Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
My point is that Republicans alone are responsible for the current change in our country wherein one no longer has to even pretend to be a good person while campaigning to get elected.
I'm not sure that isn't a welcome development in the near term. I don't think that the usual propagandized idealism seen up until Trump was a positive manipulation. The array of "spreading democracy and humanitarian values" pretexts for what is actually pure savagery is insidious in so far as it has worked to deceive people. I would rather have an enemy who means what they say as opposed to one who is a cunning liar who can manipulate masses of people onto their side, against their own interests.
Of course, the WWII fascists were also more honest in that way so there is probably a case to be made the other way.
Quote:
Look at how the last ~year has gone and tell me - do you think Democrats are going to go up on stage and say "when they go low, we go high" ever again? "Going high" is now a losing campaign move in America, and punching reporters or bragging about sexual assault (you keep calling these just "vulgar comments", Deuces, when he kind of admitted to being a sexual predator - a bit weird for a super liberal dude like you, did you sell your account to HastenDan?) no longer appears to be disqualifying to the electorate.
Which party took us to this place, Deuces?
An etiology of the current political tone is actually a bit more involved than space or my immediate knowledge permits. But I'll give it a shot. I think the republicans started it under Reagan but the "place" is maintained by both parties now. The destruction of unions is at the heart of it, which is why republicans are more responsible initially. Other tactical innovations by republicans, outgrowths of their "southern strategy" and a philosophy of exploiting irrational fears, such as those made by Lee Atwater, also helped set the tone. The essential dynamic is that republicans destroyed the traditional funding base of the democrats when they destroyed unions. This gave an opening for corporations to increase their influence over the democratic party as it needed funding parity with the republican party.
What do elections look like when a (somewhat) hidden corporate constituency controls all the major parties? Pretty much what you see now. The goal is to narrow the discussion to less critical matters and fill the remaining void with personal attacks and other entertainment so that politicians have minimal accountability to the actual policy preferences of the electorate because they are not even discussed. Imagine you are a multi-national corporation who has purchased politicians. You've been getting an amazing ROI historically but the thought of someone actually being elected who has a mandate to act on behalf of the people still gives you the occasional nightmare- it could technically happen. A candidate body slamming someone or a sculpture of naked Trump is exquisite to you, like the sound of Mario punching out gold coins from bricks except they are REAL GOLD COINS!
Mainstream democrats will not "go high" because they know they are not supposed to since going high basically means focusing on issues. Going low, dragging down the politics, is what their controllers want. It might turn out, however, that as people drop out of the parties (independents now the majority minority) that the electorate will be less inclined to pay attention to planned distractions as partisanship is a major component of the distractions. If you're not a democrat you are going to be less likely to cheer on John Stewart ripping the republicans a new one for policies also carried out by the democrats.
Remember, Bernie Sanders did very well this last season while running a super clean campaign, all the while the democratic machinery maligning him unfairly, constantly slinging mud about "Bernie bros", violence (lol), etc., not to mention rigging debates and so on. "Bernie bros" smears is what the democratic party is all about, and they only beat Bernie by cheating.
Meanwhile, Sanders went from being (nationally) unknown and saddled with the "socialist" label to arguably actually winning the democratic nomination. And he did this while being virtually blacked out early on from the corporate controlled media (which also plays a major role in setting the tone). So don't sit up and tell me going high doesn't work because somehow the republicans managed to high jacked the sensibilities of the American public so successfully that now going low is all that appeals to voters. Bernie Sanders, staying high, is currently the most popular politician in the country, and polls suggest he might have one the whole thing had he been the nominee.