Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest KJP

Liberal extremism

Recommended Posts

I think the fact that you are lumping Maxine Waters (not Walters) with Sarah Palin kind of gets at the crux of present day Liberal frustrations.... which may be boiling over into what you would consider "extremism".  It's a good example of the false equivalencies Liberals constantly are forced to counter and that tactic precludes the substantive discussion which should be happening.  There are reasons to criticize Walters but to equate her 'asinine-ness' with Palins is.... well...... asinine.  Cruz and Davis are also very, very different types of politicians who can't be compared.... other than the fact they are from Texas and enjoy a good filibuster. 

 

Back to the more general topic, when discussing 'Liberal extremism', you have to at least try to comprehend how big the 'political tent' is on the Left..... especially now that it has gotten much bigger with Trump in office.

 

They are pretty much the same thing. It is just the side of the spectrum you are on. If you were a right winged conservative, you may feel Palin and Cruz are reasonable people. Left wingers rally behind Davis. It is not a false equivalency here because the point is that they were acting out in a way that was designed to promote their political brand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are normal people on both sides of the political spectrum even capable of having a rational discussion any more?

 

 

No, and the Internet has contributed to the extremism because we can more easily choose who we want to listen to (usually those we agree with). I also see it increasingly happening with where people choose to live. We're starting to see more geopolitical polarization, with people moving to states, regions or communities based more on ideologies than on ethnicity or race (as was the case in the past decades/centuries). With the discourse becoming more polarized, more hatred becomes accepted and we demonize the other side as somehow less human.

 

History has shown that when you start to dehumanize the opposition, you don't care what you do to them and how horrible it is.


"The boss rolls up in a new Lamborghini and tells his staff 'The greatest part about America is that hard work breeds wealth. So if you work hard and dedicate yourself tirelessly to the task at hand, I can get another new Lamborghini next year.'” -- Overheard in a Cleveland bar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the constant name calling on each side in the generic sense contributes to this and diminishes the value of the name. When you call all Republicans racist, the term loses value and meaning. When you call all democrats baby killers and the like, it loses value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are normal people on both sides of the political spectrum even capable of having a rational discussion any more?

 

 

No, and the Internet has contributed to the extremism because we can more easily choose who we want to listen to (usually those we agree with). I also see it increasingly happening with where people choose to live. We're starting to see more geopolitical polarization, with people moving to states, regions or communities based more on ideologies than on ethnicity or race (as was the case in the past decades/centuries). With the discourse becoming more polarized, more hatred becomes accepted and we demonize the other side as somehow less human.

 

History has shown that when you start to dehumanize the opposition, you don't care what you do to them and how horrible it is.

 

I think that gerrymandering has also created more polarization as well.  Politicians who are in safe districts (most of them now) have no incentive to compromise and are often rewarded for not compromising. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The interesting thing about Gerrymandering which goes to Ken's point is that self gerrymandering has led to this more than the actual gerrymandering. People choose to live and flock to certain liberal or conservative enclaves has a bigger effect than the artificial gerrymandering

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the fact that you are lumping Maxine Waters (not Walters) with Sarah Palin kind of gets at the crux of present day Liberal frustrations.... which may be boiling over into what you would consider "extremism".  It's a good example of the false equivalencies Liberals constantly are forced to counter and that tactic precludes the substantive discussion which should be happening.  There are reasons to criticize Walters but to equate her 'asinine-ness' with Palins is.... well...... asinine.  Cruz and Davis are also very, very different types of politicians who can't be compared.... other than the fact they are from Texas and enjoy a good filibuster. 

 

Back to the more general topic, when discussing 'Liberal extremism', you have to at least try to comprehend how big the 'political tent' is on the Left..... especially now that it has gotten much bigger with Trump in office.

 

They are pretty much the same thing. It is just the side of the spectrum you are on. If you were a right winged conservative, you may feel Palin and Cruz are reasonable people. Left wingers rally behind Davis. It is not a false equivalency here because the point is that they were acting out in a way that was designed to promote their political brand.

 

I can't and won't agree with this.  I never said Cruz was unreasonable.  I seriously disagree with his politics/policies, but I would NEVER put him in the same boat as a bumbling idiot like Palin.  Again, the false equivalences have to stop.  It is not simply a matter of perspective. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am speaking to the things we can control.  And gerrymandering is one of them.  Looking at Ohio Congressional districts is truly an insight into growing partisanship.  These districts can be drawn in a way that makes them more competitive and in turn would make them more moderate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The gerrymandering in Ohio is disgusting. The Ohio 9th was clearly gerrymandered by Republicans to concentrate liberal Democratic strength into one district. "Hey, let's put all of those Lake Erie liberals into one district!" Its layout is insane. They basically drew up a narrow strip of land along Lake Erie to connect Toledo and Cleveland, and then eliminate one of their seats (Kucinich). It is textbook gerrymandering and pretty much the worst example of it in the entire United States.

 

Join our tour of the worst Republican gerrymanders, with Ohio's 9th District!

By Stephen Wolf 

Saturday Dec 03, 2016 · 7:59 PM PST

 

Ohio’s 9th Congressional District previously centered on Toledo, but after the 2010 Census, Republicans gerrymandered it again to include distant western Cleveland, making it just barely contiguous along the Lake Erie shore. That threw Toledo-based Rep. Marcy Kaptur and Cleveland-based Rep. Dennis Kucinich together, and Kaptur defeated him in the 2012 Democratic primary by 56-40. The current Democratic vote-sink backed President Obama by 68-31, which helped Mitt Romney win the four districts to its south and west. Rep. Kaptur has been in office since 1983 and easily won 69-31 in 2016, even as Hillary Clinton was much weaker in northern Ohio than Obama.

 

This district was part of a broader Republican gerrymander that gave their party a staggering 12 of 16 congressional districts in the last three election cycles, even when Obama narrowly carried the state 51-48 in 2012. We drew nonpartisan proposals for every state, and our map created a compact Toledo-based seat, a wholly western Cleveland district, and even constructed a third seat situated between the two. The Toledo and West Cleveland districts would have voted for Obama by 17 and 14 points respectively, while the district in between would have backed Obama by 5 percent. That means Ohio’s 9th district alone might have cost Democrats one or two extra seats on average.

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/12/3/1602495/-Join-our-tour-of-the-worst-Republican-gerrymanders-with-Ohio-s-9th-District

 

4xGU0RH.png

 

*The thing is Democrats do it too, especially in states like California. It is a bipartisan issue. To quote a friend in CA politics, "This is just how the game is played." I find that attitude towards gerrymandering just as disturbing coming from a Democrat as I do a Republican.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really should be noted that a higher percentage of liberals are anti-vaxers and anti-GMOs.  Particularly in the case of vaccine safety, there's tremendous scientific evidence for the benefit of vaccines.  That being said, pretty much every other anti-science/research based topic that I can think of are bellwethers of the Right Wing.  Am I missing any science based topic that liberals tend to stray away from?

Science, no. But I do think there is some data-based fact in Economics that liberals struggle with. Though, that certainly cuts both ways.

 

I'm not sure that's the case.  Trickle Down Economics has been largely been debunked, but is a bellwether of the Right despite how many studies show it doesn't work.

 

That was the crux of the "cuts both ways" comment

 

Out of curiosity, what widely debunked economic theories do liberals tend to support?

 

The law of supply and demand when it comes to housing. People protesting housing construction in the Bay don't understand the law of supply and demand. They think housing construction will do nothing to lower home prices. They are unbelievably misinformed and have been hoodwinked by rich property owners making millions off of the housing crisis. Or, in many cases, they are false flag protestors.

 

Oakland and Berkeley are the definition of liberal extremism...but what real America doesn't understand is that East Bay rioters and protestors are overwhelmingly trust fund kids organizing false flag protests. Many are actually hard right anarcho libertarians in liberal clothing. At some of the recent East Bay riots, "liberals get the bullet too" has been spray painted on buildings right next to the anarchy logo. Similar to how these wealthy right wing anarchist libertarians have hijacked the Black Lives Matter movement, they have also hijacked the Occupy movement.

 

*The Midwest doesn't have liberal extremism...except maybe in Athens and Ann Arbor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nimby construction objections are not usually economic arguments as much as they are irrational arguments about character of their neighborhood.  This behavior exists among all political beliefs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nimby construction objections are not usually economic arguments as much as they are irrational arguments about character of their neighborhood.  This behavior exists among all political beliefs. 

 

Not in Oakland. They are clearly economic arguments. People here actually believe (or at least say they believe) building adequate housing supply "will just raise prices." It is a price-based argument in Oakland. They feel by building housing to match population growth, it will just create more demand and upward price pressure. By keeping Oakland in a perpetual housing shortage, they feel demand will magically go away. The problem is that in the Bay, demand is higher in Oakland than anywhere else now (hence the tens of thousands of evictions over the last few years). The only way to keep prices in check is to build housing. You can't win this argument with Oakland housing protestors. The real reason they want to maintain every urban prairie in Oakland is so their property values can keep going up 20-30% a year! This is why Oakland is littered with vacant lots. The housing shortage is enforced by housing objections, appeals, protests, and full-blown riots.

 

NIMYBYs in the Bay are almost entirely Democrats, which is where the regressive movement is at. Republicans here are progressive and pro-housing. Most Republicans think housing is too expensive here and want to fix it. Democrats in Oakland are fine with the status quo. Even in more progressive SF, there are still a lot of Democrats OK with the status quo...though that number is shrinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an example of East Bay "liberal" extremism...but really anarchists hijacking the liberal movement in Oakland-Berkeley. The problem is that Democrats in Oakland and Berkeley have created safe spaces for these trust fund kids to riot. Police are ordered to let these riots happen, and they happen over and over and over. There is no end to this. Oakland has been rioting since 2011, and now Berkeley is rioting too. This is giving Democratic leadership a big black eye in the Bay and real America. San Francisco doesn't let this crap happen because its liberal Democrats are sane. SF stops its riots. Liberal leadership in Oakland and Berkeley is entirely responsible for letting these riots happen in the East Bay. And they are entirely responsible for letting BART and the freeways get shut down repeatedly. Democrats in Oakland and Berkeley deserve all of the blame since they are afraid of these rich kids suing if police stop them.

 

l1H9v1A.jpg

 

YbJx6d8.jpg

 

IUiLxHd.jpg

 

KkDxJ8U.jpg

 

1GNqahH.jpg

 

MVN1GV2.jpg

 

tx6gHYg.jpg

 

E7jeNoP.jpg

 

ySMS1ob.jpg

 

yZyUnWk.jpg

 

ta9hYzX.jpg

 

kO1Eu41.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oakland kicked this off, and now it has spread to Berkeley. It's pathetic how Oakland officials let rioters destroy small businesses over and over again. And it's May Day, so probably more riots tonight. Here is a look back to the election...Republicans are right to criticize Oakland and Berkeley for their support of extremist politics. Democrats in San Francisco and real America are criticizing it too. Sadly, Oaklanders are taking this crap to Portland now after leaving Oakland. Extremist politics are spreading on both the left and right.

 

Oakland: After second night of anti-Trump violence, officials at loss to stop it

By ERIN BALDASSARI | ebaldassari@bayareanewsgroup.com and TAMMERLIN DRUMMOND | tdrummond@bayareanewsgroup.com | Bay Area News Group

PUBLISHED: November 10, 2016 at 1:30 pm | UPDATED: November 11, 2016 at 4:18 am

 

OAKLAND — The day after the presidential election, Assan Jethmal was disappointed and in shock over Donald J. Trump’s unexpected win. A co-owner of Good Mother, an art gallery downtown, Jethmal felt much the same way as many of the demonstrators who marched through the streets of Oakland and in cities across the country, chanting “Not my President.”

 

And yet, Jethmal’s shop was among the dozens that got vandalized Tuesday night when nearly 7,000 people flooded downtown in an anti-Trump march.

 

“I left around 9 or 10 o’clock and when I came back an hour later, the whole block was on fire and the window was smashed,” he said.

 

Jethmal has insurance, but like many small business owners, he’s still on the hook for a big deductible. He said he was hustling to get the window fixed in time for a show at the gallery on Saturday.

 

Throughout the day Thursday, business owners downtown and in Chinatown swept shards of glass from the sidewalk, nailed plywood over broken windows and scrubbed spray paint off of storefronts with a weariness that comes from having gone through the same exercise so many times before. Dozens of buildings had windows broken out, including City Hall. Downtown was covered in anti-Trump and anarchist graffiti.

 

“It looks like someone took a can and just spray-painted graffiti everywhere,” said Oakland resident Tracy Tillman. “This has nothing to do with Trump. It was just an excuse for people who want to get their frustrations out. It makes me feel really bad for my city.”

 

A night earlier, police had arrested 30 people on various charges ranging from vandalism to assaulting a police officer. Three officers were injured by projectiles, according to city officials. At moments throughout the demonstration, officers declared the protest an unlawful assembly and used tear gas to disperse the crowds.

 

Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf said the vandalism was some of the worst she had seen in the aftermath of protests. She, city officials, and community and business leaders implored demonstrators to channel their frustration in a more positive direction. They visited businesses, handing out information to help owners file insurance claims and seeking to calm shattered nerves.

 

CONTINUED

http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2016/11/10/oakland-after-second-night-of-anti-trump-demonstrations-officials-call-on-citizens-to-take-care-of-oaklanders-first/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The interesting thing about Gerrymandering which goes to Ken's point is that self gerrymandering has led to this more than the actual gerrymandering. People choose to live and flock to certain liberal or conservative enclaves has a bigger effect than the artificial gerrymandering

 

Indeed, for the longest time in the U.S., say from the Gold Rush through the 1980s, migration patterns were focused almost exclusively on jobs rather than living in a "cool city". Sure people moved to L.A. or NYC because they were cool or to Florida to become snowbirds... but that's it. No Portlands, Austins, Seattles, Ashevilles or even Columbuses and Lousivilles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Truth. The creation of "lifestyle cities" like Portland, Austin, Oakland, and Boulder is very recent. In the past, economic opportunity had a much stronger influence on migration. The Rust Belt cities all boomed in the late 19th/early 20th century because of great job options. I think the erosion of the entry-level job market in much of America and also the growth in trust funds has fueled this recent millennial migration pattern. Millennials had the worst job prospects in generations (maybe American history), but they also now have the most inherited wealth. Baby boomers made a lot of money during America's glory days and many passed it on to their kids in lifestyle/scenester cities. The number of kids with trust funds or parents paying their rent in Oakland is simply astounding. And it's shocking to see so many recent Oakland migrants hate on SF. They are entirely bypassing The City on purpose because they hate SF's Marina Girl culture. These are kids who can actually afford The City.

 

Job opportunities and career growth are still the reasons many college grads flock to SF/NYC/LA/DC, but in many other cities, people are moving for cultural reasons. They want to live in a city surrounded by people like themselves. Hence how hipster echo chambers like Oakland and Portland exist. The recent growth in Portland is shocking considering the economy there. Of course, many recent migrants are remote workers from the Bay and Seattle too...The Bay's takeover of Portland's housing stock is equally shocking to see play out. Portland really doesn't want it, but can't stop it. The same thing is happening in Seattle as Bay Areans keep flooding that market with cash in hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

kO1Eu41.jpg

 

I know what it's like to deal with this -- though they just stole our product rather than did it to prove a point. Sucking broken glass up at 4AM with a Shop Vac and a hangover is a terrible feeling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, but the self gerrymandering in the large cities plays a part of it. That is not necessarily a good example. You see it more on the coasts.

 

This clearly happens, I won't deny that, but I can tell you from personal experience that many people don't move to cities because they are liberal they become more liberal because they moved to a city.  It's amazing what this change in perspective can do to one's world view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...