dagblog - Comments for "Hillary Clinton: "American Democracy Is in Crisis""

Echoing Hillary's point # 5:

artappraiser — Tue, 18 Sep 2018 23:01:45 +0000

In reply to Hillary Clinton: "American Democracy Is in Crisis"

Echoing Hillary's point # 5:

Looking back on 2017, I wrote a bunch of things. But I like this essay on hyper-partisanship best. https://t.co/KWY35fjG1V
— Lee Drutman (@leedrutman) December 26, 2017

Thanks PP.

ocean-kat — Tue, 18 Sep 2018 22:43:45 +0000

In reply to This has nothing to do with

Thanks PP.

rmrd0000 — Tue, 18 Sep 2018 19:02:33 +0000

In reply to Hillary Clinton: "American Democracy Is in Crisis"

There is a tendency, when talking about these things, to wring our hands about “both sides.” But the truth is that this is not a symmetrical problem. We should be clear about this: The increasing radicalism and irresponsibility of the Republican Party, including decades of demeaning government, demonizing Democrats, and debasing norms, is what gave us Donald Trump. Whether it was abusing the filibuster and stealing a Supreme Court seat, gerrymandering congressional districts to disenfranchise African Americans, or muzzling government climate scientists, Republicans were undermining American democracy long before Trump made it to the Oval Office.

Now we must do all we can to save our democracy and heal our body politic.

Our fellow citizens were enticed by Trump’s message. The Republican attack on democracy will not go away.

This has nothing to do with

ocean-kat — Tue, 18 Sep 2018 16:48:00 +0000

In reply to From the standpoint of a

[handled - PP]

From the standpoint of a

rmrd0000 — Tue, 18 Sep 2018 12:56:00 +0000

In reply to As the parties have become

[Deleted - stay on topic. PP]

As the parties have become

ocean-kat — Tue, 18 Sep 2018 03:37:11 +0000

In reply to my preferred excerpts:

As the parties have become unified around conflicting ideas it's rational that people would not date across party lines or be upset if their son or daughter did. When the parties were more diverse it was possible to find compatible mates without considering party affiliation. Even possible to find a more compatible date across party lines than within the party. I could date a Rockefeller republican and there is no chance I'd date a Wallace democrat or a Bircher republican. These sort of choices always existed. I'm sure there were many republicans who ended a date the moment it was apparent the person was a Bircher or democrats as soon as they discovered the person was a Wallace democrat. But there are no more Wallace democrats, not even close, and no more liberal republicans. As the parties become more unified the parties became emblematic of a certain moral or philosophical mind set. It was inevitable that when the parties became unified under certain moral and philosophical ideas people who found that moral stance abhorrent would reject them as possible intimate companions. To call that, in a disparaging way, hyperpoliticization is to ignore the very real and rational reasons for not wanting to date outside one's party.

my preferred excerpts:

artappraiser — Tue, 18 Sep 2018 02:52:24 +0000

In reply to Hillary Clinton: "American Democracy Is in Crisis"

my preferred excerpts:

the common good:

And ultimately, healing our country will come down to each of us, as citizens and individuals, doing the work—trying to reach across divides of race, class, and politics and see through the eyes of people very different from ourselves. When we think about politics and judge our leaders, we can’t just ask, “Am I better off than I was four years ago?” We have to ask, “Are we better off? Are we as a country better, stronger, and fairer?” Democracy works only when we accept that we’re all in this together.

and hyperpoliticization

hyperpolarization now extends beyond politics into nearly every part of our culture. One recent study found that in 1960, just 5 percent of Republicans and 4 percent of Democrats said they’d be displeased if their son or daughter married a member of the other political party. In 2010, 49 percent of Republicans and 33 percent of Democrats said they’d be upset by that. The strength of partisan identity—and animosity—helps explain why so many Republicans continue to back a president so manifestly unfit for office and antithetical to many of the values and policies they once held dear. When you start seeing politics as a zero-sum game and view members of the other party as traitors, criminals, or otherwise illegitimate, then the normal give-and-take of politics turns into a blood sport.

and the racially divisive troll:

Trump undermines the national unity that makes democracy possible.

Democracies are rowdy by nature. We debate freely and disagree forcefully. It’s part of what distinguishes us from authoritarian societies, where dissent is forbidden. But we’re held together by deep “bonds of affection,” as Abraham Lincoln said, and by the shared belief that out of our fractious melting pot comes a unified whole that’s stronger than the sum of our parts.

At least, that’s how it’s supposed to work. Trump doesn’t even try to pretend he’s a president for all Americans. It’s hard to ignore the racial subtext of virtually everything Trump says. Often, it’s not even subtext.