General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhen they're "Our" assholes.
Okay, stipulated, the percentage of floridly psychotic assholery is exponentially greater among GOPpie-affliliated/related/supporting individuals.
But as much as I wish the GOP would save itself from a messy, implosive devolution that will inflict massive and painful collateral damage on all of us, there ain't a damn' thing I can do about it. I have the reverse of leverage with the GOP. They'll happily figure out what I want and do the opposite, unless they suspect I'm part of a reverse psychology Conspiracy to whargle bleeaarh dehdufblrerg slorfnagle flerpsnimmm....
But anyway. No leverage there. I have none over them. They have none over me. They'll do they, no matter what.
But then there's Joe Manchin.
And Andrew Cuomo.
And the idiot Biden had to fire.
And a whole lot more of our very own homegrown Democratic-affiliated/related/supporting assholes.
Who are counting on me to allow them to continue being assholes because they're "Our" assholes. AND they have leverage. They wield power. They have bully pulpits, they have influence, they can make things important to me happen or prevent them from happening.
My leverage with them seems pretty minor, in comparison. I'm one small voter/donor/Democratic Party member.
They're counting on me to calculate that the value of what they "could" do to harm or benefit me and people I care about will outweigh their assholery, so I'll tolerate it. Keep stumm, or at best limit myself to a mild tsk-tsk. Or even become an apologist for them, excusing or explaining away their assholery on the basis of our shared Democraticness and my desire to avoid harm/ensure benefits they could deliver.
Practical politics, yanno? Compromise, that's it. Balance competing interests. Steer a middle course. Don't let the disgustingness of the means stand in the way of achieving the goal.
So here's the deal, dear benevolent Democratic affiliated/related/supporting assholes:
Yes, I get compromise. I understand the pragmatic realities of political dealmaking and negotiation. I'm willing to accept half-loaves on occasion, and trade promises of future abundance for current sacrifice. I have done all those things.
With people I trust.
And I trust a lot of people I have policy differences with, believe me. There are many people of integrity who have honest differences with me and I do believe that while their priorities aren't the best and their ideas won't necessarily work out well, they share a fundamental set of values with me related to respecting humanity and how to treat people. They will deliver on their word not just because it's a calculation that benefits them, but because it means something important to their integrity.
You are not those people, assholes.
I believe you have the capacity to learn and change and become less of an asshole and more worthy of trust.
But you ain't done it yet, and I don't see any signs that you want to.
So, no.
I am not going along to get along, and if I have to sacrifice benefits or accept harm based on you scrambling for leverage, needing to feel powerful, needing to be assholes, well, so be it.
I will call you out.
I will not "go along".
I will not keep silent.
I realize I'm spitting in the wind.
I realize my leverage is infinitesmal compared to yours.
But I still have it, just a little of it.
And if enough other Democrats make similar choices, at some point, "our" assholes will face the choice to change who they are or change what they do, and either way, we win.
determinedly,
Bright
Ocelot II
(115,836 posts)The GOP seems to tolerate, if not actually encourage, their assholes. We shouldn't.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)be in charge.
Ocelot II
(115,836 posts)Manchin does what he has to do to keep his job in WVA; a more liberal Democrat couldn't survive there. But there is no excuse for Cuomo's bullying and sexual harassment; surely a Democrat could be found in NY who isn't an asshole. The GOPers defend Trump just because he's one of them even though he's an enormous asshole. I'm not down with that kind of tribalism.
TygrBright
(20,763 posts)He can demonstrate his "independence" from the skeeriest part of the Democratic Party (however he believes the voters of WV define that) without being an asshole.
Without flexing his leverage just for the sake of demonstrating he has it.
Without perpetuating the "I won't go along with other Democrats just because they're Democrats because Democrats (except ME) are The Enemy" mythos to his constituents.
He COULD, if he wasn't a petty, power-addicted asshole, find dozens of subtle ways to defuse the reflexive Democrat-hating-psychosis of his own electorate. But it would take effort.
And it isn't as much fun as "You can't MAKE me because you NEED me too much."
Senators can work around being "the wrong party" or "at risk" from their own electorate without being assholes.
They can work behind the scenes with Party leadership to identify ways to get lots of public credit for doing what "their voters" want, while still advancing the Party's agenda.
He's JUST BEING AN ASSHOLE NOW.
Let's stop enabling him.
disgustedly,
Bright
Ocelot II
(115,836 posts)TygrBright
(20,763 posts)I'm advocating DON'T enable their assholery.
CALL them on their assholery.
Hold them accountable for the destruction their assholery does.
Not everything is either/or binary.
PUSH BACK on their assholery.
It may not work.
It may piss them off.
But we have leverage, and they do need us, too.
In a hundred subtle or not-so-subtle ways, we do NOT have to go along to get along with assholes.
patiently,
Bright
comradebillyboy
(10,175 posts)Don't like them then find Democrats who could win those offices.
TygrBright
(20,763 posts)Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)TygrBright
(20,763 posts)And see above.
Not putting up with assholery, pushing back on assholery, holding assholes accountable for their assholery, is NOT the same as "throw the bum out".
It's not either/or. Binary thinking is how we get into shitty messes.
Not cooperating with assholes, shining light on their assholery, finding ways to make it uncomfortable for them to be assholes, is perfectly do-able.
Saying "nothing can change because nothing ever has and it would cost too much anyway" is certainly easier than the discomfort of putting effort and resources into what SEEMS like futile attempts to change.
But then, ALL attempts to change are pretty much futile. Until they're not.
Let's do it.
patiently,
Bright
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)against Capito was massacred in the General . Trump won WVA by 50 or 60 points...please you need a majority for anything. So lay off Manchin. I watched folks here attack Claire McCaskill and now a GOP took her place who never votes with us. Manchin like Sherrod Brown in Ohio is a legacy...there will be no more Democratic Senators in WVA for decades once he goes.
Here is the deal, nothing can change if we don't have a majority. We lose ground. It is going to take time to change things. And that is how it has to be...running a different candidate would lose us the seat and the majority. Herschel Walker is running against Warnock in 22 so we have an uphill battle. We have to preserve our majority. Some who didn't vote for Hillary caused this and now we have to work just to save the Republic...and get what we can. That is reality.
Backseat Driver
(4,394 posts)Basically handling my one-on-one just like you, though I doubt what I can do is going to ever get through, to wit: "I am not ALWAYS mad at you," I realize you do do some things right, and I seldom fail to say thank you, but you are not getting an only-adult child gold star!" You cannot punish me in repetitive actions/inactions like missing opportunities any worse than what I already dish out on myself when you do."
So, I'm sorry you're tired - let all those other things just wait.
So, I'm sorry you're lonely - ask me to listen, to participate, hold my hand.
This moment won't happen again; don't miss it by assuming....
It's not conducive to trust.
If you do, I must accept the consequences; so should you.
If you don't, I will call you out.
You will do it alone - I will not go along but I will supervise every move.
I will not keep silent. There will be a meeting of the minds.
Adult life is messy! but I believe you can think to do differently, to come around; I believe we will both win what we both need and want for ourselves, as the result; one way or another.
TygrBright
(20,763 posts)stopdiggin
(11,361 posts)has actually done. Not what they've said, or who they've pissed off (although those are not unimportant) but what actions they have actually performed, or not performed. In your (impressive) screed you acknowledge a lot of middle ground and practical realities that come into play in deciding who gets our support and who doesn't. In my case -- the 'practical realities' and metrics involved allow me to support both of the names thrown out.
Manchin - because he really is the 'best that we can get' out of his political demographic. (you can always try to primary him in the next election. good luck.)
Cuomo - because I think he has been a fairly effective leader, with a (distinguishable) hands on approach in a crisis. and if he occasionally calls another politician a "f-ing idiot" -- I can get around that somehow, in exchange for leadership when others are offering none.
So -- you can 'bail' (as you have indicated your intent) on these two -- but I certainly don't feel the need to. I'll take either of them, until something better comes around.
TygrBright
(20,763 posts)I said STOP ENABLING ASSHOLERY.
Call it out for what it is.
Stop tolerating it.
Make it clear that it IS ASSHOLERY and not acceptable or 'business as usual.'
Tell them to change.
This is not a binary "my way or the highway" situation.
It's how we handle "OUR" assholes. They're still "OURS" and we want them to stop being assholes.
In the long run, they may decide it's more uncomfortable to keep being OURS if they can't be assholes, and yes, we may lose them... but that will be THEIR decision.
wearily,
Bright
stopdiggin
(11,361 posts)sorry, I misunderstood.
I've always been in favor of a-holes not being a-holes. Sweet.
TygrBright
(20,763 posts)If I were in their district I would of course vote for them.
And be a constant thorn in their sides demanding they change. And finding ways to hold them accountable to other Democrats in their district/state, and support and groom competitive and viable candidates to primary them.
And if they STILL won the primary, I would vote for them in the general election without hesitation.
It's really not that difficult to understand, is it?
Consequences for assholery don't need to be the equivalent of shooting a persistently drunk spouse in the head to get them to stop drinking.
There's an awful lot you can do, short of execution or even divorce, before that.
Don't apologize for them. Don't enable them.
Don't say "yes, but we need them and they're better than Republicans."
Just say "YOUR BEING AN ASSHOLE. I don't condone it, I don't accept your excuses. I won't contribute to your legal defense fund, I won't write a letter to the editor saying your assholery should be tolerated because reasons. I want you to change. Stop doing this asshole thing. Don't do other asshole things. If the gutter press rips you to shreds, it's on you. If your opponents make hay of this assholery, well, YOU let yourself in for it."
persistently,
Bright
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)you do have some "leverage" over them, the same as all your fellow citizens who voted them into office. If not, I'm not sure why you think your opinion is so important.
They're both elected by the people of their states to represent THEM. Not you. We all vote for our own representation, and many in other states always disapprove of our choices.
Nothing about democracy EVER meant everyone should be pleased. Completely to the contrary: It's designed to be a way for large numbers of people of very diverse ideologies and interests to arrive at agreements that can somehow mostly work for most.
Democracy is not the huge problem of our era. The problem is that the Republican Party has gone extremist and is smashing democracy so they can impose a RW authoritarian government is. They've gone rogue.
We all need to understand and appreciate that conservatives and liberals like Cuomo, Mikulski, Manchin, Biden, Warren, etc, who can work out their considerable differences competently, are exactly what our framing founders envisioned and hoped would always dominate in office.
TygrBright
(20,763 posts)They are Democrats.
Being Democrats is the community.
Not all members of the community have equal leverage on each other.
I acknowledge freely that it's a tiny increment, compared to being a constituent.
But I donate to Democratic campaign funding entities, and I attend conventions, and I vote for Party organization officeholders, and the higher that goes the more leverage it carries. I can advocate and try to influence other Democrats, including the assholes' constituents who might at some point decide to stand up for something more important than getting this year's highway allocation increased.
I tilt at windmills, too.
But NOTHING changes if we don't try.
Again, and again, and again.
persistently,
Bright
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)majorities. I vastly prefer the real world.
TygrBright
(20,763 posts)But it will never happen without lots of us demanding it.
It was impossible for black people to vote in America for centuries.
Now it's possible, in the very "real world" you live in.
Not easy.
Not always fair or equitable.
Sometimes denied, sometimes still suppressed.
But it's possible.
I submit it's possible for the Democratic Party to hold its elected office holders accountable for assholery and move them to change, as well.
persistently,
Bright
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)not so much your world. Voters whose choices you don't approve are going to change to be what you want and demand others do also? That's asking quite a lot.
Fwiw, for decades, since I finally realized the critical importance of FIRST requiring good character and competence in candidates, I've been doing it but have been forced to realize that not many voters do. Far too many simply do not consider good character or ability to fulfill their promises a requirement. Sounding exciting on the stump is, saying things that push their buttons is what they want in a candidate.
Just cast your mind back over the past 5 years on this forum. Who was that sleazy attorney for the porn star who was so good on the screen that people were excitedly saying he should run for president? How about all those who fell so hard for a charismatic leader with no achievements he became a genuine cult figure? Or all the Democrats who have virtually no idea what our party's high ideals and goals are, sometimes just plain no idea? Can't even name one basic principle or goal on our platform?
Our salvation is that Democrats in office are more often than not at least somewhat better people than voters look for, and sometimes far, far better. In general, Democratic candidates tend to believe in government and to bring ideals and goals to office. No one runs for office as a Democrat for the money, that's for sure; many other professions are far more lucrative and don't require constantly running and scrabbling to hold onto their jobs. Or they'd run as Republicans, where opportunities for big payoffs for services rendered are far better.
But we can all set our own standards higher, to be as moral, competent, and responsible in our ways as we want our representatives to be. We can demand that of ourselves.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)TygrBright
(20,763 posts)Hekate
(90,793 posts)...those epi-pen sales after she raised the price about 1000%. I did not know that CEO Dear Daughter had participated in that until this morning. Neera was right to criticize her, and Manchins opposition to Neeras appointment now makes sense that is, it makes sense of a personally corrupt kind.
11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)While I can, and do, respect your determination and your ideals, at this point in our history I must respectfully disagree.
Because the Florida "more righteous lefty than thou" crew that voted for Ralph Nader, didn't do me or the country any favors. I'm speaking on behalf of my own family members and personal friends who came home from Iraq or Afghanistan in a flag-draped coffin (if they were lucky); or so grievously butchered that their choice was to live a life totally dependent on others, or to simply hop off the bus of their own accord.
So today I still can't help but believe that any move by ideological purists which results in a second Republican Senator from West Virginia won't be good the party, and more importantly, the nation.
TygrBright
(20,763 posts)The idea that holding people accountable for their behavior, condemning their bad behavior, and/or letting them experience the natural consequences of their bad behavior without you apologizing for them, explaining on their behalf, protecting or excusing them because you're afraid of how awful that will work out...
IS NOT THE SAME AS SAYING VOTE FOR SOME SHITTY-ASS THIRD PARTY CANDIDATE or even set up a "leftier than thou" litmus test for every Democratic candidate.
I have voted for many centrists, compromise candidates and even conservative Democrats.
I have even voted for ASSHOLES. But I never said it was okay for them to be assholes because we need them so much that calling them out, holding them responsible, etc., would be too dangerous or uncomfortable.
I am not an "ideological purist", I am, if you prefer, an "Advocate of Responsible Adult Behavior as our Party's line in the sand".
And I think in the long run it will pay big dividends.
wearily,
Bright