The ascent of right wing populism

cawacko said:
Here you go Mott. To make up for you not banning Desh I offer you this (imo) excellent article on the two different GOP's. I think this does a great job describing the split in the party and why it will stay fractured.


http://www.nationalreview.com/article/433163/two-gops-resentment-republicans-aspiration-republicans
Click to expand...
A very interesting article but he's dancing around several issues or actually in denial abut them.

First his assumption about both political parties are based on the current paradigm of "liberal vs. conservative". It's only been that way, from a historical point of view, for a very short time. The key elements of policy of the GOP in Lincolns time was Free Labor, Internal Improvements, Expanding Public Education and a Homestead act. Over time that shifted. Not quite two generations ago the paradigm was working man populism vs. the capitalist, management class.

The second is that one parties coalitions can dissolve without impacting the other party. If, due to Trumps ascent in the GOP primaries, causes a realignment of the GOP coalition that will in itself cause a realignment within the Democrats coalition. It's not unreasonable to assume that such realignments would cause a paradigm shift in both parties on political ideology. That is exactly what happened when the old Whig coalition fell apart and a new "Republican" coalition formed to replace them primarily as a response to the slavery issue. That in turn led to a war, again over slavery, that caused a realignment of the Democrats political coalition and the political paradigm that both parties had been based upon at that time.

In this respect the author is in denial. He see's a split where the "resentfulls" leave the "aspirationals" to go their own way. That's not going to happen.

If the GOP does realign than that would also cause the Democrats coalition to realign and it's pretty hard to predict just where the political paradigm will shift too.

The GOP disintegration of its current coalition was inevitable. It has largely been coalition of elite, propertied, Capitalist/political class aligned with working class traditionalist and nativist. For years the party leaders have used divisive social issues to maintain a base of support among the white working class while virtually ignoring their economic needs and failing to keep their promises to this working class base of their party on social issues. This is where a very large amount of the resentment stems from more so than the darker angels of their nature the author points out and the author completely failed to recognize this major cause of resentment within the base of their party.
 
Last edited:
Thing1 said:
I like the term "illiterate populism" to describe Trump's movement.

This is a pretty historic time - a time we'll look back on as being a catalyst for a major change in our national politics. Who would have thunk it back when Trump was coming down that escalator, and everyone just thought "oh, this could be entertaining for awhile"?

I think a 3-party system has always been a natural evolution for the way the country is politically. Maybe it's my own perspective, because I like elements of both current ideologies, but you do see it nationally when pundits talk about areas being "purple" instead of red or blue. If the GOP truly does splinter, maybe it will give rise to a more centrist party that appeals to voters who feel alienated by the extremes on both sides.

Here's hoping.
Click to expand...
It would be interesting but if it were to happen, given our civil institutions, it's traditions and histories, it would be short lived. I think it more likely to see major changes within the coalitions of both parties and a shifting of the political paradigms both are based upon.
 
cawacko said:
You hear a lot of people describe themselves that way politically which you would think could lead to a movement. However ask ten people who describe themselves as 'fiscally conservative' what that means and I bet you'll hear at least eight or nine different responses with some not even being close. (not meaning to be cynical although I guess I am)
Click to expand...
Not to mention that the phrase is really just a cliché.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Not to mention that the phrase is really just a cliché.
Click to expand...

I guess that's kind of true, but I think it's useful to describe a general philosophy.

I always say that I'd be a Republican if not for the social issues (well, that and some of the foreign policy). I don't believe more than a third of anyone's income should go toward taxes. I think our government is bloated & wasteful, and that spending needs to be reigned in. I sort of put those ideas under the umbrella of "fiscally conservative." It's believing that we should spend within our means.
 
Thing1 said:
I guess that's kind of true, but I think it's useful to describe a general philosophy.

I always say that I'd be a Republican if not for the social issues (well, that and some of the foreign policy). I don't believe more than a third of anyone's income should go toward taxes. I think our government is bloated & wasteful, and that spending needs to be reigned in. I sort of put those ideas under the umbrella of "fiscally conservative." It's believing that we should spend within our means.
Click to expand...
I have to agree with you. I would still be a Republican if it wasn't for supply side economics, southern conservative populism and some real bone headed foreign policy positions.
 
Thing1 said:
Oh, drat - I realized that I just opened up desh to another "I knew you were a con - I outed you" post.
Click to expand...

Among the many ironies of Desh is she does what she projects onto others. She calls Republicans RINO hunters for trying to run the supposed rino's out of the party yet that's exactly what she does here to Democrats.

It's also funny to hear her argue people should vote for Democrats and then when someone says they did she calls them a liar because she doesn't deem them to be a true Democrat.
 
evince said:
I bet the fellow in you OP would have discussed Parento with me and agreed with all the Implications I tried to get you to discuss years ago.


do you even remember parento?
Click to expand...

It is kind of hard to discuss things with you when you don't understand them. It is PARETO. Not Parento. Normally I would chalk it up to a typo but since you did the same thing twice in the same post I have to presume you are a dumb fuck
 
evince said:
"No corporation can force me to buy its goods. No business can raise my taxes. No business can confiscate my property. No business can imprison me."


banks took the homes of people who were not even behind in their mortgages you fucking idiot

corporations now run some prisons
Click to expand...

Link up on the confiscation thing twat
 
2010 United States foreclosure crisis


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Jump to: navigation, search


The 2010 United States foreclosure crisis, sometimes referred to as Foreclosure-gate or Foreclosuregate,[1][2] is an ongoing and unresolved issue in the United States and refers to an apparently widespread epidemic of improper foreclosures initiated by large banks and other lenders. The foreclosure crisis was extensively covered by news outlets beginning in October 2010, and several large banks, including Bank of America, JP Morgan, Wells Fargo, and Citigroup temporarily responded by halting their foreclosure proceedings in some or all states.[3][4] The foreclosure crisis has caused significant investor fear in the U.S.[5] A 2014 study published in the American Journal of Public Health links the foreclosure crisis with an increase in suicide rates.[6]

One out of every 248 households in the United States received a foreclosure notice in September 2012, according to RealtyTrac. [7] [8]
 
http://www.housingwire.com/articles/9862-robo-signer-effect-housing-market-reaching-critical-mass


Robo-signer effect on housing market reaching critical mass


October 8, 2010


Recent issues with foreclosure affidavits spawned reviews and lawsuits for mortgage servicers across the nation, and while the overall housing market may be able to shrug off the effects, if regulators or any more lenders add to the suspensions, another crisis may be at hand. Ally Financial (GJM) and JPMorgan Chase (JPM) suspended foreclosures and REO sales in 23 states, while Bank of America (BAC) declared a nationwide freeze. All three admitted employees signed foreclosure affidavits without verifying certain information or having a notary present, now known as robo-signing. Nearly all of the major servicing shops have come under nationwide scrutiny, investigations and even full-scale lawsuits from politicians, regulators and state attorneys general offices. Rick Sharga is the senior vice president of RealtyTrac, which monitors foreclosure filings across the country and releases monthly and quarterly reports. He said the effect the robo-signers are having on the overall housing market could be marginal. For now. "If the temporary 'freeze' on foreclosure proceedings is limited to new actions and loans in the current foreclosure pipeline in the 23 judicial states, it should have a minimal effect on the overall housing market," Sharga said. He added that the most likely scenario would be a brief slowing of foreclosures over the next quarter while servicers re-check loan documents and put new internal procedures in place. Foreclosure activity would then accelerate in the first quarter of next year and return to "normal" levels by the mid-point of 2011. Alex Villacorta is a senior statistician for Clear Capital, which tracks home prices nationwide. He said the amount of REO weighing on individual housing markets is the single-largest contributor to price drops. In Atlanta, the worst-performing market in August, the REO saturation rate was 66%. Meaning, REO has taken up two-thirds of the market there. "If there were all these moratoriums coming up with all these AGs calling for halts that slows the overall flow, then it has a potential to decrease this rate of new REO material coming onto the market. The REO saturation could decrease as well," Villacorta said. Meaning home prices could get a much needed bump, if only for a short amount of time as Sharga said. The most active part of the housing market by far is the lower-tier price range of REO. Investors are identifying good deals, buying those properties up and renting them back to those who may not be able to afford a home (or who may have been recently evicted from another). "If there's this perceived, rather real or not, notion that all these REOs are going to dry up soon, that could push competition. The investors would then increase their bids," Villacorta said. But if any more lenders or regulators announce a suspension, the already fragile housing market may begin to buckle. Sharga said REO sales account for 30% of the market, and taking almost a third of all sales away could have "serious consequences" for an unstable market. It all depends on how many more banks suspend these sales. "An overall moratorium would also delay foreclosure processing on thousands of homes, delaying their entry onto the market beyond the critical spring selling season, adding to the glut of distressed inventory, probably causing further deterioration in home prices, and perhaps triggering yet more foreclosures," Sharga said. "And, at a minimum, extending the housing downturn by at least another two quarters." Currently only Ally, JPMorgan Chase and BofA have suspended foreclosures. While PNC Financial (PNC) has said it is currently communicating with lawyers over the issue, Wells Fargo (WFC) has stood by the accuracy of its documents, and a spokesman for HSBC Holdings (HBC) told HousingWire that it regularly reviews its process, alluding it may not suspend foreclosures. Write to Jon Prior.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top