So where are we? (1 Viewer)

My frustration from a couple of days ago caused me to think a little bit about the current state of our political affairs. There are some pretty big divides between the two parties right now: on climate change, gun control, health care, immigration, income inequality, just to mention a few. Of these, I would list climate change as the most pressing concern, but I'm not sure it matters. Here's why:

1. Trump could easily win a second term. A few swing states will decide, so it could happen. But if it does, he will still have to work with a Democratic House- that's almost guaranteed at this point. Which means that it will be no different from the last 4 years of Obama's presidency- effective gridlock. Maybe we'll get an infrastructure deal done, as everybody seems to want that, but if it hasn't happened already, I have my doubts. Besides, can anyone really see McConnell, Pelosi, and Trump working together in a year from now after the impeachment and what is bound to be a very very ugly election?

On foreign affairs and trade, a re-elected President Trump will no doubt continue to pursue his nationalist, protectionist, and isolationist goals. But he can only go so far, because most of the leaders of his own party simply do not agree with him on these issues. As with the first 4 years, 90% of what Trump does will be vitriolic talk.

2. Trump could easily lose a second term. In fact I think it's likely that he will for reasons I've gone into before, especially now that it appears that Warren is waning. But let's suppose that either Biden or Buttigieg are elected. What then? Just as a Democratic House is almost guaranteed, so is a Republican senate.  Which means that every major move one of these guys try to make- whether it's climate change, gun control, health care, immigration- it's all going to be blocked. Again, we may get infrastructure, along with a return to normalcy in foreign policy. Is that enough?

(Let me add that I have some deeper negative thoughts on climate change, which are that ANY proposed privation or taxation of any kind designed to deal with this issue will be campaigned against and likely undone the next time a Republican is elected. Which makes me wonder if our political system is simply incapable of dealing with a problem of this magnitude.)

Obviously whoever wins the structure of the Supreme Court will change (though not necessarily the lesser courts- on those, if its a Democrat in the White House expect McConnell to continue to block as many appointments as he can get away with). And that's important enough. If Ruth Bader Ginsburg is replaced with another liberal, it will remain an unsteady 5-4 conservative majority. But if she is replaced by a conservative then perhaps certain rights like abortion and gay marriage really could be in jeopardy.

In any case, I'm not seeing a lot of hope for progress here, one way or another. We seem really divided. Are we going to need to be attacked or suffer through another economic calamity in order to reach some consensus again?

It's not easy for Dems to win the Senate but it's also not impossible.

fatguyinalittlecoat said:

It's not easy for Dems to win the Senate but it's also not impossible.

Click to expand...

Not impossible but it doesn't seem likely to me.

Still let's suppose they do win it with a slight 1 or 2 majority. That would give Biden or Buttigieg the political capital for maybe ONE major legislative decision. Here are their choices:

1. Repeal the Trump tax plan.

2. Some kind of climate change deal.

3. Improve/protect Obamacare (you can forget about Medicare for All or even a public option, I think.)

4. Immigration reform.

5. Gun control.

Which?

Why are we so completely opposite on every issue? I don’t understand how we have two parties that are so exactly opposite on what to accomplish vs how it is done. It seems it used to be we have the same basic goals just have a different idea on how to get there. Now it’s like since Al Gore made climate change his baby republicans must deny it exists or it makes al gore look smart. 

Snorkelson said:

Why are we so completely opposite on every issue? I don’t understand how we have two parties that are so exactly opposite on what to accomplish vs how it is done. It seems it used to be we have the same basic goals just have a different idea on how to get there. Now it’s like since Al Gore made climate change his baby republicans must deny it exists or it makes al gore look smart. 

Click to expand...

Democrats have done a very poor job making the case that climate change is a major concern.  I just haven't read anything that proves it is an issue.

If Trump wins again, wouldn’t there be a good chance the Republicans would win back the House? Why would it be different than 2016?

I think its interesting that by and large, if you look at a person's opinion on any one of those issues its usually predictive of their views on the rest.  That's really bad.  Gun control, abortion, climate change and immigration policies are not connected in any way, but somehow how a person falls on one topic tends to inform on the others.  It seems rare to hold disparate (from a party standpoint) viewpoints on these topics.  It just firms up the belief that we've gone so tribal that I don't know where we go from here.  

Regarding the wheels of government moving along, it was designed to be a slow, laborious slog, so I'm not too concerned.  Of the issues @timschochet listed I'd say Climate Change and Immigration Reform are without a doubt the two biggest, most impactful and necessary policies that would need to be tackled.

Snorkelson said:

Why are we so completely opposite on every issue? I don’t understand how we have two parties that are so exactly opposite on what to accomplish vs how it is done. It seems it used to be we have the same basic goals just have a different idea on how to get there. Now it’s like since Al Gore made climate change his baby republicans must deny it exists or it makes al gore look smart. 

Click to expand...

I've wondered about this, too. How are there so many people who agree with so many of a particular party's positions? If a party takes a position on 100 topics, there seem to be way too many people who agree with the party on like 99 of those positions. The skeptical side of me thinks that a lot of people/voters really don't agree with the position of their party but they act as if they do based on party unity, kind of like what an actual politician would do.

For some party affiliations, I think it makes more sense because their platforms are more consistently aligned with an overall world view. For example, Libertarians are small government and apply that to just about everything. I assume (really showing my ignorance here) the Green Party approaches policies based on how it impacts the environment? With Ds and Rs, I get the sense that their positions are based on being the opposite of the other side. If Ds take a position first on a topic, Rs will take the opposite position and vice versa. I guess we've heard that Ds are for smaller government when it comes to "what we do in our home" and bigger government when it comes to business and society as a whole and, again, Rs are the opposite. So maybe that's the world view. But I feel like there might be holes there and there are examples where that's not true and Ds and Rs claim positions that are inconsistent with such a world view. I get the sense that their world view is "stick to our current positions no matter what and then take the opposite position of our opponent on anything new."

This is a big reason I am unaffiliated. I don't like litmus tests or that if I choose a party I must be for A,B and C OR D. E, F.

As to which initiative would be undertaken, my guess is heath care. It is the pocketbook issue that affects people now.

Snorkelson said:

Why are we so completely opposite on every issue? I don’t understand how we have two parties that are so exactly opposite on what to accomplish vs how it is done. It seems it used to be we have the same basic goals just have a different idea on how to get there. Now it’s like since Al Gore made climate change his baby republicans must deny it exists or it makes al gore look smart. 

Click to expand...

This is one of the reasons I rail against the 2-party system.  Tim and others have done a good job explaining their reasons why it's good but I just keep coming back to the point that there is no nuance any more.  I only have two choices and sure there's argument to be made about how bad one of them may be currently at the top of the ticket but it would be nice if people could be allowed to not adopt the entire platform of one party without being labeled a ___________.

Mystery Achiever said:

As to which initiative would be undertaken, my guess is heath care. It is the pocketbook issue that affects people now.

Click to expand...

Putting aside everything but the political, if I was in the leadership from either side, I'd be thinking, "Dems get Obamacare passed, get crushed in the next election. Trump spends his first year trying to get rid of Obamacare and Republicans get crushed in the next election, and healthcare is the leading issue."

So I'm thinking I don't want to touch that one. You make any change at all you get punished for it. 

timschochet said:

Not impossible but it doesn't seem likely to me.

Click to expand...

Democrats are slightly less likely to take the Senate than Republicans are to take the House. (34% and 27%, respectively.)

Juxtatarot said:

If Trump wins again, wouldn’t there be a good chance the Republicans would win back the House? Why would it be different than 2016?

Click to expand...

In 2016 the House was already Republican. I don't think Trump has those kind of coattails.

"Act like wherever you are, that's the place to be"

-Damone

I think the Dems have to focus on the White House first, hold the House, and then go extremely hard at the Senate. I'm talking all hands on deck financing and recruiting Senate candidates. The POTUS has to be the salesman getting out there and explaining to voters that the kind of "do nothing" leadership McConnell has been engaged in with bills piled up on his desk is extremely harmful to the country.

timschochet said:

Putting aside everything but the political, if I was in the leadership from either side, I'd be thinking, "Dems get Obamacare passed, get crushed in the next election. Trump spends his first year trying to get rid of Obamacare and Republicans get crushed in the next election, and healthcare is the leading issue."

So I'm thinking I don't want to touch that one. You make any change at all you get punished for it. 

Click to expand...

Running on healthcare has been credited with Dem wins in 2016 and it polls as top or among top issues. Seems if you don't address it, a Senate (or House) majority could be short-lived.

What's your guess? 

America is so 20th century. Where are we now, in 2019? Passed by the China juggernaut in many ways. Embrace it, learn Mandarin. We’re done.

Juxtatarot said:

If Trump wins again, wouldn’t there be a good chance the Republicans would win back the House? Why would it be different than 2016?

Click to expand...

If Trump wins again - its not based on broad support, but rather concentrated support in key areas.  That does not necessarily lead to shifts in the House.

A landslide ensues if the Democrats hammer home a government funded healthcare option that people can choose to participate in if they want to.  This was a huge issue in 2018 and the GOP has made it more of a burden since then.  ACA is becoming more and more of a money suck as they continue to chip away at it with no real answer in terms of a replacement.  All they are doing is making it more ineffective and doing nothing to address the cost side of the equation.

Sinn Fein said:

If Trump wins again - its not based on broad support, but rather concentrated support in key areas.  That does not necessarily lead to shifts in the House.

Click to expand...

But, like in 2016, gerrymandering has shown us that broad support isn’t needed for Republicans.

I’m not saying the Republicans would definitely win back the House, I just don’t think it’s “almost guaranteed” that Democrats would keep it as Tim mentioned.

The Commish said:

A landslide ensues if the Democrats hammer home a government funded healthcare option that people can choose to participate in if they want to.  This was a huge issue in 2018 and the GOP has made it more of a burden since then.  ACA is becoming more and more of a money suck as they continue to chip away at it with no real answer in terms of a replacement.  All they are doing is making it more ineffective and doing nothing to address the cost side of the equation.

Click to expand...

I’m not convinced a landslide would ensue. But even if you’re right it’s a catch 22 because you need a Democrat landslide in order to get that government option in the first place. 

Maurile Tremblay said:

Democrats are slightly less likely to take the Senate than Republicans are to take the House. (34% and 27%, respectively.)

Click to expand...

If the Democrat nominee is a moderate I think the likelihood of winning the Senate is higher than that - potentially quite a bit. The path is narrow, but the margins in those states were thin to begin with.

If it's Warren/Sanders then I think it's near 0.

unckeyherb said:

I think its interesting that by and large, if you look at a person's opinion on any one of those issues its usually predictive of their views on the rest.  That's really bad.  Gun control, abortion, climate change and immigration policies are not connected in any way, but somehow how a person falls on one topic tends to inform on the others.  It seems rare to hold disparate (from a party standpoint) viewpoints on these topics.  It just firms up the belief that we've gone so tribal that I don't know where we go from here.  

Regarding the wheels of government moving along, it was designed to be a slow, laborious slog, so I'm not too concerned.  Of the issues @timschochet listed I'd say Climate Change and Immigration Reform are without a doubt the two biggest, most impactful and necessary policies that would need to be tackled.

Click to expand...

Excellent points.  The question is what is the way forward?  Extremism has a stranglehold on both parties, can a moderate really break through and galvanize the middle?  If not we’re just going to swing from one extreme to another.....

Snorkelson said:

Why are we so completely opposite on every issue? I don’t understand how we have two parties that are so exactly opposite on what to accomplish vs how it is done. It seems it used to be we have the same basic goals just have a different idea on how to get there. Now it’s like since Al Gore made climate change his baby republicans must deny it exists or it makes al gore look smart. 

Click to expand...

Because those of us that don’t abide by a true party line have been marginalized by gerrymandering and other tactics that usurp the true will of the people. We are pulled to the extremes on one end, exacerbated by the Republicans “power at all costs” approach, which is a greater risk to long term democratic freedoms than even the recent rise of democratic socialism (the latter can be put back in the bottle.. once authoritarian rule takes hold, it only strengthens the vice’s grip around the neck of freedom).

pecorino said:

America is so 20th century. Where are we now, in 2019? Passed by the China juggernaut in many ways. Embrace it, learn Mandarin. We’re done.

Click to expand...

Those are serious statements. Can you please elaborate in detail?

Joe Bryant said:

Those are serious statements. Can you please elaborate in detail?

Click to expand...

Sure, although this is not the right place to pen my manifesto. One small personal observation: I work at an independent boarding school where we get candidates for admission from all over the world but mostly America and China. Lately, meaning in the past ten years or so, I've witnessed the rise of the "Holy Trinity" in diagnoses from incoming American ninth graders: Anxiety, Depression, ADHD. Many come with a side-dish of perfectionism. Not to say all of our domestic students are so diagnosed, but the percentage is rising and we are implementing programmatic changes to work with these kids. In short, we need to dial down the academics and ramp up the relationship building, self-reliance, being-a-human aspects of growing up. All good messages but they are beginning to choke out pieces of our academic program. Many of our students work at the honors level but almost as many need very significant social / emotional support along with aid with significant learning differences.

When our international students arrive in August, we hardly know them since their transcripts are undecipherable and so we need to place them into courses very quickly. We do some assessments and off they go. The percentage of those students with any of the aforementioned non-academic issues (or with a learning difference) is practically zero. Almost all enter into our honors-level math and science classes although, obviously, we are working with them at a much lower level in English and History since many read English at a 5th grade level. Now you might assume that we get the cream of the crop, seeing as how we are a boarding school, but we don't even sniff the kinds of kids that you might assume come from China. Since we are not in New England, nor have a prestigious pedigree, we are not getting the best, not even close. And the domestic students are eating their dust.

Twenty years ago, I would have said that the Americans still have the upper-hand. We used to be the best in the word at teaching students to make connections, solve problems creatively, collaborate across the disciplines. But other countries, namely China, are learning from us and are now passing us by. I have not even mentioned yet the sheer quantity of people in China which is a resource that no other country can touch.

I used to think that our leaders represented the best of our country and so long as we had honest, hard-working, reasonably intelligent folks at the top, then we'd still be OK. But it is clear that our leaders are more representative of my domestic teenage students. The confluence of our languishing (if not declining) educational system, our movement towards a post-fact, me-first, social media society, and the tribal partisanship among our leaders, has led to our decline in the past couple of decades while China and many other countries make gains. We rested on our laurels and have been (or are being) overtaken.

One link for evidentiary support. China education

Snorkelson said:

Why are we so completely opposite on every issue? I don’t understand how we have two parties that are so exactly opposite on what to accomplish vs how it is done. It seems it used to be we have the same basic goals just have a different idea on how to get there. Now it’s like since Al Gore made climate change his baby republicans must deny it exists or it makes al gore look smart. 

Click to expand...

I really don’t think the constituents are for the most part. The reason it’s like this in politics itself is that defining hot button and wedge issues is what drives campaign fundraising, both corporate and individual. And then politicians are driven by the fundraising.

timschochet said:

I’m not convinced a landslide would ensue. But even if you’re right it’s a catch 22 because you need a Democrat landslide in order to get that government option in the first place. 

Click to expand...

"landslide" is a bit of hyperbole here.  It was incredibly impactful during the midterms.  They need to continue on that path for 2020.  More importantly, whoever becomes the candidate for the Dems, they need to keep the focus on actual policy.  There are plenty to drag Trump through the impeachment gauntlet and the personal attacks.  And we all know he is incapable of ignoring that stuff himself.  It's all he really has.  The candidate needs to stay above all that nonsense and have a focused message on policy and getting America back on track.  This is one of the biggest reasons I want nothing to do with Biden.  I'll most assuredly focus on the noise.  That plays right into Trump's hands.  If you force Trump to talk actual policy and really press him on details, he's done.  It's the "Better to keep your mouth shut and keep them guessing rather than open it and remove all doubt" approach.  There isn't a single actual policy he is able to articulate in an intelligent, coherent way outside of locking up brown people and building walls.  That's not going to grown his support by itself.  

The Commish said:

"landslide" is a bit of hyperbole here.  It was incredibly impactful during the midterms.  They need to continue on that path for 2020.  More importantly, whoever becomes the candidate for the Dems, they need to keep the focus on actual policy.  There are plenty to drag Trump through the impeachment gauntlet and the personal attacks.  And we all know he is incapable of ignoring that stuff himself.  It's all he really has.  The candidate needs to stay above all that nonsense and have a focused message on policy and getting America back on track.  This is one of the biggest reasons I want nothing to do with Biden.  I'll most assuredly focus on the noise.  That plays right into Trump's hands.  If you force Trump to talk actual policy and really press him on details, he's done.  It's the "Better to keep your mouth shut and keep them guessing rather than open it and remove all doubt" approach.  There isn't a single actual policy he is able to articulate in an intelligent, coherent way outside of locking up brown people and building walls.  That's not going to grown his support by itself.  

Click to expand...

Yep, exactly like what just happened with the governor face in Kentucky. 

PELOSI:  ‘Civilization as We Know It Today Is at Stake in this Election’

Me:  'No, really it is not'

4 more years of bad immigration policy, bad tax policy, and slow action on climate change is not going to fundamentally change us.  And even it was possible (it is really not) to spend $92 trillion on a new green deal, it is only going to have a minimal impact as in a few hundredths of a degree over the next century. 

jon_mx said:

PELOSI:  ‘Civilization as We Know It Today Is at Stake in this Election’

Me:  'No, really it is not'

4 more years of bad immigration policy, bad tax policy, and slow action on climate change is not going to fundamentally change us.  And even it was possible (it is really not) to spend $92 trillion on a new green deal, it is only going to have a minimal impact as in a few hundredths of a degree over the next century. 

Click to expand...

I agree. 

Pelosi’s statement is hyperbole. 

pecorino said:

Sure, although this is not the right place to pen my manifesto. One small personal observation: I work at an independent boarding school where we get candidates for admission from all over the world but mostly America and China. Lately, meaning in the past ten years or so, I've witnessed the rise of the "Holy Trinity" in diagnoses from incoming American ninth graders: Anxiety, Depression, ADHD. Many come with a side-dish of perfectionism. Not to say all of our domestic students are so diagnosed, but the percentage is rising and we are implementing programmatic changes to work with these kids. In short, we need to dial down the academics and ramp up the relationship building, self-reliance, being-a-human aspects of growing up. All good messages but they are beginning to choke out pieces of our academic program. Many of our students work at the honors level but almost as many need very significant social / emotional support along with aid with significant learning differences.

When our international students arrive in August, we hardly know them since their transcripts are undecipherable and so we need to place them into courses very quickly. We do some assessments and off they go. The percentage of those students with any of the aforementioned non-academic issues (or with a learning difference) is practically zero. Almost all enter into our honors-level math and science classes although, obviously, we are working with them at a much lower level in English and History since many read English at a 5th grade level. Now you might assume that we get the cream of the crop, seeing as how we are a boarding school, but we don't even sniff the kinds of kids that you might assume come from China. Since we are not in New England, nor have a prestigious pedigree, we are not getting the best, not even close. And the domestic students are eating their dust.

Twenty years ago, I would have said that the Americans still have the upper-hand. We used to be the best in the word at teaching students to make connections, solve problems creatively, collaborate across the disciplines. But other countries, namely China, are learning from us and are now passing us by. I have not even mentioned yet the sheer quantity of people in China which is a resource that no other country can touch.

I used to think that our leaders represented the best of our country and so long as we had honest, hard-working, reasonably intelligent folks at the top, then we'd still be OK. But it is clear that our leaders are more representative of my domestic teenage students. The confluence of our languishing (if not declining) educational system, our movement towards a post-fact, me-first, social media society, and the tribal partisanship among our leaders, has led to our decline in the past couple of decades while China and many other countries make gains. We rested on our laurels and have been (or are being) overtaken.

One link for evidentiary support. China education

Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing the insight. 

Do you think the answer is to model China's leaders? If so, what elements?

Or is it more what you said and just a "We're done. Start learning Mandarin" thing? 

And I'd love to read the manifesto. Can you put it together in a new thread? 

China is clearly a crucial subject. 

pecorino said:

Sure, although this is not the right place to pen my manifesto. One small personal observation: I work at an independent boarding school where we get candidates for admission from all over the world but mostly America and China. Lately, meaning in the past ten years or so, I've witnessed the rise of the "Holy Trinity" in diagnoses from incoming American ninth graders: Anxiety, Depression, ADHD. Many come with a side-dish of perfectionism. Not to say all of our domestic students are so diagnosed, but the percentage is rising and we are implementing programmatic changes to work with these kids. In short, we need to dial down the academics and ramp up the relationship building, self-reliance, being-a-human aspects of growing up. All good messages but they are beginning to choke out pieces of our academic program. Many of our students work at the honors level but almost as many need very significant social / emotional support along with aid with significant learning differences.

When our international students arrive in August, we hardly know them since their transcripts are undecipherable and so we need to place them into courses very quickly. We do some assessments and off they go. The percentage of those students with any of the aforementioned non-academic issues (or with a learning difference) is practically zero. Almost all enter into our honors-level math and science classes although, obviously, we are working with them at a much lower level in English and History since many read English at a 5th grade level. Now you might assume that we get the cream of the crop, seeing as how we are a boarding school, but we don't even sniff the kinds of kids that you might assume come from China. Since we are not in New England, nor have a prestigious pedigree, we are not getting the best, not even close. And the domestic students are eating their dust.

Twenty years ago, I would have said that the Americans still have the upper-hand. We used to be the best in the word at teaching students to make connections, solve problems creatively, collaborate across the disciplines. But other countries, namely China, are learning from us and are now passing us by. I have not even mentioned yet the sheer quantity of people in China which is a resource that no other country can touch.

I used to think that our leaders represented the best of our country and so long as we had honest, hard-working, reasonably intelligent folks at the top, then we'd still be OK. But it is clear that our leaders are more representative of my domestic teenage students. The confluence of our languishing (if not declining) educational system, our movement towards a post-fact, me-first, social media society, and the tribal partisanship among our leaders, has led to our decline in the past couple of decades while China and many other countries make gains. We rested on our laurels and have been (or are being) overtaken.

One link for evidentiary support. China education

Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing this. I have 3 and 7 year old kids and I'm extremely anxious about their futures in this country.  You are in a pretty unique position to offer insight into many of the issues that cause my anxiety.  I second Joe's request to at least read a summarization of your manifesto. 

Herb said:

Thanks for sharing this. I have 3 and 7 year old kids and I'm extremely anxious about their futures in this country.  You are in a pretty unique position to offer insight into many of the issues that cause my anxiety.  I second Joe's request to at least read a summarization of your manifesto. 

Click to expand...

Thanks. There is no manifesto other than the conglomeration of thoughts in my head. I have neither the time nor the skill to put them to paper in a cogent way.

Herb said:

I have 3 and 7 year old kids and I'm extremely anxious about their futures in this country.  You are in a pretty unique position to offer insight into many of the issues that cause my anxiety. 

Click to expand...

I don’t mean to be insulting, but your anxiety becomes their anxiety in my layman’s view. I think a lot of the issues that we’re talking about stem from the breakdown of the American family and this kind of transference of anxiety (and other pathologies) from parents to kids.

As a math teacher I see this when parents will say to kids “Math is hard. You just need to survive the course.” Whereas I think in other countries the message is that it might be hard but you really need to learn it and work at it, and society values it (and education in general).

I don’t have an answer I’m sorry to say. I have a four year old myself so I feel where you are coming from. But I work hard to let her fail, succeed, explore on her own, and try not to impose myself too much.

pecorino said:

I don’t mean to be insulting, but your anxiety becomes their anxiety in my layman’s view. I think a lot of the issues that we’re talking about stem from the breakdown of the American family and this kind of transference of anxiety (and other pathologies) from parents to kids.

As a math teacher I see this when parents will say to kids “Math is hard. You just need to survive the course.” Whereas I think in other countries the message is that it might be hard but you really need to learn it and work at it, and society values it (and education in general).

I don’t have an answer I’m sorry to say. I have a four year old myself so I feel where you are coming from. But I work hard to let her fail, succeed, explore on her own, and try not to impose myself too much.

Click to expand...

I’m honestly not sure. 

I got through Algebra 2 in high school in the 80s; went to a fine university (UCIrvine) have a good job and I don’t use math beyond basic arithmetic. My daughters, just finishing high school, had to take AP calculus to insure they could get into the same level of university that I did. 

Why do they need calculus? I don’t get it. Neither is interested in engineering or related fields. Why did they have to spend hours at night studying this stuff that I didn’t have to? 

Footballguys forums in The United States of America on planet Earth orbiting the center of the Milky Way at a blazing 140 miles a second. That's pretty darn fast.

Your president is Donald Trump.

The economy is rolling along. If you are not participating, the odds are it's your own fault. No reason to make any drastic changes.

lod001 said:

Footballguys forums in The United States of America on planet Earth orbiting the center of the Milky Way at a blazing 140 miles a second. That's pretty darn fast.

Your president is Donald Trump.

The economy is rolling along. If you are not participating, the odds are it's your own fault. No reason to make any drastic changes.

Click to expand...

In my perspective, this country has lost its way. Or more accurately found another path which I think is unhealthy, divisive, selfish, short-sighted and unsustainable. This is precisely the time for drastic changes.

And to Tim’s comment about Algebra and Calculus. Why is it needed? This is the question Americans ask because they do not know what those subjects are. The idea of studying something for its beauty, for the discipline it instills—these are anathema to public education and American society’s thinking in general. At my school, I’m known as an iconoclast. In China or Finland (which does math very well), I’d be known as just another math teacher. We are very far gone.

pecorino said:

In my perspective, this country has lost its way. Or more accurately found another path which I think is unhealthy, divisive, selfish, short-sighted and unsustainable. This is precisely the time for drastic changes.

And to Tim’s comment about Algebra and Calculus. Why is it needed? This is the question Americans ask because they do not know what those subjects are. The idea of studying something for its beauty, for the discipline it instills—these are anathema to public education and American society’s thinking in general. At my school, I’m known as an iconoclast. In China or Finland (which does math very well), I’d be known as just another math teacher. We are very far gone.

Click to expand...

I understand the general concept. And I think it applies to algebra, geometry, trig, etc. It just seems to me that requiring calculus in high school is a Bridge too far. 

timschochet said:

Obviously whoever wins the structure of the Supreme Court will change (though not necessarily the lesser courts- on those, if its a Democrat in the White House expect McConnell to continue to block as many appointments as he can get away with). And that's important enough. If Ruth Bader Ginsburg is replaced with another liberal, it will remain an unsteady 5-4 conservative majority. But if she is replaced by a conservative then perhaps certain rights like abortion and gay marriage really could be in jeopardy.

Click to expand...

Maybe better for a separate thread, but: Has the Supreme Court ever reversed a decision that advanced/expanded human rights?

I mean, people don't say "A conservative Supreme Court could reverse Brown vs. Board of Education" or " ... could reverse Loving vs. Virginia".

pecorino said:

America is so 20th century. Where are we now, in 2019? Passed by the China juggernaut in many ways. Embrace it, learn Mandarin. We’re done.

Click to expand...

I think your longer post is spot-on, but I'll quote this one since it's shorter.

As much as people don't want to admit it, America is fast losing its status as #1 global superpower.  We are not the juggernaut that we were 50, 60 years ago.  Obviously the "learn Mandarin" was somewhat in jest, but even 10-15 years ago when I was in college, they were already pushing students to study Mandarin or Arabic instead of Spanish, which was traditionally the second-language to know.  To survive in the global economy today, you need to (figuratively) "learn Mandarin".

This doesn't really mean that America is "done", I don't think.  It just means that we need to accept not being the best anymore.  This isn't the death rattle of America, but moreso being passed on the track by a fast-approaching racecar.

lod001 said:

Your president is Donald Trump

The economy is rolling along. If you are not participating, the odds are it's your own fault. No reason to make any drastic changes.

Click to expand...

 You want to tell these people they screwed themselves? Probably not a winning campaign message.
Financial Times Poll (Nov. 2019):
Nearly two-thirds of Americans say they are not better off financially than they were when Donald Trump was elected, casting doubt on whether economic expansion and a record bull market will boost the president’s re-election campaign in 2020. According to a poll of likely voters conducted by the Financial Times and the Peter G Peterson Foundation, 31 per cent of Americans say they are now worse off financially than they were at the start of Mr Trump’s presidency. Another 33 per cent say there has been no change in their financial position since Mr Trump’s inauguration in January 2017, while 35 per cent say they are better off. Persistently slow wage growth appeared to be a main driver of discontent, with 36 per cent of those who said they were worse off blaming their income levels

Where ever you go, there you are.

Doug B said:

Maybe better for a separate thread, but: Has the Supreme Court ever reversed a decision that advanced/expanded human rights?

I mean, people don't say "A conservative Supreme Court could reverse Brown vs. Board of Education" or " ... could reverse Loving vs. Virginia".

Click to expand...

I’m sure the answer is no. And it certainly seems unlikely in that context. 

And yet...we’ve never had, at least since abolition times, a group of people so determined to overturn existing law as the pro-lifers are determined to overturn abortion. For my entire life they have been extremely committed to this, and have worked to get a majority on the Supreme Court for this sole purpose. If that finally happens, are the conservative. Justices they put there really going to say “well hey Roe is established law and we’re not going to touch it”? Can we really take that chance? 

timschochet said:

pecorino said:

In my perspective, this country has lost its way. Or more accurately found another path which I think is unhealthy, divisive, selfish, short-sighted and unsustainable. This is precisely the time for drastic changes.

And to Tim’s comment about Algebra and Calculus. Why is it needed? This is the question Americans ask because they do not know what those subjects are. The idea of studying something for its beauty, for the discipline it instills—these are anathema to public education and American society’s thinking in general. At my school, I’m known as an iconoclast. In China or Finland (which does math very well), I’d be known as just another math teacher. We are very far gone.

Click to expand...

I understand the general concept. And I think it applies to algebra, geometry, trig, etc. It just seems to me that requiring calculus in high school is a Bridge too far. 

Click to expand...

I completely disagree with this, calculus is an amazing accomplishment that the average person could appreciate and learn from.  The fact that it is made out to be the pinnacle and not the surface of mathematics is a shame.

jon_mx said:

PELOSI:  ‘Civilization as We Know It Today Is at Stake in this Election’

Me:  'No, really it is not'

4 more years of bad immigration policy, bad tax policy, and slow action on climate change is not going to fundamentally change us.  And even it was possible (it is really not) to spend $92 trillion on a new green deal, it is only going to have a minimal impact as in a few hundredths of a degree over the next century. 

Click to expand...

Allowing blatant and even public abuses of power and the undercutting of free elections and democracy itself by the President could be the straw that breaks this democracy's back.  Perhaps we won't even know for another 10 or 20 years, but actions and behaviors being taken and being normalized today might very well threaten U.S. civilization as a free democracy, no doubt. Why do you think so many of us are so passionate about the need to check the rampant, illegal, treacherous, and at times treasonous actions of this Administration? It's not like we dislike Trump personally to that degree.

Mind you, this is on the back of 20+ years of successful and concerted power grabbing against the public will by the GOP (gerrymandering, purging of voter rules, voter ID laws and implementation that is almost entirely designed to decrease the vote tally for constituencies that primarily vote Dem, other voter suppression tactics, embracing Russian driven propaganda and weaponizing it for political gain be it in or not in concert with Russian's proper).

The stakes ARE this high (real threat to our ongoing democratic freedoms), and I feel many of my fellow residents either don't care, or prioritize short term gain (401ks!) or their own nationalistic desires over the health of our democracy and lasting freedom. Freedom requires vigilance.  "No, really it is not" doesn't reek of the vigilance needed to sustain a free nation.

Mystery Achiever said:

 You want to tell these people they screwed themselves? Probably not a winning campaign message.
Financial Times Poll (Nov. 2019):
Nearly two-thirds of Americans say they are not better off financially than they were when Donald Trump was elected, casting doubt on whether economic expansion and a record bull market will boost the president’s re-election campaign in 2020. According to a poll of likely voters conducted by the Financial Times and the Peter G Peterson Foundation, 31 per cent of Americans say they are now worse off financially than they were at the start of Mr Trump’s presidency. Another 33 per cent say there has been no change in their financial position since Mr Trump’s inauguration in January 2017, while 35 per cent say they are better off. Persistently slow wage growth appeared to be a main driver of discontent, with 36 per cent of those who said they were worse off blaming their income levels

Click to expand...

Sure. Go find 'em for me. The 35% that are better off are the ones that are trying. The rest are not.

Regardless of the reason, if they don't feel better off, they have no incentive to vote to keep the current administration

lod001 said:

Sure. Go find 'em for me. The 35% that are better off are the ones that are trying. The rest are not.

Click to expand...

Damn. This post reeks of privileged elitism and is completely devoid of empathy or societal awareness. So everyone that finds themselves in an undesirable financial situation is clearly just not trying hard enough?

This POV is tired and ignorant.