United States Politics Thread 47

[keenir]

they can outwait/wait out the governor.

No they can't. It's not like he'll suddenly lose interest in gerrymandering if they wait long enough. He has his plan and every reason to pursue it to completion.

He has a deadline, so yes, they can outwait him.

*nods* theres paperwork: that always has a deadline.

[malloc]

they can outwait/wait out the governor.

No they can't. It's not like he'll suddenly lose interest in gerrymandering if they wait long enough. He has his plan and every reason to pursue it to completion.

He has a deadline, so yes, they can outwait him.

Can't he just try again after the deadline has passed?

[zompist]

He has a deadline, so yes, they can outwait him.

Can't he just try again after the deadline has passed?

Not if he wants to affect the midterms.

[malloc]

He has a deadline, so yes, they can outwait him.

Can't he just try again after the deadline has passed?

Not if he wants to affect the midterms.

So the Texas legislature will close down until 2027 after this session and there is nothing the governor can do to force it open?

[keenir]

Can't he just try again after the deadline has passed?

Not if he wants to affect the midterms.

So the Texas legislature will close down until 2027 after this session and there is nothing the governor can do to force it open?

anything he does, will have political consequences. if he tries to force the issue (more than he already has), then he keeps looking worse, and becomes less and less likely to be re-elected where he could try again. If he isn't careful, he may be replaced by a Republican or a Democrat who doesn't want to redraw the lines.

Because remember, the more he redraws the lines, the more precedent any successor of his - of any Party - can re-redraw the lines.

[malloc]

It seems far from obvious that his base even cares, though. If anything they almost certainly support his goal of gerrymandering the House seats because greatly empowers their side. Furthermore there is way Democrats could win control of the Texas government given its well established political leanings so they would hardly have reason to worry about the Democrats gerrymandering against them.

[Ketsuban]

If anything [his base] almost certainly support his goal of gerrymandering the House seats because greatly empowers their side.

They will absolutely care if it looks like he cares more about a gerrymandered redistricting plan than anything that benefits them. Even a Republican voter can conceive of the frustration of being "represented" by someone who doesn't give a shit because they consider their position safe as a result of gerrymandering, even if that person wears a red rosette.

[keenir]

It seems far from obvious that his base even cares, though. If anything they almost certainly support his goal of gerrymandering the House seats because greatly empowers their side.

Republicans =/=MAGA = corrupt politicians

Furthermore there is way Democrats could win control of the Texas government given its well established political leanings so they would hardly have reason to worry about the Democrats gerrymandering against them.

so...are you saying the Democrats have never governed Texas or...?

[malloc]

They will absolutely care if it looks like he cares more about a gerrymandered redistricting plan than anything that benefits them. Even a Republican voter can conceive of the frustration of being "represented" by someone who doesn't give a shit because they consider their position safe as a result of gerrymandering, even if that person wears a red rosette.

From their perspective, gerrymandering does benefit them because it ensures their dominance over the country. They don't perceive the gerrymandering plan as a distraction from bread and butter issues and it certainly doesn't occur to them that representatives in gerrymandered seats would be less responsive. They just see the governor taking bold action to defend the Republican majority in Congress, something they support without hesitation.

[keenir]

They will absolutely care if it looks like he cares more about a gerrymandered redistricting plan than anything that benefits them. Even a Republican voter can conceive of the frustration of being "represented" by someone who doesn't give a shit because they consider their position safe as a result of gerrymandering, even if that person wears a red rosette.

From their perspective, gerrymandering does benefit them because it ensures their dominance over the country.

if I'm a MAGA person who is employed as a schoolteacher, I don't care what Palin and suchfolk are doing in Alaska - I care about what is happening with the schools in my area.

They don't perceive the gerrymandering plan as a distraction from bread and butter issues

*raised eyebrow*
if I'm the Governor, and I'm spending all my time on redistricting, that means I'm not spending any time on things like funding hospitals or deciding to pay schoolteachers more than prison guards are getting.

and it certainly doesn't occur to them that representatives in gerrymandered seats would be less responsive. They just see the governor taking bold action

shooting yourself in the foot is a bold action too. and just as foolish.

to defend the Republican majority in Congress, something they support without hesitation.

why?

remember that MAGA interests =/= Republican interests.

[malloc]

if I'm a MAGA person who is employed as a schoolteacher, I don't care what Palin and suchfolk are doing in Alaska - I care about what is happening with the schools in my area.

More likely than not, you would believe that keeping the Republicans in charge of the government is vital to protecting your school from child sex changes and litter boxes for children who think they're cats. Aside from that, you would probably assume that the permanent Republican majority that gerrymandering creates will ensure that the government gives you whatever you want without having to worry about Democratic backlash. The temporary inaction on school funding or whatever pales in comparison to the long term benefits of ensuring hegemony for your party.

[keenir]

if I'm a MAGA person who is employed as a schoolteacher, I don't care what Palin and suchfolk are doing in Alaska - I care about what is happening with the schools in my area.

More likely than not, you would believe that keeping the Republicans in charge of the government is vital to protecting your school from child sex changes and litter boxes for children who think they're cats.

cats?

Aside from that, you would probably assume that the permanent Republican majority that gerrymandering creates will ensure that the government gives you whatever you want

o.0
Holy cripes, are you telling me you're not old enough to remember when a political party promised something - and then refused or forgot to deliver on their promise? O.O

we don't have to worry about you being too young to be a member here, do we?

without having to worry about Democratic backlash.

that may or may not be true...but still have to worry about Republican backlash. Not every fan of Reagan or McCain, is automatically a fan of Trump or the MAGA.

The temporary inaction on school funding or whatever pales in comparison to the long term benefits of ensuring hegemony for your party.

long term?

Long term in political terms, means Reagan, Bush Sr & Jr, and, if you're feeling generous, Perot. and even back in Trump's first term, there were Reagan scholars who were extremely displeased with Trump, as were people who actually voted for Reagan.

I'm starting to doubt your claim that you knew actual physical human Republicans.

[malloc]

if I'm a MAGA person who is employed as a schoolteacher, I don't care what Palin and suchfolk are doing in Alaska - I care about what is happening with the schools in my area.

More likely than not, you would believe that keeping the Republicans in charge of the government is vital to protecting your school from child sex changes and litter boxes for children who think they're cats.

cats?

Yes, a popular claim on the right is that children are increasingly identifying as cats (a misunderstanding of the whole furry thing) and demanding litter boxes in classrooms.

[keenir]

just saw this: https://youtu.be/cPwEJ9XS-ck?si=mcxVQFIxve8t7-9d

looks like not even Republicans can stomach the cuts.

[Raphael]

Yes, a popular claim on the right is that children are increasingly identifying as cats (a misunderstanding of the whole furry thing) and demanding litter boxes in classrooms.

I'm repeating myself here, but I'd still like to note that I'm old enough to remember when right-wingers would routinely assert that one of the ways in which they were supposedly better than their opponents was that they supposedly had a keener grasp on reality.

[MacAnDàil]

Trump said that Virginia Giuffre was "stolen" from him by Jeffrey Epstein, and that's what caused their friendship to break.

on one hand, I'm glad that Trump actually has lines in the sand that he won't cross...on the other hand, thats his line??

Also, note that Musk knew and only said when they broke up over tax. I prefer Musk to Trump as he actually has to some extent a vision of how we might improve humanity at the best of times, but he really chose the wrong line in the sand there.

[malloc]

I'm repeating myself here, but I'd still like to note that I'm old enough to remember when right-wingers would routinely assert that one of the ways in which they were supposedly better than their opponents was that they supposedly had a keener grasp on reality.

Quite. This is precisely the kind of delirious nonsense that has become commonplace among American right wingers. You can't assume that normal rational considerations will matter to someone steeped in conspiracy theories and misinformation like that. Just look at how they responded to the pandemic and now we have an anti-vaxxer in charge of Health and Human Services.

[keenir]

and now we have an anti-vaxxer in charge of Health and Human Services.

Thats due to an appointment, not a vote.

Lay that blame squarely on Trump.

[malloc]

Thats due to an appointment, not a vote.

Lay that blame squarely on Trump.

No, opposition to vaccines has broad popular support, especially among the right. Americans may not have voted for RFK himself but plenty of them, certainly most Trump supporters, wanted someone like him in charge of health policy.

[keenir]

Thats due to an appointment, not a vote.

Lay that blame squarely on Trump.

No, opposition to vaccines has broad popular support, especially among the right.

nobody said humans were intelligent. and if it had "broad popular support", it wouldn't've been newsworthy prior to this election - it would've been newsworthy when people demand their shots be given.

Americans may not have voted for RFK himself but plenty of them, certainly most Trump supporters, wanted someone like him in charge of health policy.

everyone who voted for Trump =/= Trump supporter

also, anti-vaccine =/= anti-medicine & everything else RFKJr is up to.