to the whole body. Suppose they should give themselves up to foreign
influence. Ought they to be protected in such cases. They were originally nothing
more than colonial corporations.

On the declaration of Independence, a Governnt. was to be formed. The small States aware of the necessity of preventing anarchy, and taking advantage of the moment, extorted from the large ones an equality of votes.
Standing now on that ground, they demand under the new system greater rights as
men, than their fellow Citizens of the large States. The proper answer to them is that
the same necessity of which they formerly took advantage does not now exist, and
that the large States are at liberty now to consider what is right, rather than what may
be expedient We must have an efficient Govt. and if there be an efficiency in the local
Govts. the former is impossible. Germany alone proves it. Notwithstanding their
common diet, notwithstanding the great prerogatives of the Emperor as head of the
Empire, and his vast resources as sovereign of his particular dominions, no union is
maintained: foreign influence disturbs every internal operation, & there is no energy
whatever in the general Governmt.

Whence does this proceed? From the energy of the
local authorities; from its being considered of more consequence to support the Prince
of Hesse, than the Happiness of the people of Germany. Do Gentlemen wish this to be
ye case here. Good God, Sir, is it possible they can so delude themselves. What if all
the Charters & Constitutions of the States were thrown into the fire, and all their
demagogues into the ocean. What would it be to the happiness of America. And will
not this be the case here if we pursue the train in wch. the business lies. We shall
establish an Aulic Council without an Emperor to execute its decrees. The same
circumstances which unite the people here, unite them in Germany. They have there a
common language, a common law, common usages and manners — and a common
interest in being united; yet their local jurisdictions destroy every tie.

The case was the same in the Grecian States. The United Netherlands are at this time torn in
factions. With these examples before our eyes shall we form establishments which
must necessarily produce the same effects. It is of no consequence from what districts
the 2d. branch shall be drawn, if it be so constituted as to yield an asylum agst. these
evils. As it is now constituted he must be agst. its being drawn from the States in
equal portions.
Madison
In Federalist No. 62, James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution," openly admitted that the equal suffrage in the Senate was a compromise, a "lesser evil," and not born out of any political theory. "t is superfluous to try, by the standard of theory, a part of the Constitution which is allowed on all hands to be the result, not of theory, but 'of a spirit of amity, and that mutual deference and concession which the peculiarity of our political situation rendered indispensable.'"

Even Gunning Bedford Jr. of Delaware admitted that he only favored equal representation because it advanced the interests of his own state. "Can it be expected that the small states will act from pure disinterestedness? Are we to act with greater purity than the rest of mankind?"[7]
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by El Guapo »

At the end of the day there's limited theory supporting why Rhode Island / Vermont / Wyoming should have equal representation in the Senate with California / New York / Texas. The main reason why we have it is that the small states at the convention wanted it for their own power, and large states were worried that the small states would walk or not ratify if it weren't included.

But we're stuck with it, and it'll be a big part of why our system of government will likely collapse (most likely into autocracy) within a few decades at the latest.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
Exodor
Posts: 17196
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:10 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by Exodor »

Kurth wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 2:31 am Yes, Wyoming has 2 senators, exactly the same as CA. But Wyoming also has only 1 representative in the house compared to 53 reps for CA. So, I'm not sure I understand the proposition that CA has "equal representation" to Wyoming.

As long a the Senate has veto power over legislation (and is responsible for approving appointments) then the level of representation in that body is key. Yes, California has a far greater number of seats in the house but that's fairly meaningless when the Senate has to pass any house-passed bill.

I don't think the founders envisioned a time when one state would have ~70X the population of another.
we're stuck with it, and it'll be a big part of why our system of government will likely collapse (most likely into autocracy) within a few decades at the latest.
I agree, this country is headed for a breakup. I don't think it will happen in my lifetime but I don't think this structure is sustainable long-term.
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by noxiousdog »

malchior wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 10:17 amThe question is why though? It isn't like they've used that power for good. This "power" has been used to entrench white supremacy, oppress minorities, prevent progress at all costs, and rebel constantly. That's why I believe the defenses here buy into a mythological spirit that covers for a deeply dysfunctional and flawed system.
From your perspective. Others would see it as protecting gun rights, lower taxes, and freedom from unnecessary regulation and government encroachment.

It really boils down to whether you're more afraid of your neighbors or you're more afraid of the government. At a population density of 1263 people/mi^2 in New Jersey, it makes total sense to be scared of your neighbor on one side and share community projects and enrichment on the other. I get it. I have no doubt my views have changed because I moved from a little subdivision wayyyy outside any city limits to downtown Houston.

But for comparison, half the states live in population densities less than 100 per square mile (none rebelled) and that doesn't even include Texas. They get far more regulation and far less benefit from national government encroachment.

Philosophically it's worth debating, but to dismiss it entirely prevents any serious engagement.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by noxiousdog »

El Guapo wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 10:43 am At the end of the day there's limited theory supporting why Rhode Island / Vermont / Wyoming should have equal representation in the Senate with California / New York / Texas. The main reason why we have it is that the small states at the convention wanted it for their own power, and large states were worried that the small states would walk or not ratify if it weren't included.
Yes, and Scotland, Wales, and Ireland have been chafing at British rule ever since they were United. This isn't a new conversation; nor is it a uniquely American one.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by El Guapo »

noxiousdog wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 11:24 am
El Guapo wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 10:43 am At the end of the day there's limited theory supporting why Rhode Island / Vermont / Wyoming should have equal representation in the Senate with California / New York / Texas. The main reason why we have it is that the small states at the convention wanted it for their own power, and large states were worried that the small states would walk or not ratify if it weren't included.
Yes, and Scotland, Wales, and Ireland have been chafing at British rule ever since they were United. This isn't a new conversation; nor is it a uniquely American one.
That comparison seems odd and ill-applicable. First because that Union (with the partial exception of Scotland) wasn't exactly voluntary. And second because I'm pretty sure that none of the regions in the U.K. get disproportionate representation in Parliament.

This isn't really about federalism (or the balance of power between regional governments and the national one), it's about the ability of 30% of voters to set national government policy against the wishes of 70% of voters just because of the geographic distribution of those 30%.
Black Lives Matter.
Post Reply