You're viewing a single thread.
There's been a lot of press about Cory Booker's grandstanding, but I'm not really sure what it actually accomplishes. Is it really the "good trouble" he said he wanted it to be?
It's more action than Schumer, rewarding improvements and all that
Yes, but that's an incredibly low bar and I'm not sure that Booker's actions really, uh, do anything. It's literally all talk. He spoke about how people have been writing asking for the DNC to do something. I guess this was something by the most literal sense, but I'm not sure what it accomplishes.
Talking is the only power Democrats have. At least he's doing something.
I think if this starts a new strategy where the DNC turns Congress into molasses with these kinds of marathon speeches, I'll be more inclined to say it is actually doing something. But let's say it's a one off, what did it accomplish?
What exactly should they be doing instead?
Doing anything when it matters like a couple of weeks ago. This is grandstanding and they will learn the wrong lesson. I get that we want something anything to hold on to but what it is this even accomplishing? Signaling they might do something? When? next time?
Booker wasn't on the committee so had no power to keep it from coming to vote. Schumer was. That was his failure.
I'm not exactly sure, but something more akin to what we wish members of the Social Democratic Party would have done in the Reichstag in '33.
The US isn't a parliamentary democracy. There's no coalition to be formed with other parties to go against Republicans. There are only two parties.
So what exactly do you want them to do?
the way our elections work is the coalitions form in the spring and the elections occur in the fall. at this point the only thing the dems can do with the cons holding all three centers of power is employ stalling tactics
well. let's tell them we don't want it to be a one off. at every moment we must use the levers of power that we have to move ourselves into a better moment of tomorrow. you and i, we don't have power in congress to deny, delay, and depose trump. but if everyone in the senate who even pretends to be for us started acting like Cory Booker just did, that could get us… not necessarily somewhere, but it would buy us time. that's the name of the game right now. slow trump down, build up our own strength on the margins, and slowly get in position to turn the whole thing upside down. making Booker the leader isn't the fix all, but it's something. it's a step. it's part of an overall system of resistance
I think the sentiment expressed in the OP is exactly why he decided to do this now. It didn't do anything material, not really no, but what it did do was skyrocket Booker's name as a possible replacement for the widely hated Schumer. People are begging for someone to replace Schumer, this is Booker throwing his hat into the ring.
Whether or not the Dems will learn the right lesson from all this remains to be seen...but given their track record, I hope you'd forgive me for being skeptical of that.
Teaching the Dems how to be a political party feels like training an incredibly stupid dog.
"Yes, good job! You gave a very long speech that didn't block anything! Yes, who's a good political establishment!"
Uh huh... So what are you doing?
It is a message to the GOP that democrats are willing to filibuster. I believe that's the long and short of it.
I can see why you would view it as grandstanding, though. I'm suspicious myself. Didn't one of Bookers staffers just get arrested for carrying a gun around the Capitol while Booker escorted him past security? I'm pretty sure he got arrested right before Booker's speech too.