#trickle down is a Republican trick | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

jcmorrigan · 4 years

Text

In Defense of Archibald Snatcher

Oh, wow, we’re coming up on almost the sixth anniversary of The Boxtrolls, my favorite film of all time, and though the fandom for it seems to be either dead or in hibernation, I still have the torch lit.

I actually have been of the mindset of the opinion/s I’m about to present here for all those six years, but never really thought it prudent to lay them out until I recently had a friend I was recommending the film to who I warned about some of the elements considered “problematic” and I offhandedly mentioned that I could do a whole essay about why they don’t bother me and said friend replied with a desire to want to hear it because we share infodump for infodump, so here we go, I’m poking the hornet’s nest surrounding a controversial film with a dead fandom.

But if you were on Tumblr back in the heyday, you might’ve seen the reaction to this film when it first debuted. Specifically, what a lot of people honed in on wa that the villain, Archibald Snatcher, employed a dragsona to be able to push his agenda and implement his evil scheme. There was outrage. There were accusations. There was lambasting. And above it all, one question hovers: was this transphobic?

I want to start, before we get into the weeds, by saying that if you are anywhere on the LGBTQ+ spectrum and you were offended by this film or this character, your experiences are completely valid. I’m about to present the counterargument in language that assumes my take is fact for the purpose of not having to write fifty thousand clunky disclaimers, but analytical as this may be, it IS an opinion, and if you don’t think it’s right, then hey, that’s super valid, and I’m not gonna try and change your mind, because if you’re hurt, then you’re hurt! You just may want to nope out of this post right now because I’m about to lay out my observations and thoughts to the contrary of the accusations of this being homo/transphobic.

First of all, the obvious facet that comes to mind is how strange it is that we only ever saw the word “transphobia” put on this phenomenon rather than “homophobia” when using a female alter ego as a disguise or a performance art is not the same as being a woman assigned male at birth. One only needs to take a look over at RuPaul’s Drag Race to see examples of this culture. Lots of gay men wearing dresses. No women perceived male.

All the same, I will say that on the surface, adding any kind of queercoding to the story’s villain, who the audience is supposed to boo and hiss at, looks really, really bad on paper. However you interpret it, Snatcher is definitely queercoded. He openly flirts with the man he’s trying to trick as a means of getting what he wants, he displays sincere enjoyment of wearing the dress, and he runs the gamut of flamboyant hand gestures. But if you dig a little further, there’s even more to the story: his tale is one of a man who desires to pass as one of the elite class in his society, but is held back by something he can’t change about himself no matter how he denies it.

Let’s look at the rest of his story. Snatcher is in pursuit of the White Hat: the ultimate status symbol. To that end, he’s decided to otherize the Boxtroll population of the town and play upon the culture shock in Cheesebridge to convince the humans of the “upper world” that the Boxtrolls are predatory monsters who must be killed. This sounds like a pretty black-and-white good-and-evil scenario, right? You’ve got your population of innocent sweethearts being attacked and your genocidal racist orchestrating their destruction. But there’s a third layer still: Lord Portley-Rind, the chief White Hat himself. Lord PR is actually the worst of the lot. It’s because he doesn’t accept Snatcher that Snatcher feels he has to resort to this tactic. He demonstrates open hatred of the Boxtrolls and of Snatcher (”I’m not sure who should be more worried: the Boxtrolls or us!”). There are implications in how he treats his daughter that he’s a textbook sexist who believes there are men’s roles and women’s roles in society and nary the twain shall cross. And he’s the rich guy controlling the entire city and letting children’s hospitals and crumbling bridges go to waste by spending the budget on frivolous cheese. In short, Lord PR is basically the ur-example of a nightmarish fictional Republican (and oh, how I WISH he hadn’t been so prophetic).

I’m not saying Snatcher was justified or good. No. He’s in no way redeemable. But over the course of his interactions with Lord PR, you can see just how much society’s elites treat him as inhuman or like a dirty buffoon. He’s looked down upon, he’s insulted even when he’s doing the “service” Lord PR desires, he’s rejected until he’s gone above and beyond his contract and I think it’s even a little bit implied that Lord PR would’ve reneged on the whole deal if the mob hadn’t cheered for Snatcher in the end. So what you have is a prim and proper billionaire who subscribes to gender roles telling a man of the lower class, obviously economically downtrodden, that he doesn’t deserve what Lord PR has.

The idea of meritocracy is woven throughout the film. Listening to the speech in the background of Snatcher’s anaphylactic attack, while the visuals are focused on Eggs rescuing Fish, you can hear Snatcher rambling about how his father told him that if you work hard, you will receive a White Hat, but he worked hard all his life and got nothing. One of the White Hats literally says he got his through being rich. It’s not hard to infer that Snatcher has figured out how broken the system is and realized the only way to win the game is to cheat.

But there’s still one more thing holding him back from his victory, something that actually trips him up when he achieves what he wanted. Cheese is presented as another status symbol: the rich eat it and are connoisseurs of its flavor. Snatcher is deathly allergic to it. The goal he’s chasing, he can’t even have without threat to his own life. His reaction is to pretend he isn’t allergic and to expose himself to having allergic reactions on the regular to show how much he’s ready to become part of the elites. I’ll reiterate: Archibald Snatcher wants to join the elites, but is held back because of something about himself he cannot change that only matters because the upper crust said it should.

Okay. So we’ve established the man is gay, or somewhere on the queer spectrum. How is this not really, really horrible?

Because the narrative invites you to feel some sympathy for him. No, not for his actions or any secret soft side or tragic backstory (that’s a job for the fans), but because he is chasing a dream he cannot attain. Perhaps the film’s biggest shortcoming is how little consequence comes to Lord PR in the end, because Lord PR, for all intents and purposes, is the worse villain on the board. Snatcher’s ploy is to take the class below the one he inhabits and paint its members as the bad guys: a nuisance that must be exterminated for the betterment of society. And we’ve seen this. We’ve seen plenty of real-life examples of have-nots turning on have-lessers because the haves benefit from oppressed groups infighting and being distracted from who holds the money and the power. A lot of times, you see that while intersectionality is definitely something we need to pay attention to, racism, sexism, and homophobia are not concepts that are all explicitly linked. If you experience one, that doesn’t mean you don’t project one or two of the others on other people - particularly if you’re trying to make yourself feel better about the discrimination you face.

When you look at the hierarchy, Snatcher is, I reiterate, a very bad person. But he’s also a victim. Not as much of a victim as the poor Boxtrolls, who get the malice trickling down from both the Red Hats and the White Hats, but he is a victim. We see him mocked, laughed at, turned away. And though he’s not redeemable, there are aspects in which he is sympathetic.

But what about Frou Frou? What about that particular disguise?

Well, for one, it’s used to make yet another allegorical statement. Snatcher is able to get attention paid to him if he weaponizes female sexuality - though it is a very shallow attention that largely results in the straight men of the town swallowing his propaganda while also objectifying him. Most of the comments made on Frou Frou are slimy, smarmy “compliments” on her body from the White Hats. Lord PR’s wife harbors a distinct distaste for Frou Frou because her husband most certainly prefers ogling Frou Frou to actually paying attention to their marriage. Frou Frou is a propaganda vehicle to make it look like more than one person is on the same page as Snatcher; Snatcher himself drives the action of his scheme and gets the dirty work done.

It’s also worth noting that if you take away the implications, villains using alter egos to trick their nemeses is a tale as old as time, from sea witch Ursula making herself more supermodel-esque in order to marry the prince to mythological Loki actually crossdressing much in the same vein in order to fool the Frost Giants. There’s a reason disguise masters and shapeshifters are intriguing villain archetypes: because we’re always a little bit afraid that someone isn’t who they say they are, and because - yeah, I’m about to go here - I think we all wish we could shift shape ourselves to take on new forms that suit the goals we’re trying to accomplish, even if that means “fooling” others. So it’s reasonable to think Laika wasn’t aware that there was any queercoding to even be had here - but I do think the crew was aware, and not in a malicious way.

However, watching Snatcher’s scenes as Frou Frou, there’s something that comes across in his character that you don’t see so often when he’s presenting male: he’s legitimately having fun. He dances, he flirts with the crowd, he adds more flourishes to his speech, he gets sassy. Frou Frou is a means for him to express himself, to allow himself to be feminine when he has built his philosophy on needing to do “what a man does” (he repeats this at least twice) in order to achieve greatness. He can be a little more himself when he’s Frou Frou, even though Frou Frou isn’t him. Taking a new identity that’s allowed the other half of the gender roles allowed in Cheesebridge (which runs on a binary because it’s run by the White Hats) lets him act a little less like what he needs to be to be taken seriously and a little more like he has freedom.

Put this back in context of the greater narrative: given all the parallels we’ve seen, it’s safe to assume that Cheesebridge, as a whole, is not accepting of deviations from gender roles, whether it’s being open and proud of your LGBTQ+ identity or simply wearing the clothes that don’t belong to your gender. Snatcher is taking an enormous gamble here by using Frou Frou at all. On one hand, it’s a calculated risk; he knows if he can appeal to Lord PR’s unchecked sexist libido, he can secure another avenue to being heard. On the other, however, it’s not really much of a leap to say this is something he wants to do, someone he wants to be more like, and isn’t allowed to, and since he’s cheating at the game anyway, he might as well go all the way and do what he wants with his life.

I’ve seen a lot of people take issue with the scene where he reveals himself to Lord PR and comparing it to some actual homophobic/transphobic media. And again, if that still stands to you as your primary analysis and emotional reaction, then feel free to turn away, reject my analysis, and know your thoughts and feelings are completely valid. But I think this scene differs from your usual “person with male parts tricked you into thinking they were a woman” scene in a couple ways.

For one, Snatcher decides to out himself on his own. To Lord PR, it’s when he’s got nothing left to lose. Again, when he realizes the game is broken and the odds are against him, he takes control and decides to be himself a little more. Now everyone knows he likes to act a dragsona because he wanted them to. But also, earlier on, when he revealed himself to Eggs, it was again on purpose. Eggs didn’t figure him out. Snatcher needed Eggs to know the level of the threat he was dealing with: that he was the person Eggs has been running from since the start and is no less dangerous in a dress. It’s always been of his own volition. There’s no “I thought you knew” or disrobing to see a body that doesn’t match expectations - Eggs ripping Snatcher’s wig off is maybe a little iffier, but again, in context, that’s him trying to show Snatcher’s identity, not as a man but as Archibald Snatcher, to expose the corruption, and Snatcher actually plays it completely off because he’s that good of an actor.

Which brings me to my second point. There’s only one person who reacts in an “Oh, gross!” manner to this revelation, and it’s Lord Portley-Rind. The one we’ve established is sexist, homophobic, and your textbook Rich White Straight Cis Man. The one at the top of the food chain. The one who’s been objectifying Snatcher and acting like a slobbering pervert about Frou Frou from the beginning. The homophobe realizes he has been a little gay. The sexist realizes his objectifying a particular person he perceived female has consequences. And this is why to me, that scene is actually hilarious. Because I don’t feel like I’m laughing at Snatcher’s expense. I’m laughing because Lord PR just got called OUT, and this is exactly the kind of discomfort that is karmic given how he’s treated his daughter, his wife, and everyone in his city who’s needed him.

Cycling back to when Snatcher outs himself at the ball, Eggs doesn’t really seem to care that there’s a gender-role-play involved here. His concern is not that this is actually a man; his concern is that it’s specifically the person who he knows is trying to ruin everything. Same with Winnie when Eggs passes it on. Eggs trying to reveal Snatcher to the crowd doesn’t even begin with “Frou Frou is fake,” but a line I will never forget: “Archibald Snatcher has lied to you all.” Not even drawing attention yet to the fact that he’s in the room. Starting out by having everyone remember that guy they are all sure ISN’T there and pointing out he’s bad news.

To look at Lord Portley-Rind’s “Oh my God! I regret so much!” as a dig at Snatcher is to say that Lord Portley-Rind is the lens through which we should be viewing this story, which it most certainly isn’t. The lens is Eggs and Winnie. Adjacent lenses are Fish, Shoe, and Jelly. Lord Portley-Rind is an antagonist to every single character in this film save the other White Hats.

Which is why if this film falls flat anywhere, it’s in letting Lord Portley-Rind get away without consequence. I think I can take a guess as to why this primarily happened: it needed to wrap up in a little under two hours, and dismantling systematic oppression and abuse of socioeconomic power can’t be done in a two-hour escapade. I still wish he were at least villainized a little more, as that’s where the narrative was leading up to that point. One of his earliest scenes with Winnie foreshadows that he will have to choose between her and the hat, and it takes him two tries to make the right choice. This story, until the very last act, has not supported him being a character to like or sympathize with, even in such subtle ways as Trout and Pickles stealing his hat and running around with it to taunt Snatcher - showing that a symbol is really only a symbol, and doesn’t indicate your worth. Anyone can put on a hat. Lord PR has just been brought onto an equal footing with them, if only for a moment.

Okay, so why have this whole three-layer narrative anyway? Couldn’t we have made this story more clear-cut between the Boxtrolls and White Hats, with no queercoded villain to get in between?

Yes...but I’m not sure that would have been best for the viewing audience. And there’s plenty of precedent as to why Laika thought it was a move for the better.

Queercoded villains are in every aspect of our fictional and fandom lives. Here’s a bitter pill to swallow: all your favorite Disney villains are queercoded. All of them. “But Frollo’s arc is about - “ Being a man in a religious system afraid of being tainted as sinful for being attracted to the wrong person. “Gaston, though, is - “ Very chummy with LeFou, and I’m talking the animated versions. They’re all colorful, flamboyant, foppish for the men and full of socially-unacceptable strength for the women. These were the cornerstones of our childhood nostalgia and characters we still feel culturally attached to.

It’s not just in Disney. Are you a fan of musical theater? Well, then your favorite villain probably got a big song and dance in which they wore some glitter. Classic lit? Google the name of your favorite literary canon villain and “queer theory” and see what happens.

I don’t think we can really say this is good or bad. On one hand, it’s not great that a marginalized group can only see themselves in the character we’re supposed to hate. On the other, though, we don’t always hate that character. Villains hold a unique place in our culture. They do bad things, horrible things, but the story can’t take place without a conflict, and we like when that conflict has a name and a cool design such as a tall, imposing sorcerer/witch in flowing robes - or perhaps a tall, graceful man in a long red coat and a towering crooked top hat.

I’ve had lots of friends and trusted Internet reviewers talking about how queercoding in villains can actually be really empowering. If you’re a fan of the villain, you get to see a power fantasy in which someone who has something very big in common with you gets to enact karma on others for wronging them! You get to wear the cool robes, sing the fun song, do things that are not really legal or acceptable! I think a great analogy is if you check out the book “Dead Blondes and Bad Mothers” by Sady Doyle. It’s primarily about sexism rather than queer issues (though it does touch upon them!), but examines how women throughout pop culture and storytelling history have always been the witch, the monster, the demon, and how that sucks, but it also means that women have a great pile of fictional power fantasies to pick from to indulge in. It’s the same principle. I myself may not be same-gender-attracted, but I am asexual, and still waiting on my glamorous villain who uproots society as revenge for being forced to do something analogous to having a sexual relationship...*taps wristwatch*

Meanwhile, queercoding is not as prevalent in heroes. And I think that’s where everything’s tripping on its own feet. Because a gay villain among a bunch of straight heroes does look pretty bad. Are some of the heroes queercoded as well, though? Well, that’s just realistic diversity. People are gay, and there happen to be some good ones and some evil ones here. I don’t think Snatcher’s dragsona is entirely unproblematic, but I do think it could have been mitigated a lot with more implications that Eggs and Winnie might be queer in some way (and believe me, I choose to interpret them that way, because the more the merrier).

The thing is that in pop culture as of late, there seems to be a trend to scrub away all villainous queercoding because it’s seen as a black-and-white issue. To go back to the Disney villains, do you feel like the live-action recreations of Jafar, Scar, and Gaston are missing a certain je ne sais quoi? Well, think about it through this lens and it might be that you savez quoi after all. They’ve all been made incredibly straight as of late, with off-the-record actor confirmations about having obsessive crushes on the film heroines. I can’t speak to why this has happened; there’s a lot of history behind any given social movement, and I haven’t managed to really unpack this one. “Blame Tumblr” is too easy; I would want to know who were the loudest voices, why they said what they said, and what was the intended accomplishment, not to mention if this had built on other social-media or real-life platforms over the years and was influenced by any outside source by news or marketing. I can’t say why queercoded villains are being burned; I can only say it’s happening. And it was happening big-time in 2014, when The Boxtrolls was released.

I also feel like I would be remiss to mention that The Boxtrolls is based on “Here Be Monsters,” which I believe to be one of the worst books I’ve ever read, bar none. That version of the story has...pretty much everything that’s perceived to be in the film version’s text as problematic. Frou Frou is presented as something to laugh at Snatcher about throughout, largely because everything about Snatcher is presented to make him seem gross or like a buffoon. There’s a whole scene of the hero rifling through his desk to find soiled underwear. Not to mention that the original purpose of Frou Frou in the text was to manipulate the town’s women by dictating the fashion trends they should follow and the beliefs they should hold in order to fit in. This is something that does need commentary on it, but in that text in particular, it seems like the women are silly and easily swayed, and that they’re the town’s weak link because they’re slaves to fashion. The Boxtrolls completely flips this around so that the town’s weak link re: Frou Frou is the rich MEN who objectify women, particularly the men that happen to be in charge of the whole town, and looking at that divide alone tells me how much care was put into this adaptation at every level.

So why’d I do this, besides having a friend who wanted to read it? Because Archibald Snatcher is legitimately one of my favorite fictional characters. Yeah, I know, he’s a horrible person and terribly racist, and no, I don’t think his demonizing an entire people is anything to be emulated. But on one hand, there are places where I not only empathize but identify with him, particularly where it comes to living out the majority of one’s life trying to live up to a meritocracy - I did everything right, so why am I not on top? He’s also just fun and satisfying to me. He’s the exact brand of evil I eat up. He’s quippy, flamboyant, sadistic to a point, and altogether enjoying his job way too much. Even though he isn’t in power all that long, he is a power fantasy for me, too - wishing I had his talent to talk my way into others’ hearts by saying the right thing, and maybe cultivating a little bit of that I didn’t realize I had (but not to use for evil purposes). I loved him from the moment he turned up because of his sheer dynamic presence - his drawn-out vowels, his sinister smile, his silver-tongued manipulations - and to this day I find him an inspiring character when it comes to writing fiction, both in the realms of fanfiction and original villain creation. You could say he’s a comfort character to me. And maybe this has been the delusional rambling of a woman trying to protect a character she likes for surface reasons by spelling out what look like analytical points of discussion.

But I don’t think Laika was trying to be mean-spirited or homo/transphobic in their character creation. I think they were trying to make an engaging villain who had some layers you could pick at to see more about the narrative as a whole and the message of societal corruption and how the way to overcome it is to be true to yourself rather than defined by your status: a lesson Snatcher fails at the finish line when Eggs gives him one last chance to “make you.” And ultimately, if you really and truly did like Archibald Snatcher, you’re not wrong or invalid in the least.

#archibald snatcher #the boxtrolls #boxtrolls #laika #analysis #discourse #long post #hot takes #controversial opinions #you know...all the fun stuff #and then the sequel: op gives him a crossover villain ship to help him self-actualize

62 notes · View notes

vagabondretired · 6 years

Photo

GOP Moron Trickle Down Theory: Campaign staff for Democratic Rep. Tom O’Halleran (AZ) busted a pair of Republican operatives trying a trick that was as stupid as it was dirty. Two men calling themselves Jose Rosales and Ahmahd Sadia showed up at O’Halleran’s office trying to donate $39.68, out of a jar, and demanding a receipt made out to the Northern Arizona University Communist Party. Their whole approach was sketchy as hell—in addition to the jar foolishness, when asked for an email address to send a receipt to, they abruptly changed the address they’d given—and when they left, O’Halleran's staff clearly knew what was up: Lindsay Coleman, the finance director for the campaign, then drove to the local Republican field office to return the money. Almost immediately, the man who identified himself as Rosales appeared from a room inside the office and was identified as Oscar. He accepted the money from Coleman. That must have been fun: “Hi, I think you’re trying to frame us up for taking money from communists! Here’s your money back.” Also, communists, really? Although from the names it seems they were supposed to be a Latino communist and a Muslim communist, so there’s a prospect to terrify the Republican base. In short, Republicans committed a crime—making a federal campaign contribution under a false identity—in hopes of making a Democrat look bad to whoever cares about contributions from communists in the year 2018, and did it so ham-handedly that their opponents were able to turn it back on them pretty much immediately. Well done, guys.

8 notes · View notes

patriotsnet · 3 years

Text

What Will Happen If Republicans Win

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/what-will-happen-if-republicans-win/

What Will Happen If Republicans Win

So How Can Republicans Win Without Texas

Lets take the 2016 map with Texas flipped as a starting point. Republicans were at 268 Electoral College votes, meaning that they would only need to flip one Democratic state to win the election. The simplest way to do that would be to target states like Minnesota , the only midwestern state the Republicans failed to pick up in 2016, minus solid blue Illinois. Lets flip Minnesota and see how the map looks then.

This is one way in which Republicans can win an election without Texas. The ten extra Electoral College votes from Minnesota push the Republicans to a victory, albeit by a small margin but a victory nonetheless. Of course, this begs the question, how realistic is this map? Well, Minnesota was by no means a comfortable victory for the Democrats in 2016; Clinton won the state by just one-and-a-half points or roughly 44,000 votes out of a total of 2.7 million votes cast. Its not unrealistic to think that, with some extra effort in campaigning, Republicans could flip the North Star State.

Republicans could also target Nevada , which was ranked as a lean-Democrat/battleground state in 2016. Clinton eventually won Nevada and its six Electoral College votes, but only by a margin of around 30,000 from just over a million cast. Heres how that map would look.

A smaller margin than if the Republicans flipped Minnesota, but a victory nonetheless.

All maps courtesy of 270towin.com

TAGS

What If The Republicans Win Everything Again

Total victory for the G.O.P. would mean Trump unleashed.

Opinion Columnist

The end of Robert Muellers investigation. The loss of health insurance for several million people. New laws that make it harder to vote. More tax cuts for the rich. More damage to the environment. A Republican Party molded even more in the image of President Trump.

These are among the plausible consequences if the Republicans sweep the midterm elections and keep control of both the House and Senate. And dont fool yourself. That outcome, although not the most likely one, remains possible. The last couple of weeks of polling have shown how it could happen.

Voters who lean Republican including whites across the South could set aside their disappointment with Trump and vote for Republican congressional candidates. Voters who lean left including Latinos and younger adults could turn out in low numbers, as they usually do in midterm elections. The Republicans continuing efforts to suppress turnout could also swing a few close elections.

No matter what, Democrats will probably win the popular vote in the House elections, for the first time since 2012. Trump, after all, remains unpopular. But the combination of gerrymandering and the concentration of Democratic voters in major cities means that a popular-vote win wont automatically translate into a House majority.

A Division Of Power In Government Is Common In The Us With The Republicans And The Democrats Often Splitting Control Of The White House And Congress

Joe Biden may have been announced as President Elect but there are still some crucial decisions to be made on how America will be governed for the next four years. The presidential election appears to have been a pretty resounding win for the Democrats but the picture is less clear in the Senate, when both parties retain hope of having a majority when the Upper House reconvenes next year.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer released a statement after Bidens victory was called, saying: “A Democratic majority in the U.S. Senate would be the biggest difference maker to help President-elect Biden deliver for working families across the country.

Sen. Chuck Schumer: “There has been no evidence of any significant or widespread voter fraud. Joe Biden won this election fair and square. The margins of his victory are growing by the day.” pic.twitter.com/bvAFNdVAw5

The Hill November 9, 2020

All elections in Georgia, not just those for the Senate, require the winning candidate to pick up over 50% of the votes cast. This year neither of the states two Senate races had a majority winning so a run-off will be held on 5 January, with both the Democrats and the Republicans holding out hope of securing the vital seats needed to give them a majority in the Senate.

Why is control of the Senate so important?

How would a Republican Senate affect a Biden presidency?

How likely is it that a Republican Senate compromises with President Elect Biden?

What If Republicans Win The Midterms

March 3, 2018

WASHINGTON A sizable portion of the American population has been convulsing with outrage at President Trump for more than a year. Millions of people who previously took only mild interest in politics have participated in protests, fumed as they stayed riveted to news out of Washington and filled social media accounts once devoted to family updates and funny videos with furious political commentary.

Yet public life on the whole has remained surprisingly calm. A significant factor in keeping the peace has surely been anticipatory catharsis: The widespread expectations of a big Democratic wave in the coming midterm elections are containing and channeling that indignation, helping to maintain order.

What will happen if no such wave materializes and that pressure-relief valve jams shut?

The country was already badly polarized before the plot twist of election night in 2016, of course, but since then liberals and much of what remains of Americas moderate center have been seething in a way that dwarfs the usual disgruntlement of whichever faction is out of power. While nobody can know for sure whether Mr. Trump would have lost but for Russias meddling, many of his critics clearly choose to believe he is in the White House because Vladimir Putin tricked the United States into making him its leader.

This November, if the wave turns out to be a mere trickle, we could see the accomplishment of that goal take hold.

Gold If Republicans Win The Election

Oliver said if President Donald Trump pulls out a surprise victory in the election, the gold price could plunge, just as it did after the 2016 election. That happened against expectations.

While he denounced “left-wing populism,” he also said that Trump “has his own populist streak” because he likes high tariffs, cutting taxes, increasing spending and “a central bank that prints to fund internal improvements and a rising stock market.”

“The precious metals offer safe haven from the approaching political and economic turbulence,” Oliver wrote. “After a relatively brief correction, gold and silver have resumed their climb.”

He added that if the market demands that the dollar be backed on-third by gold like it was between the 1690s and the `908s, gold would need to trade at $8,927 an ounce. On the other hand, if the Federal Reserve is forced to back its liabilities by two-thirds, which he said would be more appropriate for a crisis, the gold price would have to rise to $17,854 an ounce. Further, as the Fed’s balance sheet grows, these numbers for the gold price will increase.

“Given the economic and political risks, $1,900/oz is a bargain,” he declared.”

TAGS

Reality Check 1: Biden Cant Be Fdr

Theres no question that Biden is swinging for the fences. Beyond the emerging bipartisan infrastructure bill, he has proposed a far-reaching series of programs that would collectively move the United States several steps closer to the kind of social democracy prevalent in most industrialized nations: free community college, big support for childcare and homebound seniors, a sharp increase in Medicaid, more people eligible for Medicare, a reinvigorated labor movement. It is why 100 days into the administration, NPR was asking a commonly heard question: Can Biden Join FDR and LBJ In The Democratic Party’s Pantheon?

But the FDR and LBJ examples show conclusively why visions of a transformational Biden agenda are so hard to turn into reality. In 1933, FDR had won a huge popular and electoral landslide, after which he had a three-to-one Democratic majority in the House and a 59-vote majority in the Senate. Similarly, LBJ in 1964 had won a massive popular and electoral vote landslide, along with a Senate with 69 Democrats and a House with 295. Last November, on the other hand, only 42,000 votes in three key states kept Trump from winning re-election. Democrats losses in the House whittled their margin down to mid-single digits. The Senate is 50-50.

Lessons Democrats Can Learn From The 2020 Elections

Why are the elections taking place now?

These are runoffs. Georgia does things a little differently than most other states. Back in November, if one of the Senate candidates had gotten 50% plus one vote, that candidate would have won the election outright and the state would have avoided a runoff in that race. But that didn’t happen in either contest.

Perdue came closest he won 49.7% of the vote to Ossoff’s 47.9%. Calculated another way, out of almost 5 million votes cast, Perdue missed avoiding a runoff by a little over 13,000 votes.

The Loeffler-Warnock race had another hurdle. Because it was a special election, there weren’t primaries and everyone ran on the same ballot together at once.

In a field of 20 candidates, including a prominent Republican challenger, Loeffler got just over a quarter of the vote.

Warnock actually finished ahead of her, with about a third of the vote. But when the votes were combined by party in that race, Republicans were narrowly ahead of Democrats, 49.4% to 48.4%.

Interest is high, given not just the money spent, but the high early-vote turnout, which began Dec. 14 and continued through Friday.

Column: What Happens If Republicans Win The Senate

Copy Link URLCopied!

For most of the year, it seemed almost certain that Republicans would win the six additional U.S. Senate seats they need to oust the Democrats from their majority and take control of Congress.

But the outlook has turned murkier in recent weeks. While a GOP majority is still the most likely outcome, its no longer as sure a bet. Endangered Democratic incumbents in North Carolina and Alaska are waging surprisingly strong campaigns, and a Republican incumbent in Kansas is in unexpected trouble. We dont have a lock on this thing at all, one GOP strategist told me recently.

It even seems possible that Senate elections could end in a draw, with a 50-50 split, in which case Vice President Joe Biden would cast votes as a tiebreaker.

And thats not even the most exotic possibility.

One scenario is a Senate in which neither major party wins 50 seats. The next Senate will include two, maybe three independents. Incumbents Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Angus King of Maine, whose seats arent up this year, may be joined by Greg Orman, a newcomer who leads the polls in Kansas. Sanders, a socialist, would continue to vote with Democrats, but King and Orman, both centrists, would be wooed by both parties and could instantly become two of the most powerful politicians on Capitol Hill.

But the most intriguing scenario for next years Senate, paradoxically, is the least exotic one: What happens if Republicans win a slim majority of 51 or 52 seats?

More Tax Cuts For The Wealthy And Further Spending Cuts For Middle

Most legislation needs 60 votes in order to break a filibuster in the Senate, but a congressional budget resolution can establish parameters for subsequent legislation to be enacted through the reconciliation process, which only requires 51 votes to pass a measure. The budget resolution itself cannot be filibustered and also only requires 51 votes to pass the Senate. As a result, it is easier for the majority to pass a budget resolution and a reconciliation bill than most other legislation.

The current conservative economic and fiscal roadmap is the fiscal year 2015 budget put forward by former vice presidential nominee and House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan . The Ryan budget would provide those with incomes of at least $1 million another $200,000 per year in tax cuts while cutting nondefense spending by $4.8 trillion. Roughly $3.3 trillion of those cuts, or nearly 70 percent, target programs that help low-income and middle-class families, such as Medicaidwhich provides health coverage for low- and moderate-income familiesand Pell Grants, which help students pay for college.

When given the opportunity, Senate Republicans voted for the various Ryan budgets in 2011, 2012, and again in 2013. Previous Senate Republican actions make it clear that the budget that would result from a Republican majority would most likely feature many of the same components as Rep. Ryans past budgets.

Here Is What’s In The Covid

What does the early voting tell us?

It’s always a little tricky to interpret early-voting data and ascribe real meaning to it, but Democrats see some hopeful signs.

Three million people cast ballots early. That’s a record already for total votes cast in a Georgia runoff election. And who is voting is what’s giving Democrats optimism: Black voters are making up a higher percentage of voters than they did for the Senate races in November, and turnout in Democratic congressional districts is higher than in GOP-held ones.

Of course, Democrats saw hope in early-voting numbers in Texas before Nov. 3, and Trump wound up winning that state by 6 points, a wider margin than the polls had predicted.

How much money has been spent on the races?

Almost $500 million has been spent on advertising between the two races in just the two months since the presidential election, according to the latest numbers provided to NPR by AdImpact, a political ad-tracking firm. The figures measure ad reservations between Nov. 4 and Jan. 5.

With outside groups included, Republicans have outspent Democrats $271 million to $218 million.

What Happens When Republicans Simply Refuse To Certify Democratic Wins

Its something we need to start preparing for now.

What will the institutions of liberal democracy do when Republican officials simply refuse to concede Democratic victories? The question isnt as far-fetched as it may seem, and the reckoning may be coming far sooner than most expect.

The entire left-leaning political world has spent the months after the 2020 election obsessed over the fairness of elections, and conservative attempts to rig the vote through gerrymandering and voter suppression. This is for good reason, of course: Republicans know they lack the support to win majority support in a fair contest, but believe they have the right to rule nonetheless for reasons that ultimately boil down to white supremacy, religious dominionism and antiquated patriarchal beliefs. So Republicans have been busy passing bills to restrict voting among young people and non-whites, while doing their best to ensure that exurban conservative whites continue to be dramatically and unfairly overrepresented in the House, Senate and Electoral College.

Its hard to overstate how dangerous this is, and what its consequences might entail in the very near future. As Greg Sargent notes, the GOP appears to be plunging headlong into a level of full-blown hostility to democracy that has deeply unsettling future ramifications.

And no, thats not an exaggeration. Everything were seeing from the Republican Party is pointing directly to it in 2024.

Support Nonprofit Journalism

A Vote To Repeal The Affordable Care Act

Senate Republicans have indicated one of their first votes, should they be in the majority, would be to repeal the ACA. This would most likely occur during the first months of 2015, the same time that millions of Americans will be shopping in the state and federal marketplaces to sign up for health coverage.

Moreover, Senate Republicans would be voting to repeal the ACA when the law is working: The uninsured rate has dropped to a record low, according to a Gallup poll: 7.3 million people were enrolled and paying their premiums in the marketplaces as of August, and another 8 million people have health coverage through Medicaid, not to mention the 5 million people who signed up for ACA-compliant plans outside the marketplace. In addition, millions of Americans benefit from the consumer protections that ban insurers from denying coverage because of a pre-existing condition and from putting both lifetime and annual coverage limits on their care.

For some reason, congressional Republicans want to return to old political fights at a time when the rest of the country is ready to move forward. Having a substantive debate on how to improve the ACA and the nations health care system is one thing. Scoring political points on a law that is delivering for Americans is another.

What To Watch For

Activists and a number of Democrats have been heavily pressuring left-leaning Justice Stephen Breyer to retire while Democrats still have the power to confirm Bidens chosen nominee without Republican interference. While control of the Senate will next be determined through the 2022 midterm elections, Democrats have urged Breyer to act sooner, as Democrats slim majority in the Senate50 votes plus Vice President Kamala Harris as a tie breakermeans the party could lose their majority sooner, should one Democratic senator become incapacitated or unexpectedly have to step down. Breyer, for his part, has so far given no indication that he plans to imminently retire, and has spoken out against the idea of the Supreme Court being subject to political interferenceeven soon publishing a book on the topic and how judges try to avoid considerations of politics.

How Challenges To States Electors Will Work

For a challenge to proceed, at least one lawmaker from each chamber must object to a states electors. More than two dozen House Republicans have said they will try to challenge results, and a dozen GOP senators will join them even though Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has urged senators to stay away from this.

Lawmakers dont have to give a detailed explanation of why they object; they just object in writing, which Pence will read out loud.

If theres an objection to a states electors raised by both a House and Senate lawmaker, the chambers have to split up and vote on that objection. Most of this will be done silently, save for Pence reading out loud the objections.

They have up to two hours to debate each one. That means there will be simultaneous debates in the House and Senate. We expect congressional leaders in both chambers to move to put down the challenges as quickly as possible. In the House, Pelosi will let lawmakers from the states being challenged do the speaking on the Democratic side.

What If The 2020 Election Audits Show Trump Really Won

We just don’t know. We just don’t know what comes next. It is all a calculated guess. The US Constitution is silent. Even if, if, if, it is so very clear through professional forensic election audit results, that the presidential election of 2020 was stolen and President Trump actually won, there appears to be no obvious remedy stated in the US Constitution to right this wrong. We just don’t know.

The Founding Fathers did not write up a “what if” in the Constitution to make things right. The Founding Fathers wrote up nothing in the Constitution in case mail-in ballots or the internet were used to manipulate the vote. The scary part is that since the answer to possible election fraud appears not to be in the Constitution, nor in federal law, nor in federal court cases, then the answer-the remedy will come from somewhere else. That somewhere else, we know not. But probably not from the words within the US Constitution. Much of this is conjecture.

I. This we do know…

* With a strict constructionist view of the wording in the Constitution, the words are not there to “road map” how to fix possible presidential election fraud.

* The Constitution mentions nothing about the Electoral College re-convening. Historically, the Electoral College has never re-convened for a second time for a presidential certification.

* We know that President Trump is planning something very big and important this summer, and America might look and feel very different by Labor Day Weekend.

Texas Republican Suggests Civil War Will Happen If Democrats Win Georgia Senate Runoffs

As voters in Georgia go to the polls today in a runoff election that will decide who represents them in the U.S. Senate, a Texas Republican suggested Monday evening that if Democrats win those races, conservatives might just declare civil war.

During an appearance on Fox News, Rep. Chip Roy told host Tucker Carlson:

Heres the thing. What happens tomorrow in Georgia if we have a Democratically controlled Senate, I mean, were now basically at full-scale hot conflict in this country, whereas right now were in a cold civil war. Weve got a major problem in this country where the American people, the regular people out there that are working every day, hardworking Americans, they are getting trampled by a system that is rigged against them.

The system is rigged against them? Well, Donald Trump is currently the president and Republicans control the Senate, so wouldnt that mean the rigged system is being perpetuated by those in power, i.e. the GOP?

But that wasnt all Roy had to say. He added:

That is what is at stake, and if the American people in Georgia dont show up, if Georgians dont show up and ensure that we hold the Senate in Republican hands, then thats whats happening. Two additional votes coming out of the Senate in Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico, they lock it down for good.

i uh..i think a republican member of congress just threatened civil war if the dems win in georgia tomorrow pic.twitter.com/yZhwB75Up1

Andrew Lawrence January 5, 2021

Weakening Of The Investigations Against Trump

If Democrats dont control the House or the Senate, they cant initiate investigations of Trump or some of his more controversial cabinet members, such as Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt.

More importantly, after the 2018 elections, the electoral process will recede as a constraint on the president and GOP in terms of the Russia investigation at least for a while.

We dont really know why Trump, despite his constant criticisms of the investigation, has not fired Attorney General Jeff Sessions or Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, or why he has not directly tried to stop the probe by special counsel Robert Mueller. Maybe Trump, despite his rhetoric, has some real respect for the rule of law. I think its more likely that Trump understands that firing Rosenstein or making a drastic move to stop the Mueller probe would increase both the chances of Democrats winning the House and/or Senate this year, and the odds that the resulting Democratic-led chamber would feel compelled to push to impeach Trump. But if the GOP emerges from 2017 and 2018 without losing control of the House or the Senate, I suspect that, with the next election two years away, the president will feel freer to take controversial steps to end the Russia probe. And I doubt Republicans on Capitol Hill would try to stop him.

What Congress Is Doing On Wednesday

Throughout November and December, states certified their results. Then the electoral college voted Dec. 14 based on those results and made Biden the winner. States sent their electoral college vote totals to the new Congress to be counted and confirmed. This counting will happen on Wednesday. Its largely a formality, since election law says Congress has to treat states results completed by the safe harbor deadline of Dec. 8 as conclusive.

Wednesday is the penultimate step in the post-election process. All thats left after that is to inaugurate Biden.

I Do Not Buy That A Social Media Ban Hurts Trumps 2024 Aspirations: Nate Silver

sarah: Yeah, Democrats might not have their worst Senate map in 2022, but it will by no means be easy, and how they fare will have a lot to do with the national environment. And as we touched on earlier, Bidens overall approval rating will also make a big difference in Democrats midterm chances.

nrakich: Yeah, if the national environment is even a bit Republican-leaning, that could be enough to allow solid Republican recruits to flip even Nevada and New Hampshire. And then it wouldnt even matter if Democrats win Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

One thing is for sure, though whichever party wins the Senate will have only a narrow majority, so I think were stuck in this era of moderates like Sens. Joe Manchin and Lisa Murkowski controlling every bills fate for at least a while longer.

sarah: Lets talk about big picture strategy, then, and where that leaves us moving forward. Its still early and far too easy to prescribe election narratives that arent grounded in anything, but one gambit the Republican Party seems to be making at this point is that attacking the Democratic Party for being too progressive or woke will help them win.

What do we make of that playbook headed into 2022? Likewise, as the party in charge, what are Democrats planning for?

With that being said, the GOPs strategies could still gin up turnout among its base, in particular, but its hard to separate that from general dissatisfaction with Biden.

0 notes

statetalks · 3 years

Text

What Will Happen If Republicans Win

So How Can Republicans Win Without Texas

youtube

A smaller margin than if the Republicans flipped Minnesota, but a victory nonetheless.

All maps courtesy of 270towin.com

TAGS

What If The Republicans Win Everything Again

Total victory for the G.O.P. would mean Trump unleashed.

Opinion Columnist

A Division Of Power In Government Is Common In The Us With The Republicans And The Democrats Often Splitting Control Of The White House And Congress

The Hill November 9, 2020

Why is control of the Senate so important?

How would a Republican Senate affect a Biden presidency?

How likely is it that a Republican Senate compromises with President Elect Biden?

What If Republicans Win The Midterms

March 3, 2018

What will happen if no such wave materializes and that pressure-relief valve jams shut?

This November, if the wave turns out to be a mere trickle, we could see the accomplishment of that goal take hold.

Gold If Republicans Win The Election

Oliver said if President Donald Trump pulls out a surprise victory in the election, the gold price could plunge, just as it did after the 2016 election. That happened against expectations.

“The precious metals offer safe haven from the approaching political and economic turbulence,” Oliver wrote. “After a relatively brief correction, gold and silver have resumed their climb.”

“Given the economic and political risks, $1,900/oz is a bargain,” he declared.”

TAGS

Reality Check 1: Biden Cant Be Fdr

Lessons Democrats Can Learn From The 2020 Elections

Why are the elections taking place now?

Perdue came closest he won 49.7% of the vote to Ossoff’s 47.9%. Calculated another way, out of almost 5 million votes cast, Perdue missed avoiding a runoff by a little over 13,000 votes.

The Loeffler-Warnock race had another hurdle. Because it was a special election, there weren’t primaries and everyone ran on the same ballot together at once.

In a field of 20 candidates, including a prominent Republican challenger, Loeffler got just over a quarter of the vote.

Warnock actually finished ahead of her, with about a third of the vote. But when the votes were combined by party in that race, Republicans were narrowly ahead of Democrats, 49.4% to 48.4%.

Interest is high, given not just the money spent, but the high early-vote turnout, which began Dec. 14 and continued through Friday.

Column: What Happens If Republicans Win The Senate

Copy Link URLCopied!

For most of the year, it seemed almost certain that Republicans would win the six additional U.S. Senate seats they need to oust the Democrats from their majority and take control of Congress.

It even seems possible that Senate elections could end in a draw, with a 50-50 split, in which case Vice President Joe Biden would cast votes as a tiebreaker.

And thats not even the most exotic possibility.

But the most intriguing scenario for next years Senate, paradoxically, is the least exotic one: What happens if Republicans win a slim majority of 51 or 52 seats?

More Tax Cuts For The Wealthy And Further Spending Cuts For Middle

youtube

Here Is What’s In The Covid

What does the early voting tell us?

It’s always a little tricky to interpret early-voting data and ascribe real meaning to it, but Democrats see some hopeful signs.

Of course, Democrats saw hope in early-voting numbers in Texas before Nov. 3, and Trump wound up winning that state by 6 points, a wider margin than the polls had predicted.

How much money has been spent on the races?

With outside groups included, Republicans have outspent Democrats $271 million to $218 million.

What Happens When Republicans Simply Refuse To Certify Democratic Wins

Its something we need to start preparing for now.

And no, thats not an exaggeration. Everything were seeing from the Republican Party is pointing directly to it in 2024.

Support Nonprofit Journalism

A Vote To Repeal The Affordable Care Act

What To Watch For

How Challenges To States Electors Will Work

Lawmakers dont have to give a detailed explanation of why they object; they just object in writing, which Pence will read out loud.

What If The 2020 Election Audits Show Trump Really Won

I. This we do know…

* With a strict constructionist view of the wording in the Constitution, the words are not there to “road map” how to fix possible presidential election fraud.

* The Constitution mentions nothing about the Electoral College re-convening. Historically, the Electoral College has never re-convened for a second time for a presidential certification.

* We know that President Trump is planning something very big and important this summer, and America might look and feel very different by Labor Day Weekend.

Texas Republican Suggests Civil War Will Happen If Democrats Win Georgia Senate Runoffs

During an appearance on Fox News, Rep. Chip Roy told host Tucker Carlson:

But that wasnt all Roy had to say. He added:

i uh..i think a republican member of congress just threatened civil war if the dems win in georgia tomorrow pic.twitter.com/yZhwB75Up1

Andrew Lawrence January 5, 2021

Weakening Of The Investigations Against Trump

youtube

More importantly, after the 2018 elections, the electoral process will recede as a constraint on the president and GOP in terms of the Russia investigation at least for a while.

What Congress Is Doing On Wednesday

Wednesday is the penultimate step in the post-election process. All thats left after that is to inaugurate Biden.

I Do Not Buy That A Social Media Ban Hurts Trumps 2024 Aspirations: Nate Silver

What do we make of that playbook headed into 2022? Likewise, as the party in charge, what are Democrats planning for?

With that being said, the GOPs strategies could still gin up turnout among its base, in particular, but its hard to separate that from general dissatisfaction with Biden.

source https://www.patriotsnet.com/what-will-happen-if-republicans-win/

0 notes

realtalkingpoints · 6 years

Link

Karl Rove is “Cautiously Optimistic, and nervous as heck...” about Republicans prevailing in 2018 midterm elections.

This is no time for Republicans to rest comfortably ahead of 2018 elections. The Democrats will be throwing everything they’ve got at this. Nasty tricks up their sleeve, rules skirted, bent or even broken. If they’ve gotten away with it before, they’ll be trying it again. The Democrats’ ground swell of activism is always their best game, and they will be bringing it.

I recommend heavy pressure on those states and counties infamous for manipulative voter enrollment. Places where there are 100% or more voter registration. Clearly something fishy going on there. Places where tight races are decided by absentee ballots that trickled in at the last minute. Places with Motor Voter policies and large undocumented populations. Let the Secretaries of States and voting authorities in those locations know that they will be watched closely and called out publicly for abuses.

The President’s voter fraud probe was shut down by strong opposition from Democrats, not Republicans. Let them know that there will be public records requests to view the ballots after the election. Let them know that there will be probes of polling location protocols before, during and after the election. They don’t want to follow the rules, and have thus far thwarted Federal efforts asking for accountability. So the American public must do it on their own. Take the tools of manipulation and fraud out of their hands. Make them win at the ballot box only. Chances are, they can’t...

#politics #us politics #trump #conservative #republican #gop #maga #Karl Rove #fox news #voter fraud

22 notes · View notes

aion-rsa · 4 years

Text

Borat 2: Rudy Giuliani ‘Tucking Shirt’ Excuse is Irrelevant

https://ift.tt/3mqmY1O

Having been online for a little more than a weekend, the climax to Sacha Baron Cohen’s Borat 2—or its full title of Borat Subsequent Moviefilm: Delivery of Prodigious Bribe to American Regime for Make Benefit Once Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan—has already become the stuff of legend. Rudy Giuliani, former Mayor of New York City, once dubiously titled “America’s Mayor,” and current personal attorney of President Donald Trump, appeared to be sticking his hand down his pants while in the hotel room of a young woman.

At least that’s how the news started trickling out last week when the review embargo lifted on Borat 2, and it’s a public perception that Giuliani and his cohorts in the White House immediately began trying to discredit before anyone in the general audience saw the movie on Amazon Prime Video.

The moment in question occurs late in the film, with Giuliani reclined on a bed after Maria Bakalova takes off his lavender microphone. Bakalova is playing the character of Tutar Sagdiyev, who is in turn pretending to be an alt-right conservative journalist from eastern Europe, hence how she’s ensnared Giuliani into a pseudo-prank. For the moment occurs after he’s followed her into a hotel bedroom to “have a drink.” Once she takes off his mic, he lies down on his back and over the course of several shots edited together from several hidden cameras around the room, he is seen with his hand in his pants.

The obvious implication to many when the news broke, and possibly to the filmmakers, is that Giuliani’s hand is on his genitals. And it’s a reading of the moment that the controversial politician flatly denies.

On Wednesday, Oct. 21, Giuliani attempted to get ahead of the movie when he tweeted, “(1) The Borat video is a complete fabrication. I was tucking in my shirt after taking off the recording equipment. At no time before, during, or after the interview was I ever inappropriate. If Sacha Baron Cohen implies otherwise he is a stone-cold liar. In fact, the NY Post today reports ‘it looks to me like an exaggeration through editing.’”

And to be completely fair, his clinging to The New York Post’s reading may not be unfounded. It’s clear in the now widely available film that the moment with his hand in his pants is cut together in a way that extends the length of the scene for dramatic (or comedic) effect. He does, in fact, appear to be tucking his shirt in (at least initially), and the way the story was first broken last week emphasized that Baron Cohen’s character cried, “She was 15,” when Barkalova is actually 24.

Yet even if he was only tucking in his shirt, the distinction matters little for an increasingly disgraced politician who’s inserted himself into the center of a shady conspiracy theory—and after he played a central role in the scandal that got President Trump impeached earlier this year.

For starters, whether or not Giuliani kept his hand in his pants for longer than necessary, the fact that he was in the situation as a public figure of his age and position of power is already inappropriate. Here is a 76-year-old man, with two children in their 30s, happily allowing himself to be lured into a bedroom by a woman he is supposed to be having a professional interaction with—a woman in her early 20s and who he was tricked into believing was a teenager. Even before lying on his back, he was visibly flirting with Bakalova and suggested, “You can give me your phone number and your address” while she was taking off his mic. To reaffirm his apparent interest, he placed a hand on her hip and reclined on his back. It’s a strange position for any person to be in to tuck in their shirt, to put it mildly.

Movies

Borat Subsequent Moviefilm Review: Rare Win For a Legacy Sequel

By Nick Harley

Movies

How White Noise Exposes the Empty Lies of the Alt-Right

By David Crow

But the bigger, and more important, reason his and some media outlets’ equivocating is irrelevant is because Giuliani finding himself in this situation demonstrates extraordinarily bad judgment. The kind of bad judgment that Giuliani, by his own design, has attempted to make a focal point in the 2020 presidential election.

In a handful of minutes, a pretty smile and some flattering words convinced Giuliani to place himself in a compromising situation that’s turned him into a laughing stock around the world. In essence, he handed “Borat,” of all people, the kind of video Russian intelligence officials would deem “kompromat.” Kompromat is a term that originated inside the KGB during the Soviet reign of Joseph Stalin, but it’s become popularized in the 21st century as “compromising material” that Russian intelligence services are accused of regularly collecting on public figures as a resource for blackmail, extortion, and control.

This is important to know since The Washington Post reported earlier this month that the White House was warned in December 2019 of Giuliani being the target of an influence operation by Russian intelligence. The warnings were based on multiple sources, including intercepted communications, which showed the president’s personal lawyer interacting with people tied to Russian intelligence. At the time, he was on a quest to obtain information that could be used to incriminate, or at least smear, Hunter Biden and his father, former Vice President Joe Biden.

Apparently National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien personally warned Trump that any information Giuliani brought back from Ukraine should be considered “contaminated.” The president responded to the intelligence by allegedly saying, “That’s Rudy.”

Cut to October 2020 and Giuliani has attempted to engineer a damaging October surprise at Democratic nominee Biden’s expense by sharing with The New York Post a computer hard drive he claims belonged to Hunter Biden, and which he and the New York tabloid assert proves Hunter traded on his father’s influence on American foreign policy in exchange for money.

Giuliani’s story does not directly implicate Ukraine as the source of the laptop and its allegedly damning intelligence. He and computer repairman John Paul Mac Isaac claim that Hunter Biden dropped the laptop off in Mac Isaac’s Delaware repair shop, even though Hunter does not live in Delaware, and is said to have forgotten he left the incriminating laptop there because he was drunk at the time—it’s also worth noting that Mac Isaac is legally blind.

This has led to a fair amount of skepticism about the actual source of the laptop, including by Fox News, whose newsroom refused to publish images from Giuliani’s “laptop from hell” without further evidence or separate sourcing to corroborate it. Indeed, the New York Post journalist who actually wrote the piece to Giuliani’s specifications refused to have his name on the byline due to questions about the validity of the laptop.

Meanwhile the conspiracy theory Giuliani’s attempted “surprise” tries to feed into has been repeatedly discredited and dismissed, including last month by Republican senators who released an 87-page report from the joint findings of the U.S. Senate Security and Finance Committees. They found no evidence of wrongdoing or improper influence by then-Vice President Biden.

Whether more news actually comes from Giuliani’s “laptop from hell,” its association with Giuliani is, in the words of the national security adviser, “contaminated,” just as Giuliani’s credibility is further demolished by the fact he found himself compromised by Borat.

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

The post Borat 2: Rudy Giuliani ‘Tucking Shirt’ Excuse is Irrelevant appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/2G1exKZ

#aion-rsa #Den of Geek

0 notes

bennettmarko · 5 years

Text

How Trump Has Betrayed the Working Class

Robert Reich

For a century the GOP has been bankrolled by big business and Wall Street. Trump wants to keep the money rolling in. His signature tax cut, two years old last Sunday, has helped U.S. corporations score record profits and the stock market reach all-time highs. To spur even more corporate generosity for the 2020 election, Trump is suggesting more giveaways. Chief of staff Mick Mulvaney recently told an assemblage of CEOs that Trump wants to “go beyond” his 2017 tax cut.

Trump also wants to expand his working-class base. In rallies and countless tweets he claims to be restoring the American working class by holding back immigration and trade. Incumbent Republicans and GOP candidates are mimicking Trump’s economic nationalism. As Trump consigliore Stephen Bannon boasted recently, “we’ve turned the Republican party into a working-class party.”

Keeping the GOP the Party of Big Money while making it over into the Party of the Working Class is a tricky maneuver, especially at a time when capital and labor are engaged in the most intense economic contest in more than a century because so much wealth and power are going to the top.

Armed with deductions and loopholes, America’s largest companies paid an average federal tax rate of only 11.3 percent on their profits last year, roughly half the official rate under the new tax law – the lowest effective corporate tax rate in more than eighty years.

Yet almost nothing has trickled down to ordinary workers. Corporations have used most of their tax savings to buy back their shares, giving the stock market a sugar high. The typical American household remains poorer today than it was before the financial crisis began in 2007.

Trump’s giant tax cut has also caused the federal budget deficit to balloon. Even as pretax corporate profits have reached record highs, corporate tax revenues have dropped about a third under projected levels. This requires more federal dollars for interest on the debt, leaving fewer for public services workers need.

The Trump administration has already announced a $4.5 billion cut in food stamp benefits that would affect an estimated 10,000 families, many at the lower end of the working class. The administration is also proposing to reduce Social Security disability benefits, a potential blow to hundreds of thousands of workers.

The tax cut has also shifted more of the total tax burden to workers. Payroll taxes made up 7.8 percent of national income last year while corporate taxes made up just 0.9 percent, the biggest gap in nearly two decades. All told, taxes on workers were 35 percent of federal tax revenue in 2018; taxes on corporations, only 9 percent.

Trump probably figures he can cover up this massive redistribution from the working class to the corporate elite by pushing the same economic nationalism, tinged with xenophobia and racism, he used in 2016. As Steve Bannon has noted, the formula seems to have worked for Britain’s Conservative Party.

But it will be difficult this time around because Trump’s economic nationalism has hurt American workers, particularly in states that were critical to Trump’s 2016 win.

Manufacturing has suffered as tariffs raised prices for imported parts and materials. Hiring has slowed sharply in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and other states Trump won, and in states like Minnesota that he narrowly lost.

The trade wars have also harmed rural America, which also went for Trump, by reducing demand for American farm produce. Last year China bought around $8.6 billion of farm goods, down from $20 billion in 2016. (A new tentative trade deal calls for substantially more Chinese purchases.)

Meanwhile, health care costs continue to soar, college is even less affordable, and average life expectancy is dropping due to a rise in deaths from suicide and opioid drugs like fentanyl. Polls show most Americans remain dissatisfiedwith the country’s direction.

The consequences of Trump’s and the Republicans’ excessive corporate giveaways and their failure to improve the lives of ordinary working Americans are becoming clearer by the day.

The only tricks left to Trump and the Republicans are stoking social and racial resentments and claiming to be foes of the establishment. But bigotry alone won’t win elections, and the detritus of the tax cut makes it difficult for Trump and the GOP to portray themselves as anti-establishment.

This has created a giant political void, and an opportunity. Democrats have an historic chance to do what they should have done years ago: Create a multi-racial coalition of the working class, middle class, and poor, dedicated to reclaiming the economy for the vast majority and making democracy work for all.

#robert reich

0 notes

jonjost · 5 years

Text

A year and some has passed since my last Pastoral, and in some sense it seems as if nothing has changed, though in truth much has changed. For the worse. The Trump administration, dogged with endless scandal and corruption, simply doubles down. Mired in a cesspool of moral and ethical offenses and plain old crimes, the nation seems stunned, our political parties paralyzed. Offense on offense is dumped in the public lap, a myriad of impeachable acts are done and while the air is sour with alarm, almost nothing has happened to confront the new reality. Yet there is a reason for this stasis, one which curiously is what provokes it.

Starved dead whale in OregonFrom Bette Gordon’s Variety

The ascendancy of Trump, seen by many as an aberration, a slap in the face to our sense of civil decorum, was in reality simply an unveiling of ourselves. For decades America has been corrupt and rotted to the core – not just the hard-right business oriented sorts, but our nice soft liberals as well. On the right the military industrial complex and its endless wars, was encouraged to expand since there was much profit to be made from it, and few raised a complaint. Now President Eisenhower’s Farewell speech warning has come to full flower, and both Republicans and Democrats genuflect to the military, while civilians pay their taxes and utter “Thank you for your service” while veterans, utterly abandoned after that “service”, commit suicide at such rate that far more have died that way than in combat.

On the liberal side the corruption can be seen in universities which have become secondary to their football and basketball teams, where grade inflation and cozy “legacy” admissions warp the fabric of education. It can be seen in the empty gestures toward “green” behavior, with recycling and hybrid cars and endless feel-good symbolic acts which utterly fail to address the reality that America is a vicious militarist/capitalist system which seizes 25% of the globe’s resources to serve 4.4 % of the world’s population. To effect any real change requires a drastic down-sizing of American consumption, something which even the most liberal of Americans will not consider. They will say instead that the 25% must simply be more equitably distributed, not that we need to cut back 80% to properly fit our population. It is a moral corruption no less damning than the rude billionaire’s club of the Republican’s.

Neo-Nazi rally, NCNavy Seal acquitted of murdering Iraqi prisoner

While many “good” Americans abhor Trump, and many others celebrate him, the brutal truth is that he is a symptom, an ugly scab which reveals the broad, deep decadence which has been building in American society for decades, and which while transparently evident for all that time, was discreetly ignored or minimized, as being something which a minority of other people did, and never oneself. Corruption was a flaw of 3rd world places, or Italy or Turkey. It was the kind of lie familiar in totalitarian states in which the official truth is known by all be be false, but has to be accepted for survival. Americans imagined themselves mystically different but they were not. While the nation built a vast military empire, visible and obvious, everyone paid their taxes, and few protested. The unacknowledged benefits were simply too enticing, and besides, resisting would just be too much bother and risk.

Since the end of World War Two, Americans have lived in a fantasy bubble, perceiving themselves ever as the good guys, the white-hat cowboy come to save the damsel in distress. After all we’d gone to Europe’s and Asia’s defense, beating the Krauts and the Japs, sacrificing our youth for others. Our story. Never mind it was the Soviet Union which sacrificed endlessly more and did the job in Europe, and never mind it was Japanese over-reach which cost them their war. But for we Americans, nope, it was our glorious GI’s that turned the tide, and won the day. Westerns. We, in our own minds, come what may, were always the good guys.

John Wayne

As the world slowly pieced itself back together after the conclusion of the war, America was essentially a back-door socialist society, recovered from the Depression-era ravages of capitalism run amok thanks to the WPA, Social Security and myriad other government props deliberately devised to save capitalism from itself. Coupled with the steroid boost of vast government spending (debt) to conduct the war – factories for building ships, tanks, planes, all constructed on the government dime – the USA emerged as an industrial power-house with virtually no competition. It had all been leveled by the war, save for what was left in the USSR. And together, entering the ’50’s America propagated its myths to the globe, and to itself.

USA USA USA #1 #1 #1.

And America, and much of the rest of the world, fell for it. We were the shining beacon, the city on the hill, the biggest economy, the champion of democracy, the general all-around do-good guys of the 50’s. Everybody loved us and we loved us. Or at least so we told ourselves.

Charles Sheeler

The fifties cemented America’s self-image as the benign biggest bestest country ever, the melting pot, the energetic inventive nation that had thrown off the shackles of old-world corruptions, tossed the aristocracy on the dung heap of history, and was innocent and pure. We gave generously to others, developed the Marshall Plan for Europe, and turned Japan into a nation of Peaceniks.

We were a Norman Rockwell painting.

We were, of course, utterly self-deluded, mired in the propaganda we had issued about ourselves to others. We were the knights riding in on white horses saving the world from the scourge of Nazism and the Yellow Peril. We wore the white hats, dammit.

I recall in high-school having a final “civics” test which had 100 questions, two of which were the same question phrased differently – it asked why is/was/will be American foreign policy always be formed for the good of the other countries. I replied it isn’t/wasn’t and wouldn’t be, citing some of the warped history they had taught me – for example, the Spanish-American war, which among other things was the first Gulf of Tonkin trick, to be deployed but a few years later. I “missed” this question twice, and one other about who wrote the Virginia Bill of Rights. 3 questions of 100. I was flunked. As I recall I took the matter to the administration but I don’t remember the result. The old lady teacher was a member of the Daughters of the American Revolution.

Andy WarholRichard Avedon

Danny Lyons

In the 50’s, creeping through the back-door of French colonialism, we took over their role in Indo-China, largely in secret. At the same time we overthrew the elected government of Iran, installing an erstwhile Shah who did our bidding and was duly celebrated as modernizing ancient Persia. Our fingers were in Africa and Central and South America, propping up useful dictators. This however did not show up much to the American mind until the 60’s. Pieces occasionally slipped by the censors, but most of America’s dirty work was kept well from view, and what was not was always justified by the Cold War, in which the USSR, our former ally, was demonized. Anything was justified to stop “communism.” And stopping communism was a good excuse to construct a global empire, all in the name of doing good.

Thomas Eakins

The 60’s brought an abrupt ending to America’s introverted dream of itself as the perfect Ozzie and Harriet land of white-bread harmony. Instead the fixed verities of the 50’s were up-ended as kids grew their hair long, disdained Mad Ave proprieties, and the civil rights movement flared into open warfare against the deep long racist reality of the nation. The “cultural” war was on, challenging the status-quo assumptions of the country regarding race, sex, money, and myriad other “givens” of our society. The seeds for a decades long tectonic shift in what America really is, and how it perceives itself, were planted.

Dallas, 1963Detroit, 1967Los Angeles, 1968Chicago, 1968

Even more frightening for those who found the 50’s a nirvana of normalcy, the actual demographics of the nation were changing colors: the country was slowly becoming non-white. Women were demanding equal status. The old verities of a patriarchal, racist culture were collapsing and anger was in the air. It still is.

The Vietnam war coupled with the civil rights movement, rapidly joined by feminists and gays and other deprived elements of our society quickly ripped the veneer of 1950’s propriety to shreds and laid bare the hypocrisies of the nation. It continues to this day, now shrieked out in headlines quoting the erstwhile President with racist diatribes and misogynist vomit. The 1970’s roiled the nation in the wake of the 60’s and in rode a familiar figure, the cowboy in the white had, to the rescue. This particular cowboy was about as authentic as Wild Bill Cody, hailing from Illinois and Hollywood, a showbiz shill for General Electric and other corporate interests. Sporting an aw-shucks demeanor and an All-American down-home fake accent, Ronald Reagan offered respite from nearly two decades of turmoil. He promised a Shining City on the Hill and trickle-down economics, and except for his own kind – the rich – he actually took a piss on the rest. All the promised showers were golden.

In America’s seeming zig-zag politics – Reagan begot a one-term Bush which led to led to “good old (iberal) boy” Clinton, a sorta two-term “left” wobble that boomeranged to a two-term “right” Bush, Cheney’s inside-job 9/11, briefly stunning the nation into a seeming unity until the real Bolton intent was made clear with a fraudulent WMD claim war, the catastrophic invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, and the deep fractures in our social comity stepped up into the glare of the spotlight. Soured on Bush’s “compassionate conservatism” liberals united behind the unheard of a silver-tongued black candidate, and Obama, at best a center-Republican of yore inside, was readily voted in, the Establishment’s Harvard-trained Manchurian Candidate, who deftly pulled the wool over the fawning liberals so pleased with themselves for showing their I-am-not-a-racist credentials for having voted for him. Of course he could move in next door, though a guy from the hood with a boom box doing rap at the BBQ might not be so welcome.

Obama policies, liberal on the identity politics side, pro Wall Street and hard-core military-industrial complex War War War on the foreign policy side, (but for Obama discreetly, with drones, off-the-books, black-ops, not spoken of lest the liberals notice) managed to flummox the nation. We were, said he and others, now post-racial. For eight years it became socially unPC to murmur anything that could be interpreted as racist or sexist or any violation of someone’s norms. While ample signs pointed to the volcano just beneath the surface of our shared politics, the elite of the Beltway chose not to see it. In private they spoke of “deplorables” and simply missed what had been going on for 40 years behind their backs, off in the backwaters of “fly-over” land, that “globalization” had decimated and left behind. (Read William Kittredge’s 1998 book Who Owns the West for a prescient early view of this.)

Helen Frankenthaler

The flim-flam snake-oil salesman is embedded into our culture as deeply as anything: American as apple-pie. Right down to our bedrock myths of ourselves, the scrappy pilgrims who built up New World from scratch. Forget about the millions of indigenous people who were already here; forget about the millions of slaves. And so on – it is a tired myth woven of lies and self-delusion. Presently we are experiencing its death throes, the shudder of a centuries old society as it faces the mirror and cannot face the image which returns its stare. We are brutal. We are ugly. We are evil.

We are 4.4% of the world’s human population sitting on 7% of its landmass and gorging on 25% of the world’s resources. We do this by having had the economic weight and military force to seize these resources by blackmail, extortion, military threats and when those fail, pure military force. We have done it for some centuries now. We are an empire, and as usual, an evil one. Like all empires we pretend we’re the guys in white hats.

An honest history of ourselves tells us this was always so, and that the heroic stories we concocted for ourselves were false. But before we bow out, we have a last show-biz conman to survive and his millions of followers, many or them allegedly devout Christians who wallow in resentment and hatred, while clutching the Cross. Hypocrisy, if one reads our history well, is as American as apple pie too.

I hear America singing, the varied carols I hear, Those of mechanics, each one singing his as it should be blithe and strong, The carpenter singing his as he measures his plank or beam, The mason singing his as he makes ready for work, or leaves off work, The boatman singing what belongs to him in his boat, the deckhand singing on the steamboat deck, The shoemaker singing as he sits on his bench, the hatter singing as he stands, The wood-cutter’s song, the ploughboy’s on his way in the morning, or at noon intermission or at sundown, The delicious singing of the mother, or of the young wife at work, or of the girl sewing or washing, Each singing what belongs to him or her and to none else, The day what belongs to the day—at night the party of young fellows, robust, friendly, Singing with open mouths their strong melodious songs.

Walt Whitman

Our poet laureate sang his songs, enticing, beautiful. And they offered one of the many threads which make up the tapestry of our communal delusion. These days his self-celebration has curdled, as it has now many times, into a narcissism of feel-good gestures – yoga and recycling and solar panels and panels of Norman Vincent Peale emulators speaking the newest hip phrases of the same old balm. Atop the curdled pop culture of our time sits a vulgarian impressario, a narcissist of the first rank, ready to lead his base of last-gasp old white racists over the buffalo cliff, taking everyone with him.

America I’ve given you all and now I’m nothing. America two dollars and twentyseven cents January 17, 1956. I can’t stand my own mind. America when will we end the human war? Go fuck yourself with your atom bomb. I don’t feel good don’t bother me. I won’t write my poem till I’m in my right mind. America when will you be angelic? When will you take off your clothes? When will you look at yourself through the grave? When will you be worthy of your million Trotskyites? America why are your libraries full of tears? America when will you send your eggs to India? I’m sick of your insane demands. When can I go into the supermarket and buy what I need with my good looks? America after all it is you and I who are perfect not the next world. Your machinery is too much for me. You made me want to be a saint. There must be some other way to settle this argument. Burroughs is in Tangiers I don’t think he’ll come back it’s sinister. Are you being sinister or is this some form of practical joke? I’m trying to come to the point. I refuse to give up my obsession. America stop pushing I know what I’m doing. America the plum blossoms are falling. I haven’t read the newspapers for months, everyday somebody goes on trial for murder. America I feel sentimental about the Wobblies. America I used to be a communist when I was a kid I’m not sorry. I smoke marijuana every chance I get. I sit in my house for days on end and stare at the roses in the closet. When I go to Chinatown I get drunk and never get laid. My mind is made up there’s going to be trouble. You should have seen me reading Marx. My psychoanalyst thinks I’m perfectly right. I won’t say the Lord’s Prayer. I have mystical visions and cosmic vibrations. America I still haven’t told you what you did to Uncle Max after he came over from Russia. I’m addressing you. Are you going to let your emotional life be run by Time Magazine? I’m obsessed by Time Magazine. I read it every week. Its cover stares at me every time I slink past the corner candy store. I read it in the basement of the Berkeley Public Library. It’s always telling me about responsibility. Businessmen are serious. Movie producers are serious. Everybody’s serious but me. It occurs to me that I am America. I am talking to myself again.

Asia is rising against me. I haven’t got a chinaman’s chance. I’d better consider my national resources. My national resources consist of two joints of marijuana millions of genitals an unpublishable private literature that jetplanes 1400 miles an hour and twentyfive-thousand mental institutions. I say nothing about my prisons nor the millions of underprivileged who live in my flowerpots under the light of five hundred suns. I have abolished the whorehouses of France, Tangiers is the next to go. My ambition is to be President despite the fact that I’m a Catholic.

America how can I write a holy litany in your silly mood? I will continue like Henry Ford my strophes are as individual as his automobiles more so they’re all different sexes. America I will sell you strophes $2500 apiece $500 down on your old strophe America free Tom Mooney America save the Spanish Loyalists America Sacco & Vanzetti must not die America I am the Scottsboro boys. America when I was seven momma took me to Communist Cell meetings they sold us garbanzos a handful per ticket a ticket costs a nickel and the speeches were free everybody was angelic and sentimental about the workers it was all so sincere you have no idea what a good thing the party was in 1835 Scott Nearing was a grand old man a real mensch Mother Bloor the Silk-strikers’ Ewig-Weibliche made me cry I once saw the Yiddish orator Israel Amter plain.

Everybody must have been a spy. America you don’t really want to go to war. America its them bad Russians. Them Russians them Russians and them Chinamen. And them Russians. The Russia wants to eat us alive. The Russia’s power mad. She wants to take our cars from out our garages. Her wants to grab Chicago. Her needs a Red Reader’s Digest. Her wants our auto plants in Siberia. Him big bureaucracy running our filling stations. That no good. Ugh. Him make Indians learn read. Him need big black niggers. Hah. Her make us all work sixteen hours a day. Help. America this is quite serious. America this is the impression I get from looking in the television set. America is this correct? I’d better get right down to the job. It’s true I don’t want to join the Army or turn lathes in precision parts factories, I’m nearsighted and psychopathic anyway. America I’m putting my queer shoulder to the wheel.

Allen Ginsburg, Berkeley, January 17, 1956

American Pastoral #29 A year and some has passed since my last Pastoral, and in some sense it seems as if nothing has changed, though in truth much has changed.

#Allen Ginsberg #Andy Warhol #Barnum and Bailey #Danny Lyons #Helen Frankenthaler #Norman Rockwell #Richard Avedon #Ronald Reagan #Thomas Eakins #Walt Whitman #Wild Bill Cody

0 notes

astiroseani-blog · 7 years

Photo

THIS IS WHY DONALD TRUMP'S MANIFESTO DOESN'T ADD UP. Economic growth in America. Who gained and who lost? Despite the consistent economic growth over the last three decades, the wages of middle class workers haven't quite changed - with only $280 increase in their monthly pay after thirty years. While big companies' CEOs now earn 400 times more than their average workers, although the number was 40 times already 30 years ago. But wait, the wealthiest 400 Americans are even wealthier than the 150 million lowest earners put together! More than 60% of Democrats and 50% of independents said the social inequality was a very big problem, versus only 28% of Republicans. Four-in-ten Republicans termed the gap either a small problem (22%) or not a problem at all (18%). Well, if we use common sense, this is a HUGE problem for all. But, where did it all go wrong? 1. Tax cuts that benefit the haves - under Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush administration (1958-2008). The average effective tax rate (the money people pay after all the tricks and loopholes) has dropped from 51% to 26% for the top 1%. When in 1950-1960s, they paid 70% tax on the over one million dollars income they earn. 2. Capital gains (profits that come off property business, bonds, stocks) that are taxed at only 15% instead of the 35% for wages in their tax bracket. While the middle-class workers' income tax increased by 1% to 16%. 3. Big corporate money that comes into politics that ended up only skewing the focus away from taking care of the poor. Now, we have political campaigns going on in America and that thing costs lots of money. The marketing, logistic, human resource come with a huge price tag. Just a quick nostalgia, the general election in 2012 cost $2 billion. Where did the money come from? Large corporations. The oil industry, for example, spends around $150 million each year on political campaigns with the expectation that the supported candidate or government will create laws and policies that benefit their business, e.g. tax breaks, job contracts or not signing the environmental protection bills. The tax breaks earn them approximately $2.5 billion/year. So, putting $150 million on a so called political investment is a capitalistically logical business move. Politicians will defend this practice by pontificating about the job opportunities that these corporates create for the working class. Meaning the benefit that the government give to the rich will spill over to the rest of the nation, or what people term as trickle down economics or horse and sparrow, which is a less elegant term to refer to the same idea. It is when you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows. That has never been the case, because the job opportunities are mostly abroad. Furthermore, IMF on its 2015 report argues that there is no trickle-down effect as the rich get richer. When the income share of the top 20 percent (the rich) increases, the GDP growth actually declines over the medium term, suggesting that the benefits do not trickle down. In contrast, an increase in the income share of the bottom 20 percent (the poor) is associated with higher GDP growth. But, Hillary, I thought we were together on this when you said "... And don't let anybody, don’t let anybody tell you, that, you know, it's corporations and businesses that create jobs. You know, that old theory, trickle-down economics. That has been tried. That has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly." But where are you standing exactly when it's all big corporations backing your campaigns? What to expect from you then? Wall Street Journal released a survey in 2012, that 35 largest American corporations created 333,000 jobs abroad, and only 113,000 in America itself from 2009-2011. There's only a tiny fraction of people making more than $1 million, and only a tiny fraction of that tiny fraction is traditional job creators. Some of those business owners are hedge fund managers or wealthy lawyers. They also don't do much hiring and so why the system has to be so generous to them? So, shrinking tax revenue to pamper big donors clearly doesn't do any good to the country, but some politicians deliberately putting themselves in this catch 22 situation and exploiting the political illiteracy that their voters suffer from. With less tax coming in, the country ended up with worse public services. Education spending dropped from 12% in 1970s to 3% in 2011. In 2012, the Republicans in the House of Representatives cut $3.3 trillion from low-income programs over the next decade, meaning 14-28 million low-income people will have less health care coverage on top of dealing with food stamps reduction. Some people are not just conservatives, they are actually regressive from politics perspective or basically -retarded- in a straight up no bullshit term. For example, people who identify themselves with the Tea Party, that want to abolish the public achievements made over the years, hence taking us back in time, when there was no social security, unemployment insurance, healthcare, labor laws, gay marriage or minimum wage. They are ideologically immune to science and unwilling to compromise on anything and no, I will not go over the demographic characteristic of these people. There are people who are so obsessed in turning America into this imaginary wilderness where the government will do as little as possible to help the people in need, in order to cut off every potential unnatural dependencies which in their unjustifiable fear could disrupt the process of natural selection. Their method is one that fosters Social Darwinism mentality, where only those who are strong deserve to survive and lead the strong society. Those who are not? Let them die. Which was exactly what Ron Paul implied in a Republican debate in 2011 on the issue of healthcare, when he was asked how he would handle an insured sick American who needs 6 months of intensive treatment to survive. His response: "That's what freedom is all about: taking your own risks". So basically, if you die, it is your fault. Although Ron Paul got away with this idiocy by putting it into a more decent sounding context. But still, this is a legit example of Social Darwinism. Believe it or not, some people that run the office believe that they have been pretty generous already for letting you live in this land. And for those who want to bring about changes, especially women, there is a special place in hell for you. Well, if that's the case, why don't we all just #berninhell.

2 notes · View notes

persinmon · 5 years

Text

Republicans really be putting the "trick" in trickle down economics

#republicans #bunch of assholes

0 notes

vicoilsteems · 6 years

Text

THE MORE YOU KNOW . . . What is Neo-liberalism ? Neo-liberalism" is a set of economic policies that have become widespread during the last 25 years or so. Although the word is rarely heard in the United States, you can clearly see the effects of neo-liberalism here as the rich grow richer and the poor grow poorer.

"Liberalism" can refer to political, economic, or even religious ideas. In the U.S. political liberalism has been a strategy to prevent social conflict. It is presented to poor and working people as progressive compared to conservative or Rightwing. Economic liberalism is different. Conservative politicians who say they hate "liberals" -- meaning the political type -- have no real problem with economic liberalism, including neoliberalism.

"Neo" means we are talking about a new kind of liberalism. So what was the old kind? The liberal school of economics became famous in Europe when Adam Smith, an Scottish economist, published a book in 1776 called THE WEALTH OF NATIONS. He and others advocated the abolition of government intervention in economic matters. No restrictions on manufacturing, no barriers to commerce, no tariffs, he said; free trade was the best way for a nation's economy to develop. Such ideas were "liberal" in the sense of no controls. This application of individualism encouraged "free" enterprise," "free" competition -- which came to mean, free for the capitalists to make huge profits as they wished.

Economic liberalism prevailed in the United States through the 1800s and early 1900s. Then the Great Depression of the 1930s led an economist named John Maynard Keynes to a theory that challenged liberalism as the best policy for capitalists. He said, in essence, that full employment is necessary for capitalism to grow and it can be achieved only if governments and central banks intervene to increase employment. These ideas had much influence on President Roosevelt's New Deal -- which did improve life for many people. The belief that government should advance the common good became widely accepted.

But the capitalist crisis over the last 25 years, with its shrinking

profit rates, inspired the corporate elite to revive economic liberalism. That's what makes it "neo" or new. Now, with the rapid globalization of the capitalist economy, we are seeing neo-liberalism on a global scale.

A memorable definition of this process came from Subcomandante Marcos at the Zapatista-sponsored Encuentro Intercontinental por la Humanidad y contra el Neo-liberalismo (Inter-continental Encounter for Humanity and Against Neo-liberalism) of August 1996 in Chiapas when he said: "what the Right offers is to turn the world into one big mall where they can buy Indians here, women there ...." and he might have added, children, immigrants, workers or even a whole country like Mexico."

The main points of neo-liberalism include:

THE RULE OF THE MARKET.Liberating "free" enterprise or private enterprise from any bonds imposed by the government (the state) no matter how much social damage this causes. Greater openness to international trade and investment, as in NAFTA. Reduce wages by de-unionizing workers and eliminating workers' rights that had been won over many years of struggle. No more price controls. All in all, total freedom of movement for capital, goods and services. To convince us this is good for us, they say "an unregulated market is the best way to increase economic growth, which will ultimately benefit everyone." It's like Reagan's "supply-side" and "trickle-down" economics -- but somehow the wealth didn't trickle down very much.

CUTTING PUBLIC EXPENDITURE FOR SOCIAL SERVICES like education and health care. REDUCING THE SAFETY-NET FOR THE POOR, and even maintenance of roads, bridges, water supply -- again in the name of reducing government's role. Of course, they don't oppose government subsidies and tax benefits for business.

DEREGULATION. Reduce government regulation of everything that could diminsh profits, including protecting the environmentand safety on the job.

PRIVATIZATION. Sell state-owned enterprises, goods and services to private investors. This includes banks, key industries, railroads, toll highways, electricity, schools, hospitals and even fresh water. Although usually done in the name of greater efficiency, which is often needed, privatization has mainly had the effect of concentrating wealth even more in a few hands and making the public pay even more for its needs.

ELIMINATING THE CONCEPT OF "THE PUBLIC GOOD" or "COMMUNITY"and replacing it with "individual responsibility." Pressuring the poorest people in a society to find solutions to their lack of health care, education and social security all by themselves -- then blaming them, if they fail, as "lazy."

Around the world, neo-liberalism has been imposed by powerful financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank. It is raging all over Latin America. The first clear example of neo-liberalism at work came in Chile (with thanks to University of Chicago economist Milton Friedman), after the CIA-supported coup against the popularly elected Allende regime in 1973. Other countries followed, with some of the worst effects in Mexico where wages declined 40 to 50% in the first year of NAFTA while the cost of living rose by 80%. Over 20,000 small and medium businesses have failed and more than 1,000 state-owned enterprises have been privatized in Mexico. As one scholar said, "Neoliberalism means the neo-colonization of Latin America."

In the United States neo-liberalism is destroying welfare programs;

attacking the rights of labor (including all immigrant workers); and

cutbacking social programs. The Republican "Contract" on America is pure

neo-liberalism. Its supporters are working hard to deny protection to

children, youth, women, the planet itself -- and trying to trick us into

acceptance by saying this will "get government off my back." The

beneficiaries of neo-liberalism are a minority of the world's people. For

the vast majority it brings even more suffering than before: suffering

without the small, hard-won gains of the last 60 years, suffering without

end.

0 notes

patriotsnet · 3 years

Text

What Will Happen If Republicans Win

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/what-will-happen-if-republicans-win/

What Will Happen If Republicans Win

So How Can Republicans Win Without Texas

A smaller margin than if the Republicans flipped Minnesota, but a victory nonetheless.

All maps courtesy of 270towin.com

TAGS

What If The Republicans Win Everything Again

Total victory for the G.O.P. would mean Trump unleashed.

Opinion Columnist

A Division Of Power In Government Is Common In The Us With The Republicans And The Democrats Often Splitting Control Of The White House And Congress

The Hill November 9, 2020

Why is control of the Senate so important?

How would a Republican Senate affect a Biden presidency?

How likely is it that a Republican Senate compromises with President Elect Biden?

What If Republicans Win The Midterms

March 3, 2018

What will happen if no such wave materializes and that pressure-relief valve jams shut?

This November, if the wave turns out to be a mere trickle, we could see the accomplishment of that goal take hold.

Gold If Republicans Win The Election

Oliver said if President Donald Trump pulls out a surprise victory in the election, the gold price could plunge, just as it did after the 2016 election. That happened against expectations.

“The precious metals offer safe haven from the approaching political and economic turbulence,” Oliver wrote. “After a relatively brief correction, gold and silver have resumed their climb.”

“Given the economic and political risks, $1,900/oz is a bargain,” he declared.”

TAGS

Reality Check 1: Biden Cant Be Fdr

Lessons Democrats Can Learn From The 2020 Elections

Why are the elections taking place now?

Perdue came closest he won 49.7% of the vote to Ossoff’s 47.9%. Calculated another way, out of almost 5 million votes cast, Perdue missed avoiding a runoff by a little over 13,000 votes.

The Loeffler-Warnock race had another hurdle. Because it was a special election, there weren’t primaries and everyone ran on the same ballot together at once.

In a field of 20 candidates, including a prominent Republican challenger, Loeffler got just over a quarter of the vote.

Warnock actually finished ahead of her, with about a third of the vote. But when the votes were combined by party in that race, Republicans were narrowly ahead of Democrats, 49.4% to 48.4%.

Interest is high, given not just the money spent, but the high early-vote turnout, which began Dec. 14 and continued through Friday.

Column: What Happens If Republicans Win The Senate

Copy Link URLCopied!

For most of the year, it seemed almost certain that Republicans would win the six additional U.S. Senate seats they need to oust the Democrats from their majority and take control of Congress.

It even seems possible that Senate elections could end in a draw, with a 50-50 split, in which case Vice President Joe Biden would cast votes as a tiebreaker.

And thats not even the most exotic possibility.

But the most intriguing scenario for next years Senate, paradoxically, is the least exotic one: What happens if Republicans win a slim majority of 51 or 52 seats?

More Tax Cuts For The Wealthy And Further Spending Cuts For Middle

Here Is What’s In The Covid

What does the early voting tell us?

It’s always a little tricky to interpret early-voting data and ascribe real meaning to it, but Democrats see some hopeful signs.

Of course, Democrats saw hope in early-voting numbers in Texas before Nov. 3, and Trump wound up winning that state by 6 points, a wider margin than the polls had predicted.

How much money has been spent on the races?

With outside groups included, Republicans have outspent Democrats $271 million to $218 million.

What Happens When Republicans Simply Refuse To Certify Democratic Wins

Its something we need to start preparing for now.

And no, thats not an exaggeration. Everything were seeing from the Republican Party is pointing directly to it in 2024.

Support Nonprofit Journalism

A Vote To Repeal The Affordable Care Act

What To Watch For

How Challenges To States Electors Will Work

Lawmakers dont have to give a detailed explanation of why they object; they just object in writing, which Pence will read out loud.

What If The 2020 Election Audits Show Trump Really Won

I. This we do know…

* With a strict constructionist view of the wording in the Constitution, the words are not there to “road map” how to fix possible presidential election fraud.

* The Constitution mentions nothing about the Electoral College re-convening. Historically, the Electoral College has never re-convened for a second time for a presidential certification.

* We know that President Trump is planning something very big and important this summer, and America might look and feel very different by Labor Day Weekend.

Texas Republican Suggests Civil War Will Happen If Democrats Win Georgia Senate Runoffs

During an appearance on Fox News, Rep. Chip Roy told host Tucker Carlson:

But that wasnt all Roy had to say. He added:

i uh..i think a republican member of congress just threatened civil war if the dems win in georgia tomorrow pic.twitter.com/yZhwB75Up1

Andrew Lawrence January 5, 2021

Weakening Of The Investigations Against Trump

More importantly, after the 2018 elections, the electoral process will recede as a constraint on the president and GOP in terms of the Russia investigation at least for a while.

What Congress Is Doing On Wednesday

Wednesday is the penultimate step in the post-election process. All thats left after that is to inaugurate Biden.

I Do Not Buy That A Social Media Ban Hurts Trumps 2024 Aspirations: Nate Silver

What do we make of that playbook headed into 2022? Likewise, as the party in charge, what are Democrats planning for?

With that being said, the GOPs strategies could still gin up turnout among its base, in particular, but its hard to separate that from general dissatisfaction with Biden.

0 notes