Random political thought thread.

[The Cat]

The only thing Michigan does similar to German it seems is that there is an age limit. I think 68 or 70 then they can't run for another term. Should they be non political? Yes. Are they? No and they never have been although since 2010 it has accelerated massively.

People do not like to be reminded of this either. "I told you so." Never feels appropriate with this kind of thing, but Ive got friends who used to mock me for this who wont look me in the eyes anymore so I think they know....now.

 

[The Cat]

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I'll go you one better. The Michigan Supreme Court candidates are chosen by the parties it's the only state that does it this way. They hold nominating conventions to select candidates to run in the nonpartisan general election. Candidates in the general election run without party labels. Incumbents may skip the nominating process by filing an affidavit affirming their desire to run for re-election. So, unless you do some homework, you won't know who these people are (until 2020 there was little to no advertising for SCOMI candidates), or their affiliation. And they run one incumbent and one new candidate concurrently on a single ticket. Given the incredible importance placed on state Supreme Courts at this point, it's vital to know how ones state runs things. It's currently Dems 4-3 in Michigan and they will likely pick up another given this environment - one R justice is retiring and no R incumbent nominee.

Now I know how little I know about my state government. I have much more knowledge I think about city government; I've even sat in on a sessions a few times. These tend to be fluff, like spending 30 minutes on a resolution praising Hamilton, while the real governing goes on beyond closed doors.

 

[ceecee]

Now I know how little I know about my state government. I have much more knowledge I think about city government; I've even sat in on a sessions a few times. These tend to be fluff, like spending 30 minutes on a resolution praising Hamilton, while the real governing goes on beyond closed doors.

I know I always get on people to pay attention to their local government, especially their county government. But the state SC matters so much now, on a ridiculous number of things. Can't legislate - no problem. We'll just legislate through the courts.

 

[ceecee]

I was going to say something about it must be something about the water thats good for the brain up there, then I remembered the other thing about the water, and figured it might be in poor taste. Like the water. -_-

According to the Michigan Drinking Water map, I drink water from Lake Huron every day (treated of course and run through my RO house filter). It's good.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Montana’s Tribal Voters Could Determine the Makeup of the Senate

 

[Red Herring]

Our six party system explained with American politicians (in case anybody has been wondering about this):

If you don't have the time just skip to the end to see an overview of how they are spread out.

 

[Red Herring]

Mind you, the blue states are where the AfD has been court confirmed to be a "suspected case of political extremism" and the brown states are where they are a officially "confirmed case of political extremism". This is an important classification because it gives the secret service the legal right to wiretap them, use informants etc to further investigate if they are "enemies of the constitution". And that could eventually lead to further legal consequences down the road.

 

[ceecee]

Our six party system explained with American politicians (in case anybody has been wondering about this):

If you don't have the time just skip to the end to see an overview of how they are spread out.

Really helpful. I loled at Gavin Newsome in the Greens but it does fit as there isn't anything in between them and the SPD. Hillary - solid FDP though. Especially the more she talks now.

 

[SensEye]

Our six party system explained with American politicians (in case anybody has been wondering about this):

If you don't have the time just skip to the end to see an overview of how they are spread out.

I like the concept of this video. It really helps a North American understand what the parties are all about in one easy lesson. Just from watching this I can tell I would likely vote FDP or CDU/CSU. I would need a deeper dive into their economic policies to determine which. But it would almost certainly be one of those two, with SPD being a possible longshot. The rest, no chance.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Our six party system explained with American politicians (in case anybody has been wondering about this):

If you don't have the time just skip to the end to see an overview of how they are spread out.

I am sorry but this video just isn't working for me as a "fact". This maybe works when you just consider social issues. However when you go into welfare state, socialized healthcare, housing, free college, public safety etc. this video falls apart pretty quickly (at least in my opinion).


In my book it is more like this in best case scenario:

MAGA-AfD
People around the center - CDU
Democratic establishment - FDP
Progressives - Greens




In my book in US there is nothing to the left of Green positions. In other words socialized healthcare, free college etc. are the core of what the SPD is. What means that SPD and options further left don't really exist in US. Therefore putting the entire Democratic establishment in there is just factual ignorance in my opnion. The progressives kinda have glimpses of those postions since they are the closest option, but the texbook SPD program is still to the left of them.

To make things even worse CDU when it comes to governing power respects the institution of socialized medicine and most other wefare programs.
I mean don't even get me started on what Merkel did in Covid era. Not to mention that they aren't strangers to governing in coailtion with SPD. Therefore putting the entire Republican establishment in there is perhaps even bigger ignorance than what was done with the Democratic party in that video.


I am sorry, but I am not buying this.
For me this is simply factually wrong and misleading.
Just saying.

 

[Red Herring]

I am sorry but this video just isn't working for me as a "fact". This maybe works when you just consider social issues. However when you go into welfare state, socialized healthcare, housing, free college, public safety etc. this video falls apart pretty quickly (at least in my opinion).


In my book it is more like this in best case scenario:

MAGA-AfD
People around the center - CDU
Democratic establishment - FDP
Progressives - Greens




In my book in US there is nothing to the left of Green positions. In other words socialized healthcare, free college etc. are the core of what the SPD is. What means that SPD and options further left don't really exist in US. Therefore putting the entire Democratic establishment in there is just factual ignorance in my opnion. The progressives kinda have glimpses of those postions since they are the closest option, but the texbook SPD program is still to the left of them.

To make things even worse CDU when it comes to governing power respects the institution of socialized medicine and most other wefare programs.
I mean don't even get me started on what Merkel did in Covid era. Not to mention that they aren't strangers to governing in coailtion with SPD. Therefore putting the entire Republican establishment in there is perhaps even bigger ignorance than what was done with the Democratic party in that video.


I am sorry, but I am not buying this.
For me this is simply factually wrong and misleading.
Just saying.

You seem to be missing the forest for the trees here a bit. I think the analysis in the video is mostly based on the social mileus and general parts of the spectrum the parties stand for. Naturally the individual issues on the agenda will differ and the political culture between parties is different. And if you only have two parties it's harder to establish and practice bipartisonship.

The video is not about how each part of US politics falls neatly into the German system but about explaining the different parties to Americans by comparing them with people they know. I also think you often tend to exaggerate a bit when it comes to the differences between the American and the European welfare state - at least when it comes to Germany specifically which often has a mixed system (universities have only been free for two decades, healthcare is universal in the sense of everybody has to have insurance but it's semi-private and very complicated, etc and the SPD played a vital role in rolling back the welfare state in Germany). But since the average American stands to the political right of the average European on many social and economic issues it should come as no surprise that there is no 100% overlap. You can't put the two systems on top of each other and get a clean overlap with no rims sticking out. But if you look at the SPECTRUM within the US and within Germany you can match points in one system with points in the other system BASED ON THEIR RELATIVE POSITION within each system. That's all this was ever about.

My addendum about the AfD, our rough equivalent of MAGA and the closests thing we have to the 45th US president, being officially on the watchlist of the secret service for being a potential threat to the constitution and liberal democracy was also obviously meant as a clear pointer to the differences between how the two societies deal with these movements. Over here the public debate is still whether or not MAGA positions should be heard in talkshows or whether they should be refused a platform, whether "normal" conservatives should coooperate with them on some issues or if the firewall will keep standing. "Our MAGA" is currently at about 17% support - significantly more in the rural, economically underdeveloped East, less in the densely populated West.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I like the concept of this video. It really helps a North American understand what the parties are all about in one easy lesson. Just from watching this I can tell I would likely vote FDP or CDU/CSU. I would need a deeper dive into their economic policies to determine which. But it would almost certainly be one of those two, with SPD being a possible longshot. The rest, no chance.

I would dare to give you FDP label.

The key is in social values.
C in CDU and CSU stands for Christian. What means that this is the party for people that are into traditional family values and going to Church regularly. While FDP is more more of a free market and don't your own thing kind of a party. Thus you strike me as much more of a FDP type.

 

[Red Herring]

I would dare to give you FDP label.

The key is in social values.
C in CDU and CSU stands for Christian. What means that this is the party for people that are into traditional family values and going to Church regularly. While FDP is more more of a free market and don't your own thing kind of a party. Thus you strike me as much more of a FDP type.

The C in CDU is mostly decorative these days. Unlike in America religion and the church play no real role in German public life. If you use the term "traditional family values" in front of North Americans they'll get the wrong idea. The CDU is more than anything the party of structural conservatism. They are not trying to turn back the clock on social change but to slow it down if possible. These last few years they were mostly trying to figure out how to face the challenges of the 21st century without losing a party base that still lives in the 20th (don't forget Germany, like Japan, is a society with a relatively old demographic with a culture that has a system for everything and is pretty much set in its ways).

 

[Virtual ghost]

You seem to be missing the forest for the trees here a bit. I think the analysis in the video is mostly based on the social mileus and general parts of the spectrum the parties stand for. Naturally the individual issues on the agenda will differ and the political culture between parties is different. And if you only have two parties it's harder to establish and practice bipartisonship.

The video is not about how each part of US politics falls neatly into the German system but about explaining the different parties to Americans by comparing them with people they know. I also think you often tend to exaggerate a bit when it comes to the differences between the American and the European welfare state - at least when it comes to Germany specifically which often has a mixed system (universities have only been free for two decades, healthcare is universal in the sense of everybody has to have insurance but it's semi-private and very complicated, etc and the SPD played a vital role in rolling back the welfare state in Germany). But since the average American stands to the political right of the average European on many social and economic issues it should come as no surprise that there is no 100% overlap. You can't put the two systems on top of each other and get a clean overlap with no rims sticking out. But if you look at the SPECTRUM within the US and within Germany you can match points in one system with points in the other system BASED ON THEIR RELATIVE POSITION within each system. That's all this was ever about.

My addendum about the AfD, our rough equivalent of MAGA and the closests thing we have to the 45th US president, being officially on the watchlist of the secret service for being a potential threat to the constitution and liberal democracy was also obviously meant as a clear pointer to the differences between how the two societies deal with these movements. Over here the public debate is still whether or not MAGA positions should be heard in talkshows or whether they should be refused a platform, whether "normal" conservatives should coooperate with them on some issues or if the firewall will keep standing. "Our MAGA" is currently at about 17% support - significantly more in the rural, economically underdeveloped East, less in the densely populated West.

Of course you can match various positions of both system. My only argument is about what are actually equivalents in both systems and that some positions don't really have equivalents. I am simply saying that the video is kinda too simplistic and thus kinda misleading for those that don't know too much about the subject. Years ago you said yourself that the the biggest healthcare bill you ever paid with out of pocket money was something like 70$. Therefore for me these kind of stuff really matter when you consider what are equivalents.

Plus in the case that you missed it: my incoming government will be the equivalent of CDU+AfD+FDP (and yeah the left is panicking). So in this part of the EU it seems that we solved that issue of what should be heard. However my AfD/MAGA still has plenty of welfare state elements since their voters and various relaities demand it. Therfore for me this whole thing of drawing simplistic parallels is kinda slipperly slope that quickly becomes misleading if you aren't careful. Can we really draw the exact parallels between the parties if mine is getting into government and yours is under security survailance ?

 

[Virtual ghost]

The C in CDU is mostly decorative these days. Unlike in America religion and the church play no real role in German public life. If you use the term "traditional family values" in front of North Americans they'll get the wrong idea. The CDU is more than anything the party of structural conservatism. They are not trying to turn back the clock on social change but to slow it down if possible. These last few years they were mostly trying to figure out how to face the challenges of the 21st century without losing a party base that still lives in the 20th (don't forget Germany, like Japan, is a society with a relatively old demographic with a culture that has a system for everything and is pretty much set in its ways).

I know, but his arguments and avatar just fit so much more into FDP zone.

On the other hand if party base still lives in 20th century then why it is such an error so say that they value old school and traditional values ? (genuine question)

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Really helpful. I loled at Gavin Newsome in the Greens but it does fit as there isn't anything in between them and the SPD. Hillary - solid FDP though. Especially the more she talks now.

I take it you're referring to this:

Hillary Clinton Accuses Protesters of Ignorance of Mideast History

In an interview on the MSNBC show “Morning Joe,” on Thursday, Ms. Clinton criticized student protesters, saying many were ignorant of the history of the Middle East, the United States and the world.

www.nytimes.com

I don't have an issue with her because she's blunt and direct. I have an issue with her because her political instincts are terrible; if they'd been better she could have defeated Trump. It's not just her, though. I think James Comey idiotically assuming she would win and issuing a warning that he was reopening the investigation days before the election didn't help, especially since none of that happened to anything.

I feel the way college campuses have reacted to protests is extremely overblown. I don't know the details of all these cases, and I'm sure there are examples of something awful that people can point to. I'm certain that not everyone participating in the protests is a monster, though. There are massive human rights violations involved and there should be nothing wrong with protesting those.

 

[SensEye]

I would dare to give you FDP label.

The key is in social values.
C in CDU and CSU stands for Christian. What means that this is the party for people that are into traditional family values and going to Church regularly. While FDP is more more of a free market and don't your own thing kind of a party. Thus you strike me as much more of a FDP type.

You might be right. As I mentioned in my post, I would want a better look at these two parties economic policies. You are correct in that I am not a social conservative, but on that brief video I feel the FDP might not be fiscally conservative enough for my tastes. And if Red Herring is correct and the Christian label is just decorative, the CDU may avoid being too socially conservative for my taste and a better fit economically.

Anyways, for people like me, who don't have much understanding of what seems to be a large spectrum of political parties in various EU countries, this kind of video placing politicians I am somewhat familiar with into "best fit" parties is a quick and easy way to get some insight. Otherwise, all I have is a more general left to right spectrum to go on.

 

[Red Herring]

I feel the FDP might not be fiscally conservative enough for my tastes.

Well, the FDP is by far the most fiscally conservative party in Germany. If you want something more radical this might not be the country for you, LOL. Budgetary discipline is their No. 1 priority (followed by tax cuts for middle and higher incomes as a second and keeping the social safety net as small as possible as a third priority)

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Well, the FDP is by far the most fiscally conservative party in Germany. If you want something more radical this might not be the country for you, LOL. Budgetary discipline is their No. 1 priority (followed by tax cuts for middle and higher incomes as a second and keeping the social safety net as small as possible as a third priority)

More so than the CDU?

I'm of the position that the social safety net should be larger here, especially as AI changes everything.