Are we seeing a realignment of politics?

[renard_ruse]

It won't sit well with those of you wedded to your existing notions of left vs. right, and to the Rorys, etc, who see everything as a demographic oppression issue, but I predict we are seeing a very profound realignment of American, and maybe even western politics in general.

I can make a good case that Trump is farther left on many issues than Hillary and the current Democrat establishment. On economics, on foreign policy, perhaps on some other issues as well, one can argue Trump is farther left or at least is heading that direction.

Trump dispatched the GOP establishment wing, the neo-con wing, and the Cruz wing to a lesser extent, so easily. It was like cutting through butter when you consider he was an outsider, with no electoral experience and just mowed them all down one by one. Clearly their time was done.

In 2018 and 2020, you can expect to see more and more little Trumps popping up for other offices. I don't see how the establishment and neo-con wings can survive, they will probably gradually melt into the Democrats. The Cruz/Tea Party wing is not really large enough to survive on its own and I don't see them joining the Dems, they will probably have no choice but to be a minor partner with whatever succeeds the Trump movement.

I think we will see a new patriotic left movement emerge on the right, and a neo-conservative establishment movement on the left, and eventually shift places on the spectrum.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

In the 1992 presidential election, Ross Perot won almost 19% of the popular vote and people were jacking off all over themselves about an effective end to the two party system.

It didn't happen, of course, and nothing earth shaking will emerge from this election either. Except that either the clown or the cynic will become President. That's plenty bad enough.

 

[renard_ruse]

In the 1992 presidential election, Ross Perot won almost 19% of the popular vote and people were jacking off all over themselves about an effective end to the two party system.

It didn't happen, of course, and nothing earth shaking will emerge from this election either. Except that either the clown or the cynic will become President. That's plenty bad enough.

Sorry, you are very wrong.

Perot was clearly within the existing political framework of the time in an ideological sense (he was sort of in the center, against partisanship per se, but with more of a populist conservative streak). He was a maverick but there wasn't anything fundamentally different from existing conceptions of what a normal political alignment is.

This time there is something fundamentally different. I think its fairly clear that conservatism as we've known it since Goldwater, and certainly since Reagan, has been pretty much past its expiration date for a while now. All movements get stale and wither eventually. And pretty much nobody outside the beltway has any use for RINOs.

On the left, the old liberalism is being replaced by Bernie's crazies demanding free stuff and Hillary's basically neo-liberal economics, globalist worldview and an an extreme obsession with demographic pandering to win elections.

There is something sure as heck going on that we haven't seen before in the fifth/sixth party system.

 

[renard_ruse]

Keep in mind I'm not saying there will be an end to the two party system, but what the parties stand for will morph into something very different than what we're conditioned to.

My premise is that the Republicans will end up on the left of the Democrats on most issues, though still to the right if you want to call it that on many cultural issues.

For example, Democrats will become openly the party of Wall Street and big money, and the Republicans the party against big financial interests.

We're told it won't happen because of demographics and ethnic voting patterns, but I think that may start to break down sooner or later for a number of reasons, particularly if the new populist/leftist GOP can phrase the issues effectively which is possible if done correctly.

 

[snugglestruggle]

I would say what we are seeing is the beginning of a wave of rejection of globalism. After 35 years people are waking up realizing while it has brought cheap consumer goods, it also cost them the good paying middle class jobs which were the engine that made it possible for people to move up in the world.

Back when we made things, factory jobs made it possible for under educated people to find good paying work to support a family, or pay for their further education. Can't do that on a FF , target or Walmart salary.

 

[Conager]

Goldwater lost, and Reagan was an anomaly. For the most part the Rockefeller Republicans took back over and are in control to this day. There's nothing for particularly conservative about them.

Goldwater, a staunch cold warrior, perhaps somewhat appropriate to his time, failed to heed Ike's warnings about the dangers of the burgeoning military-industrial complex. Goldwater was a tremendous defense budget proponent. Partly because he like to fly. He qualified on every single plane in the Air Force's inventory. Held the rank of major-general in the reserves, I beleive.

 

[Conager]

I would say what we are seeing is the beginning of a wave of rejection of globalism. After 35 years people are waking up realizing while it has brought cheap consumer goods, it also cost them the good paying middle class jobs which were the engine that made it possible for people to move up in the world.

Back when we made things, factory jobs made it possible for under educated people to find good paying work to support a family, or pay for their further education. Can't do that on a FF , target or Walmart salary.

Nonsense. Good paying jobs were an illusion bought with direct protectionist measures, indirect ones through regulatory bars to vompetition and the appearance of ever-increasing wages and real estate values because of ever-decreasing value of our fiat currency. Soros is a amateur dillitante compared to what the Fed has wrought.

None of that was sustainable, and no amount of protectionism will bring it back.

 

[Jessie_Pinkman]

Carter / Reagan- Bush / Clinton / Bush jr / Obama....
I think it's all patternless.

Trump just happened to be at the right place at the right time to catch lightning in a bottle- he's flipping the finger at every career politician, and the white low to lower middle class is using him to express their dissatisfaction (to put it mildly).

 

[snugglestruggle]

Nonsense. Good paying jobs were an illusion bought with direct protectionist measures, indirect ones through regulatory bars to vompetition and the appearance of ever-increasing wages and real estate values because of ever-decreasing value of our fiat currency. Soros is a amateur dillitante compared to what the Fed has wrought.

None of that was sustainable, and no amount of protectionism will bring it back.

Then explain the Brexit, the Rise of Nationalism in Germany, France, Poland, Czech, people are getting sick of globalism and it's economic effects. It's not all about the mooslam invasion into Europe. Look at their economies, read what people are saying, the writing is on the wall.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Then explain the Brexit, the Rise of Nationalism in Germany, France, Poland, Czech, people are getting sick of globalism and it's economic effects. It's not all about the mooslam invasion into Europe. Look at their economies, read what people are saying, the writing is on the wall.

No amount of anger alters reality though.

 

[BotanyBoy]

No amount of anger alters reality though.

Which reality?

 

[patient1]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features...-like-kasich-supporters/?ex_cid=2016-forecast

Here's a recent article from Five-Thirty -Eight

"There seem to be two main camps of Republican opposition to Trump. One, embodied by Kasich, objects to Trump on experiential and temperamental grounds — Trump is playing to cultural grievances on issues such as immigration, and the Kasich camp wants a more inclusive GOP. The other, embodied by Cruz, objects to Trump on ideological grounds — he’s not a conservative, they argue.

Both Cruz and Kasich have refused to endorse Trump. But, as Hanna shows, the Kasich camp appears to be the one more likely to oppose Trump in the general election."


Conclusion-
"There seem to be two main camps of Republican opposition to Trump. One, embodied by Kasich, objects to Trump on experiential and temperamental grounds — Trump is playing to cultural grievances on issues such as immigration, and the Kasich camp wants a more inclusive GOP. The other, embodied by Cruz, objects to Trump on ideological grounds — he’s not a conservative, they argue.

Both Cruz and Kasich have refused to endorse Trump. But, as Hanna shows, the Kasich camp appears to be the one more likely to oppose Trump in the general election."


So cheer up, Renard! The future Republican Party should be more to your way of thinking. Whether or not G.W. Bush was the last Republican President remains to be seen, but I think you are right that there is a transformation in progress.

 

[Conager]

Then explain the Brexit, the Rise of Nationalism in Germany, France, Poland, Czech, people are getting sick of globalism and it's economic effects. It's not all about the mooslam invasion into Europe. Look at their economies, read what people are saying, the writing is on the wall.

Easily.

The little Dutch boy with his finger in the dyke. the only reason that we are not all living in abject poverty and have lots of nice reasonably well made inexpensive things is because we are able to import from the world at what are actually Market valued prices. Not artificially inflated prices. Chasing higher wages through protectionism, which would of course increase the price of everything that we buy, is exactly as stupid as raising the minimum wage.

Not because it's inherently morally wrong or any other thing it's simply because it's chasing your tail and it's inefficient. The market never rewards inefficiency with wealth and prosperity. any incremental games that you may see showing such statistics as rising wages will be eroded away carefully through currency manipulation.

There is no way short of outlawing fiat currency and absolute control and confiscation of all known mediums to transfer wealth to goods and services you cannot stop the flow of money.

Money exactly like water and electricity follows the path of least resistance.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Which reality?

Really any of it. Anger might inspire some people but even that isn't common.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Really any of it. Anger might inspire some people but even that isn't common.

I'll agree it isn't common but when it does there is either an atrocity or a big fucking change.

 

[Conager]

I'll agree it isn't common but when it does there is either an atrocity or a big fucking change.

I wouldn't mind seeing the whole thing degenerate into French revolutions style anger, no matter what the source or direction or whether those pushing for change were on "my" side or not.

The American Revolution by comparison was a little pussifide.

Something has to give, before anything is going to improve. I used to not be a fan of the left's delight at the "cleverness" of some sort of Cloward- Piven collapse. Now I kind of wish they would because I'm pretty sure that they'd end up, justly, on the losing side of things.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I wouldn't mind seeing the whole thing degenerate into French revolutions style anger, no matter what the source or direction or whether those pushing for change were on "my" side or not.

The American Revolution by comparison was a little pussifide.

Something has to give, before anything is going to improve. I used to not be a fan of the left's delight at the "cleverness" of some sort of Cloward- Piven collapse. Now I kind of wish they would because I'm pretty sure that they'd end up, justly, on the losing side of things.

I'd make so much fucking money it would be insane. Probabbly end up in the hospital from exhaustion and extended erection problems I got from counting money.

No more Sac/DC telling me I'm not allowed to make money....what a fucking dream.

So I'm all about burning the house down.

I'd be happy to rebuild it bigger, better, and by better I mean full of drugs, sex and rock n' roll.....wed/sat are hip hop night.