What's happening in the Ukraine?

[Mr. Desmond]

Certainly, they bear much responsibility but politics is the art of compromise and when one side prefaces their comments with, "I will not..." there will be no compromising and negotiation is out of the question as well.   Guess which side has been saying that a whole lot...   It ain't Republicans.....

Now we go into the off topic area.

Yes, it is.

They haven't negotiated in 5 years.

I would allocate "blame" on both sides. Studies have shown that Pubs have moved far to the right while Dems have stayed relatively put.

The reason the economy doesn't take off is now we are under the Pub version of limited austerity. Don't make a deal and these cuts take place.

I'd like the blaming, demonizing, and blowing up non issues to stop, but it's the current version of "politics." It moves in vicious cycles and the far right is determined to not negotiate.

Whatever.

As to Russia, Putin does not like the influence of the West on the Ukraine and fictionalized a justification. He is another strong man gone bad. The Ukraine Pres was Russian; he backed out of Western deals to cozy up to Russia ... some people didn't like it .. they protested ... he left. Once the people saw the palace their Russian Pres was building, it pissed them off even more .... Unchecked power leads to abuse...

[14ledo81]

Quote:

Originally Posted by teamroper60

And I'll not go much into your comment on domestic stuff other than to say if you think the source of dysfunction in DC is Obama and the Democratic leadership making extreme demands and refusing ever to compromise or negotiate, you've lost touch with reality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdl

It is very clear we disagree on domestic politics so it is probably best to not discuss this much further but I will say that if you think all of the problems in Washington fall on the Republicans, you are living in a dream world of your own.

This certainly does not seem like a very civil way to debate.

[teamroper60]

I wouldn't be so quick to blame Obama.  Putin invaded Georgia in 2008 and Bush did nothing.  They still have troops in parts of Georgia today.

Probably because he knew he wouldn't get the backing he needed in congress to do anything.   That is where I blame Obama in this.   He opened his trap and drew a line that he couldn't defend.   Now his threats of repercussions are meaningless.  He would have been better off to have done nothing than to have drawn the line over Syria.

Now we go into the off topic area.

Yes, it is.

They haven't negotiated in 5 years.

I would allocate "blame" on both sides. Studies have shown that Pubs have moved far to the right while Dems have stayed relatively put.

The reason the economy doesn't take off is now we are under the Pub version of limited austerity. Don't make a deal and these cuts take place.

I'd like the blaming, demonizing, and blowing up non issues to stop, but it's the current version of "politics." It moves in vicious cycles and the far right is determined to not negotiate.

It is Obama who is continuously saying "I will not negotiate."  I just googled "Republicans, I will not negotiate"  I found three links on the first three pages where it was Republicans refusing to negotiate.   All the rest were Obama and/or Reid.  Nevertheless, even if in the end, you don't move your position, you don't start off by saying you won't negotiate if you want the other side to move in your direction.   It doesn't work because the other side is going to bull up too.

I agree that congress needs to stop making issues out of non-issues and I believe the Republicans need to stop beating the dead horse of trying to overturn the ACA.   But we cannot continue to spend money the way congress is doing now either.  If we took every single dime the richest 1% of our country has, we couldn't run this country for 4 months at the rate we are currently spending it.  So we cannot tax our way out of the current budget issues. Yes, taxes may have to be raised (on not just the rich but on everybody), subsidies to corporations need to end and loopholes are going to have to be closed, but ultimately social programs is what eats the largest chunk of our budget and cuts are going to have to be made to many of those programs and frankly, they are going to have to be much bigger than the ones being proposed now by either party.  At any rate, this is way further off topic and I am done debating it.   As long as people continue to think all the problems this country is facing can be laid at the feet of one party, we are going to continue to disagree.

But back to the actual topic..    It is going to take Russia moving well into Ukraine before the rest of the world will decide enough is too much and take any significant action against Putin.    Even then, the idea of war is pretty far fetched.   With all the financial problems facing not only the US but most of the EU as well, nobody can afford it.

[mdl]

This certainly does not seem like a very civil way to debate.

Ha.  Yeah, the general feature of the American right of hostility to facts generally gets my goat, so my language isn't always the most civil.  What I was referencing is basically what @Mr. Desmond was saying above.  It's simply a fact that elected Republicans have moved, on the whole, way right while elected Dems have moved a tiny bit left.  You can measure these things and it's a fact that the center of political opinion in the country as a whole currently matches something like the moderate wing of the Democratic party.  You can only pretend there's equal blame on both parties right now for the dysfunction and lack of compromise if you think compromise means Democrats agreeing to proposals that match the preferences of the center right of the Republican party rather than the far right of the Republican party, which is one a misunderstanding of the word compromise and two would be further right than the preferences of some vast majority of Americans.

[mdl]

I agree that congress needs to stop making issues out of non-issues and I believe the Republicans need to stop beating the dead horse of trying to overturn the ACA.   But we cannot continue to spend money the way congress is doing now either.  If we took every single dime the richest 1% of our country has, we couldn't run this country for 4 months at the rate we are currently spending it.  So we cannot tax our way out of the current budget issues. Yes, taxes may have to be raised (on not just the rich but on everybody), subsidies to corporations need to end and loopholes are going to have to be closed, but ultimately social programs is what eats the largest chunk of our budget and cuts are going to have to be made to many of the those programs and frankly, they are going to have to be much bigger than the ones being proposed now by either party.

Fair enough.  My problem is that this is essentially exactly what Obama has been proposing: some tax reform that raises more revenue but is less distorting than the current tax code along with some cuts to both the military and the social programs that take up almost all non-defense federal spending (SS and Medica**).  And it's derided as socialist by current elected Republicans.

[teamroper60]

Fair enough.  My problem is that this is essentially exactly what Obama has been proposing: some tax reform that raises more revenue but is less distorting than the current tax code along with some cuts to both the military and the social programs that take up almost all non-defense federal spending (SS and Medica**).  And it's derided as socialist by current elected Republicans.

I disagree but only to the extent that the proposed cuts to social programs (as proposed by either party) don't go deep enough to really have a significant effect on the debt crisis.    But, as I said, I am done with this debate..

[dsc123]

why don't we keep this to foreign policy.

[teamroper60]

why don't we keep this to foreign policy.

Probably because where Russia is concerned, we have no foriegn policy...   We stomp our feet and Putin laughs.   Not much of a policy.....

[dsc123]

Probably because where Russia is concerned, we have no foriegn policy...   We stomp our feet and Putin laughs.   Not much of a policy.....

I meant that as a suggestion, not a question.

[geauxforbroke]

I haven't read up on the situation, all I know is from conversations with coworkers and the occasional glance at the news. But from what I've seen, it seems like Russia has been waiting for something like this to happen so that they could justify reclaiming land (Crimea) that they didn't want to give up in the first place. In the end, I think all of this will be much ado about nothing. We stand to gain nothing by intervening.

As far as who to blame for our current political landscape, you can blame the two party system. I believe it's been the ruination of politics in the US, and it won't be until we have a legitimate third party (and maybe even forth party) that we'll actually get things done. Politics now is very adversarial, and it seems like people identify themselves so strongly with a party that they forget that we're all Americans here . It's time to work together to improve the country, and forget about what parties think you should believe in.

[phan52]

Putin is totally out of touch with the 21st Century. He is a Cold Warrior with dreams of a coalition that mirrors the Soviet days, but those days are long over. He is nothing but a bully who really overestimates his geopolitical power. He can threaten all he wants to shut off the gas lines feeding through Ukraine to Europe, but he will only shoot himself in the foot, as that is Russia only real source of revenue. Putin reigns over a centrally controlled oligarchy that has never embraced capitalist type competition and investment so they will never approach the true wealth and power of the Western world as long as Putin is in power. China also zoomed past them years ago. The 21st Century is all about economic power.

Anybody who thinks that Putin is playing chess and Obama is playing checkers, and has boxed the US into a corner, is fooling themselves. Thank goodness we have a POTUS like Obama who thinks before he acts and considers diplomacy, instead of a warmongering fool like McCain. We would most certainly have boots on the ground in Syria by now and the sabers would be rattling mightily over Ukraine as we speak. The leaders of the Western world know who they are dealing with and will act accordingly. No need to rattle the cage.

[dsc123]

Ultimately, it just seems like nobody really cares.  I don't really read this as Russia pushing others around--the US and EU don't really have a lot at stake in the Ukraine.  There's moral outrage at the invasion, but no real interest.

[14ledo81]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 14ledo81

This certainly does not seem like a very civil way to debate.

Ha.  Yeah, the general feature of the American right of hostility to facts generally gets my goat, so my language isn't always the most civil.  What I was referencing is basically what @Mr. Desmond was saying above.  It's simply a fact that elected Republicans have moved, on the whole, way right while elected Dems have moved a tiny bit left.  You can measure these things and it's a fact that the center of political opinion in the country as a whole currently matches something like the moderate wing of the Democratic party.  You can only pretend there's equal blame on both parties right now for the dysfunction and lack of compromise if you think compromise means Democrats agreeing to proposals that match the preferences of the center right of the Republican party rather than the far right of the Republican party, which is one a misunderstanding of the word compromise and two would be further right than the preferences of some vast majority of Americans.

Well, then you should be extremely happy about this statement.  If it is true then Dems should have no problem winning every election.

[geauxforbroke]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdl

Quote:

Originally Posted by 14ledo81

This certainly does not seem like a very civil way to debate.

Ha.  Yeah, the general feature of the American right of hostility to facts generally gets my goat, so my language isn't always the most civil.  What I was referencing is basically what @Mr. Desmond was saying above.  It's simply a fact that elected Republicans have moved, on the whole, way right while elected Dems have moved a tiny bit left.  You can measure these things and it's a fact that the center of political opinion in the country as a whole currently matches something like the moderate wing of the Democratic party.  You can only pretend there's equal blame on both parties right now for the dysfunction and lack of compromise if you think compromise means Democrats agreeing to proposals that match the preferences of the center right of the Republican party rather than the far right of the Republican party, which is one a misunderstanding of the word compromise and two would be further right than the preferences of some vast majority of Americans.

Well, then you should be extremely happy about this statement.  If it is true then Dems should have no problem winning every election.

I'm not sure that's actually the case. I've heard from a couple of places that the "average American" would be slightly right of center. However, I have no sources to back that up, so if @mdl has some sources that quantify what he's talking about, I'd be really interested.

[mdl]

Well, then you should be extremely happy about this statement.  If it is true then Dems should have no problem winning every election.

Of course there's a lot more to voting behavior than how someone ranks on a survey designed to give them a score on the liberal/conservativeness of their policy beliefs.

I'm not sure that's actually the case. I've heard from a couple of places that the "average American" would be slightly right of center. However, I have no sources to back that up, so if @mdl has some sources that quantify what he's talking about, I'd be really interested.

Respect for the call for references.  I wish I could find the graph I saw that showed this.  If you look at DW-NOMINATE graphs of members of congress it's very clear that Republican congress members have turned hard to the right while the Democrats haven't changed much.  That'd make me guess my statement is true by itself, as it seems unlikely the lean Republican voters who aren't hardcore base/activist voters have suddenly shifted as hard right as the Republican politicians.

But the actual evidence I'm recalling was a graph I saw on some poli sci prof's blog a while ago, reposted from some paper, showing estimated conservative/liberal score distributions for Democratic and Republican citizens (from survey data presumably) and for Democratic and Republican congress members (from DW-NOMINATE, based on votes) for two different years, before and after the recent polarization if I remember correctly.  The takeaway as I remember it was basically that the distributions haven't shifted all that much for anyone except Republican congress members, which shifted significantly rightward.  My reading of the graphic was basically that the weighted average of the Democratic and Republican citizens' curves would be somewhere equivalent to the most centrist couple Democratic congress members.  The mean of Republican citizens' distribution was equivalent to the most centrist Republican congress people.  The mean Republican member of congress was equivalent in policy beliefs only to the most conservative portion of Republican base voters.

If I can find the graphic I'll post a link.

[Mr. Desmond]

Well, then you should be extremely happy about this statement.  If it is true then Dems should have no problem winning every election.

You forget about the gerrymandering of the House that has recently taken place in a majority of States .. and it favors the GOP.

GOP is smart (well, not many of its right wing candidates) and well funded. They are rewriting state laws, going after state legislatures and gerrymandering in the extreme. That will gives them an advantage in the House for a long period of time.

[iacas]

Let's stick to the topic. It isn't the general position of the U.S. Citizenry or either party.

[dsc123]

http://www.newsweek.com/abby-martin-becomes-viral-voice-dissent-kremlins-rt-230969

Apparently there's some sort of Russian owned media corp that has a US component.  Its anchor quit on air over concerns with assisting putin to whitewash what is going on.