I don't care about that. I care about winning.The Romulan Republic wrote:Rather than trying to go through that whole post and reply line by line, I'll just say this, and I hope it covers the key points:
I am not blind to the need to reach out to ones' political opponents, and I don't think every Republican is a mini-Trump or something, though at the same time, I don't think you can deny that a large number of Republicans favour policies, like strict voter ID laws, that are a direct threat to democracy, or that Trump is increasingly showing signs of being an authoritarian strong man, including hostility to the press and judiciary and unilaterally violating the Constitution to persecute minorities.
That said... why is it always the Democrats who have to compromise and respect the other side? Because after the last decade or so, telling me "You need to comprise", as a Democrat, sounds a lot like "You need to keep taking it up the ass and pretending you like it." Compromise is a two-way street. Otherwise, again, its just another name for capitulation.
As an example, you know what I think would have been a smart maneuver? If Hillary Clinton had said in, oh, May of 2016, something like: "Okay, gun control is a nonstarter. No seriously, gun control people, I'm sorry, but we are not on, I am so done with you. If you expect to get more gun bans in my administration, expect to be disappointed. You are the weakest link, goodbye." [FOOTNOTE BELOW]
Done properly? I bet that would have gotten those 200,000 or so key swing voters in those three key Rust Belt swing states to stay home. Or even vote Clinton.
Now, is that compromising with Trump on any issue Trump cares about? No. Trump's probably just as happy with gun control, because that means he can afford armed body guards and angry poor people can't. Is it compromising with the Republican Party on any issue the party leadership cares about? Not really; the only reason they care about gun control is that the NRA gives them donations and that they can use it to create a bloc of millions of single-issue voters who will vote for them blindfolded.
It's not compromising with the Republicans. It's compromising with Republican voters. Specifically, with a select minority of those voters whose support for the party would be profoundly shaken if the Democrats suddenly started actively opposing gun bans. And that select minority of voters are in fact every bit as much the constituents of a Democratic elected politician as the Democrats who do most of the work of voting them into office.
When politicians compromise with their own voting constituency? That is not called "taking it up the ass." That is called "winning."
This is not about principle. This is not about being high and idealistic. The crude, simple reality is that you cannot win in a political arena you do not understand. Or in an arena you refuse on principle to understand. Or in an arena you refuse to even enter because it would mean getting icky Republican voter ectoplasm all over you or something because they're "delusional."
And no, I am NOT attributing any specific stated opinion to you here. I am describing a pattern of behavior, one that you partially match, that others partially match, and that others match very well indeed. It is a very toxic pattern of behavior. Without it, Trump could not have won- he needed many other things but he certainly needed this one.
The toxic pattern of behavior here is to dismiss one's political opponents and their supporters as a mass of crazy/delusional/stupid/evil/whatever people. People who are not really worth the effort to even engage with as individuals, let alone as a group. Note, I repeat, in case this was not sufficiently obvious: I said engage with, not capitulate to.
A faction that resolves to win political disputes by not interacting with people who aren't already aligned with the faction... is going to lose. It is that simple.
__________________________________________
FOOTNOTE:
[Note, I'm sure people will say "but everyone would assume it was a trick!" I am aware that this might happen, but can we please not discuss it because it is not the point, and you know what I mean.]
You are supposed to think that the Republican Party organization, flawed though it is, really does look like the best available option to a lot of Americans. And you are supposed to think "gee, how the hell did we end up in a place where THAT looks like the best we can do?" And you are supposed to think "maybe we need to create a path that actually lets sensible people with self respect and different political opinions LEAVE this toxic organization." And "maybe we should be prepared to treat these individuals with a degree of respect and compromise, encouraging them to leave, rather than sneering at them, discouraging them from leaving."If Republicans want respect, they should respect others. If they want compromise, they should be willing to compromise. I see precious little of either from the current Republican Party, and while their are exceptions, they are either silent, or drowned out. If one chooses to remain part of an organization that behaves in such a manner, what am I supposed to think?
Well, I'll tell you this. If the Republican voter base proved itself broken by overwhelmingly toeing the line and voting for Trumpolini... Every Democrat who called Republican voters stupid, who adopted the language of mockery and derision, every Democrat who openly advocated the kinds of thing that Republicans point to and correctly consider to be undesirable slippery slopes on issues like gun control, every Democrat who refused to actually go down to grassroots level and at least notice what Republican voters were saying, in favor of the endless commentator circle-jerk...I had hoped that more Republicans might take a stand against Trump, or that a catastrophic loss might precipitate such a shift. But the overwhelming majority of the party ultimately toed the line (if often grudgingly) and voted for the Orange Rapist, or at least did not openly stand against him, proving the Republican Party even more craven and broken than I thought.
All of us who did those things (and I'm not excluding myself because I certainly can't prove myself INNOCENT of this)... All of us helped break that voter base.
