The Road to 2020 - American Elections
I figured we needed a central hub for all discussion pertaining to the Democratic primary (even though it's in the beginning of its end) and the subsequent General Election, which is sure to generate quite a lot of discussion.
Curious to see who are people's Democratic candidate of choice (regardless of whether or not you are an American citizen), if they (or any Democratic candidate) can win the primary and beat Trump in the GE.
Personally, I will be voting for Bernie Sanders, and as it stands he has a good shot at being the Democratic nominee, and I think he can beat Trump in the General.
Feel free to discuss any and all topics as it relates to the American election here
Curious to see who are people's Democratic candidate of choice (regardless of whether or not you are an American citizen), if they (or any Democratic candidate) can win the primary and beat Trump in the GE.
Personally, I will be voting for Bernie Sanders, and as it stands he has a good shot at being the Democratic nominee, and I think he can beat Trump in the General.
Feel free to discuss any and all topics as it relates to the American election here
Comments (2159)
If he retired as a mod that would satisfy me. It's one thing to be an ornery puss, cause you know, this is the land of philosophy and that's not so rare, this poster included. Putting ornery pusses in charge of the job of trying to elevate the quality of the forum is another thing.
To argue the other side, my impression is that he has the job because no one else is willing to do it, so there's that. The entire forum realm has been trending downhill for years, so it's probably just an aspect of Internet change we should learn to make peace with. All things must pass. The only other thing I wish to add is this....
All of you are dead head nitwits with shit for brains who couldn't find your own ass if your life depended on it and not only that you totally suck, suck, suck you fucking retards!!
Can I be a mod now?
Oops, sorry, I forget to yell that YOU'RE ALL WAR CRIMINALS TOO!!!
Ha, I remember that. 11 months ago, before Trump allowed ~250k Americans - at the time of the election - to die of Covid. A gift for Biden. The democrats traded their victory for a quarter of a million dead Americans. I can shamelessly say I missed that calculation.
I do like how committing war crimes is just kind of a joke to people like Hippy.
Election Needles: Georgia Senate Runoffs (The New York Times)
(Will the conspiracy theorists also see faces in the clouds here...?)
I was reading a piece in Daily Beast earlier about the shit that all the electoral officers and state politicians have been put through in Georgia. Instead of concentrating on actually running the elections they’re constantly tied up battling Republican and Q-Anon election conspiriacies, fanned and exacerbated by you-know-who.
[quote=Georgia Election Official] We have the tools in Georgia to run the cleanest, most transparent, most auditable election in the history of the state - and nobody believes it.[/quote]
Wasserman called this hours ago, The NYT needle virtually called it hours ago. The obituaries are being written. Stop watching CNN who are trying to make it exciting for the plebs.
Captain Dudley Smith (from L A Confidential.)
(Waiting for Ossoff to be declared the winner so ... I can sleep. 4:52 AM EST - Atlanta, GA)
I think so, actually.
What was predictable was that such an inept leader as Trump would make his last days a total farce and that he would not bother much about what happens to a crucial election to the GOP.
I would hope that the GOP would break into two. It would be the best thing what could happen to the party, actually. The prevailing stupidity and cynicism of Republican politicians thinking of Trump as a "Kingmaker" is simply mind blowing. Q-anon people are simply lunatics, and it's not a coherent strategy to go with the lunatic fringe. Why people opt for failure is beyond my reasoning. Perhaps they just rely that people forget what happened 6 to 12 months ago or something.
Of course the biggest reason for Trump's utter failure was his Covid-19 response, in which he failed from the start by going with the Rush Limbaugh line that it was a "common cold" and all was just democratic humbug. And of course, it the pandemic wouldn't have emerged to be a pandemic, but your average "swine-flu scare", that line would have been great. Unfortunately Covid-19 was the real deal, a pandemic. And since Trump is as inept as he is, he couldn't turn around ever from his first reactions.
I think it would have only taken for Trump closest aides and supporters to portray Trump himself to understand that Covid-19 was his "9/11"-moment, to change policy, be the serious "Crisis-President" and basically win the elections last year. The GOP could have milked the safety issue easily as they did during the 9/11 and following War on Terror era. Only the libertarian fringe would cried about the restrictions, but who cares about them, actually.
It's the mystical power of comeuppance that corrects stupidity and injustice in the cosmos.
I think it's fair to say that Trump had a little bit of influence on the outcome of the race. Of course the Trump cult would also blame McConnell for blocking $2000 checks for everyone... and they're not wrong either.
Great job!
Stacy Abrams should receive some type of reward for her lifetime of efforts. Remarkable. Astounding. Unbelievable.
Speaking of influence:
CNN is telling people their vote might be stolen or fraudulently overturned would make them stay at home. Interesting logic. Anyone catch the $2000 check offered to everyone if they voted democrat? I guess that is legal in America.
Also CNN is suggesting that the leaked phone call to Georgian secretary of state affected the election. Very secure election, unsecured phone lines. Nice.
https://thelibertyloft.com/joe-biden-offers-money-for-votes-in-georgia/
It doesn't get better than this.
Are you trying to frame a party promising a policy of welfare as bribery?
No. It was proposed by Democrats' way back in April (House) & May (Senate) 2020.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/492950-house-democrats-propose-2000-monthly-payments-to-americans
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/08/monthly-payments-2000-coronavirus-243670
This so-called "Trump's idea" was just more of his petulant me-too bs aimed at settling scores with his own zombie-Party & Moscow Mitch. "$2,000 checks" (one-time, not monthly) were being negotiated between the House & Senate even before the November 3rd election:
https://www.newsweek.com/house-democrats-put-forward-trump-stimulus-check-proposal-vote-1557107
Is 80 million votes against Trump really that hard to believe? He worked very hard for over 4 years to demonize half the country, after all.
[quote=TR45H to MAGA-insurrectionists, 1/6/21]WE LOVE YOU. YOU’RE VERY SPECIAL.[/quote]
[quote=Rudy Giuliani to MAGA-insurrectionists, 1/6/21]Let's have trial by combat![/quote]
sundown, Wash. DC., 5:02 PM EST :point: begins KKKlown-show version of 'Night of the Long Knives' redux ...
update:
1/5/21
[quote=Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman]So Atlanta is ours and fairly won.[/quote]
US Senate runoff (GA):
• Warnock (D) beats Loeffler (R)
• Ossoff (D) beats Perdue (R)
Democrats gain 3 seats (50-50) –
US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY)
Thanks for flipping Georgia, Stacey?
Warnock & Ossoff, black & jewish sons of the deep south, will represent a formerly segregationist state in the US Senate ... fulfilling the promise of 'Schwerner Chaney & Goodman' ... and in the wake of the twilight struggle lead by MLK Jr, Abraham Heschel, et al, which continues.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/GravelInstitute/status/1346899170905497600[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/byaaroncdavis/status/1346908166030766080[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanLamothe/status/1346917938843029504[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/councilofdc/status/1346918966707499008[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1346928882595885058[/tweet]
, congratz Georgia et al (y)
:heart:
How much different would the world be today?
You got there in the end.
:rofl:
Demonizing half the country is what politicians on both sides have been doing for decades, and your just now noticing? I guess you're right because Hillary lost after demonizing half the country. But then that is why people vote for their political party - because they have been indoctrinated to think that the other party are demons.
All I hear and read about is the sanctimonious idea that what has been happening is not America, but it is America.
America behaves as if it’s the only country that has free elections and it’s all such a tragedy for Democracy. Somehow they can’t see who and what they are. It’s a lie that’s crumbling. All they possess is power. Maybe it can be saved, maybe not. But doing the same thing over and over leads to the same thing.
My take throughout this process was that the vast majority of Republicans stood by Trump in order to maintain party unity and to avoid his vicious response to disloyalty. The hope, I think, was to allow the clock to run out with his baseless protests and conspiracy theories about the election. Despite making all his claims, no Republican effort meaningfully attempted to overturn the election. No Republican Governor, Secretary of State, election board, or legislature actually failed to certify their election results, and no Republican or even Trump appointed judge accepted his arguments. Most notably, in Georgia, Republicans took a beating from Trump for their disloyalty because it appears that Trump thought the very Republican controlled state was his best bet in decertifying results. Up to the last minute, it looked like McConnell would be able to control the Republican Senators from signing on to the objections to the election, but he was not able to. In any event, no one actually thought the objection to the Electoral College votes in Congress would result in any change to the final election result.
As to whether the Republicans were cowards, fearful of doing the right thing, they certainly were. As to whether the rank and file actually believed the Trump nonsense, I doubt it. As to whether the Republicans can now remove themselves from Trump now that he has revealed too clearly what and who he actually is, yes. And that, as I said above, is the positive takeaway here. I don't see the rank and file GOP as much as co-conspirators in attempting to steal Biden's legitimate win, but as pathetic cowards fearful of losing their power who knew better.
40 percent of Republicans polled approved of the Capitol mob attack.
The congressmen who objected were trying to take control of Trump's supporters, aiming for popularity in 2024.
This is the same crowd who earnestly believed Obama is the Antichrist. This is the crowd who fears there are nano-trackers in the covid-19 vaccine.
They aren't going away.
Does their intent matter if they were benefitting from advancing a politics that lead to a coup attempt? And as @frank said 45% of Republican supporters stand by Trump's coup attempt. They're not dumb; the last four years the GOP's made this bed, they should lay in it. Of course they won't, and we're expected to believe the majority of the party were cowards with noble intentions or alternatively that "both sides" do exactly the same thing.
This nano tracker idea would be novel if we weren't all willing to pay for the one most carry in their pocket.
Stay healthy my friend :flower:
With two cameras and a microphone! :lol:
Glad I could help. :victory:
I wish covid had killed/would kill more of those dickheads. Perhaps china could (allegedly) engineer a more effective virus in that regard.
Unfortunately the risk isn't distributed that way. :worry:
Quoting fdrake
This is not entirely true, but it’s how things are done these days.. 45% of interviewed Republicans said they support the protestors. They did not say they supported “a coup”. Does anyone really believe these people were attempting a coup? That’s what the media have called it, even an insurrection. It was a violent protest carried out by people who believed they were wronged. That’s not a coup. Where’s the evidence of a coup? That these people intended to remove the government? How exactly?
I would agree with this. Essentially a bunch of dumb fucking sheep getting their rocks off. Wouldn't know a coup if it bit them in the ass.
I think Trump's pentagon changes suggest that he was thinking about a coup. Plus numerous comments during his presidency pointed to that.
His followers aren't exactly anchored in reality, so it's possible that they thought they were revolutionaries.
Gotta hand it to the Trumpists, not even Hitler was able to get into the Ministry
:up:
Where should a protest end, how far should it go? What’s the point of a protest that requires permission to protest against the very authority that hands out the permission? What does it take to make change, and who’s right or wrong? Can change come from elections? What does real change mean?
All over the world people are protesting against their governments or their actions. Whatever the issue the consistency is people taking to the streets because of their dissatisfaction. All over the world people feel that governments are no longer representing their interests.
If you support Antifa protests then you must support BLM and consequently you must also support the Capitol Building invasion. If what makes one more legitimate than the other is the level of violence or the things they stand for, then you delegitimise all protests and reduce them to permission granted by the authorities which weakens them until they’re just empty gestures.
Governments treat the people like fools. Not only do they deprive them of jobs, income, health and security but they deprive them of dignity. How are people meant to fight back? How long before they come for you and there’s no longer room for effective resistance?
Quoting StreetlightX
I don’t think it’s even that.
Worth comparing the contemporary German response to their own corresponding neo-Nazi's trying to infiltrate parliament, held off by a mere three policemen.
Which is not to celebrate the sanctity of 'congress buildings' or 'seats of government', whose destruction ought to be, in certain cases, a very good thing. Especially the American congress, which is in any case soaked in blood. This is one of the things that annoys me about alot of the mainstream, liberal response to what happened. There's alot of hand-wrigning about an 'attack on democratic institutions' - as though this was the main issue. No, the main issue is the name and purpose of that attack, which was aggression in defence of a corrupt plutocrat who lost an election - all while enabled and supported by the cops, who effectively handed them the keys before murdering one of them. For many other reasons, the looting and destruction of that building would be a perfectly fine thing.
The disgust levelled at those violent cosplayers ought to be separated from the celebration of a symbol of power and bloody oppression.
Quoting StreetlightX
Exactly. They went for the source of power and corruption.
The differential police response to wannabe fascists and civil rights movements is exactly as was expected;
That this spasm of violence was a glaring confirmation of impotence of Trump's repeated efforts at overturning the vote, and a final nail in its coffin;
That Trump - but not Trumpism - is a dying political force, especially within the Republican party, which is all but happy to throw him to the wolves, despite their complete complicity in the events that occurred;
That when push comes to shove, the cops still owe their loyalty to the state, and will gun down citizens if necessary, no matter what sympathies they have with the rioters.
What if Jesus was just like that guy with the horn hat? Just totally nuts?
Yea, they thought they were going to stop the certification, after which Trump would magically become a dictator.
Which is a minority of Republicans, of people that voted for Trump.
I think that a major reason why both Kelly Loeffler and Perdue lost the Georgia was because they both jumped on the Trump train. Q-anon beliefs gets a minority excited, but annoys a lot of conservatives Republicans, who all are now called RINOs.
Republicans simply don't see how stupid and counterproductive it is to support Trump. But I guess that they think that people will forget.
It is interesting that people insist that there were no irregularities - of course this opens up the whole thing even if they accept even one incident of fraud. Maybe that is why they don't. I have no way of knowing one way or another: either I take CNN's word for it, or I take Trumps word for it, this is not how an argument is settled. On the face of it, it is hard to believe Biden won. It is also a very close election, and irregularities in other elections do cast a large shadow over the result. So agnosticism is the order of the day I would think. A few months down the road I think we will see some cracks appear.
Given that the Republican Trump supporters are not all insane, it then follows that they are making some sort of a rational calculation here. They are either seizing on minor irregularities to gain some political support, or the fraud actually happened. It seems impossible that they are all risking their career on something that cannot be proven if not now, in the next four years. If there is even one case of an fraud that had affected one result in the election, even one state, you can say goodbye to the Democratic party. The Capitol carnage will seem minor in comparison.
Lets look at the facts so far:
Popular vote:
Trump 46.8 Vs Biden 51.3 . 4.5 % difference.
Arizona 0.4%, Georgia 0.2%, Nevada 2.4%.
And then there is this: this actually happened. Not saying there is fraud, but in close elections the system does not inspire a lot of confidence.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/02/rita-hart-iowa-challenge-election-results-442224
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/23/politics/iowa-2nd-district-mariannette-miller-meeks-rita-hart/index.html
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2020/12/30/steal-attempt-now-official-iowa-democrat-asks-fellow-democrats-to-overturn-election-she-lost-n2581975
The more important question is whether the horn hat man is the messiah.
What the hell is an 'armed protest'?? How is it not armed insurrection, pure and simple? If the shooting starts, can the 'armed protestors' expect that their actions are priviledged under 'freedom of expression'?
Daily Beast.
Republicans Are Tough on Terrorism Until the Terrorists Are Republicans
There's not much meaning to "Republican" any more. Two very different wings that should not be sharing the same name: Fascists and regular conservatives.
Anyway let's hope that this is a watershed. Always darkest before the dawn......
Only because the "decent" ones stand firmly with them, which seriously questions their decency.
I agree with the first part, that "Republican" means very little anymore, but I don't think the distinction between the two types is lunatic and normal. Compare the last two Republican Presidents: GW and Trump. GW believed in military intervention in the Middle East, he courted the Hispanic voter and didn't enforce the immigration laws, he favored open trade, and he responded to 9/11 by creating a federally controlled Dept. of Homeland Security. Trump is opposed to military action in the middle east, he's built a wall on the border, he wants to negotiate what he thinks are fair trade practices, and he left entirely to the states how to respond to covid.
I think the real meaning of a Republican is anyone who opposes a Democrat, with the best example being McConnell, who doesn't seem to be an ideologue or even a pragmatist, but really just an obstructionist, who has figured out how to make nothing happen.
I wouldn't quite put it that way. But there's little to distinguish Trump Republicanism from neo-fascist European movements like the National Front except maybe the latter are, if anything, a bit more subtle with their tactics. Same overall playbook.
I think you can levy the fascism claim upon Trump personally, but I think his followers truly believe they are protecting democracy from being stolen by some secret society. They also are convinced that the judges haven't been following the Constitution and that the rule of law is dead. They also believe that you and I are sheep, blinded as to reality, giving them a feeling of superiority and a justification for their defiance.
I work with a guy like this. He refuses to wear a mask because he thinks they don't work and their only purpose is to force the citizens into submission. They're sort of a gateway drug, where today they'll get you to wear masks, so that eventually they'll get you to willingly give up your first born. Then, after that, it'll get even worse, and people will voluntarily give up their guns.
So, back to lunatics then? Anyway, hard for me to get my head around how deep this type of stuff goes.
He served in the navy, actually. His presumable first lawyer started with one pitch:
Another one spin it a bit differently:
Well, this defense strategy makes a certain degree of sense. Now, if only he has a history of psychiatric treatment...
Romney is an obvious choice, he's had the guts to call Trump out since day 1. Ben Sasse has also made a stand. 10 Republicans voted to impeach, as noted above, who are now subject of foul abuse and death threats through social media. I mean, if I were an American elector, I doubt that I would ever vote for a Republican, but I would like to believe in the idea of principled opposition. I thought W was reprehensible, although one of Trump's noticeable anti-accomplishments is actually to make W look a little less bad.
The real rot that has set in is the divorce from reality, the willingness to believe lies and 'alternative facts'. That, and the sense of personal animus and hatred towards those who disagree with you. The fact that a majority of Republican voters still believe the election was rigged is a dreadful state of affairs.
There was an interview with a BBC correspondent who used to cover Washington in Reagan's day (can't recall his name). He said that Tip O'Neill, who was the Democrat speaker, used to drop by Reagan's office at 6:00 pm every evening for a drink and chat. They didn't socialise much apart from that and their relationship was not necessarily convivial, but they could talk.
He said the rot really set in with Newt Gingrich who had a strong 'take no prisoners' animus towards any opposition. The Tea Party fundamentalists were also a major part in it. (Jim Jordan, Mark Meadows and Mike Pompeo were all associated with Tea Party fundamentalism.) Hopefully with Trump's defeat and banishment (and probable bankruptcy in the very near future) that cycle is coming to an end, and politics can move more towards actually trying to solve massive problems instead of being a massive problem.
Eisenhower. gave some names and one interestingly is Liz Cheney, one of the 10, even if she is the daughter of Darth Vader.
Anyway, seems that the true conservatives are now called RINOs and the Republicans are totalitarian populists, or because they fear the mob are acting as totalitarian populists. Madness prevails.
The reality for a former Republican Presidential nominee and senator:
Quoting Wayfarer
Actually many see Gingrich as the person who ignited the hyper-partisan combative rhetoric. This of course was during the Clinton years, where on the domestic side Clinton was going from scandal to scandal and the Republican using every bit to sling mud on the Clintons making it a constant barrage toward the Clintons. It worked. The real hatred of the Clinton's was sown back then, starting with Whitewater and so on.
(For Hillary, it started a long time ago as the first lady)
From there came the deep hatred against Hillary Clinton and the birth of the conspiracy theories. Still, in the 1990's they were not at the Pizzagate/QAnon level with media vastly reporting on them. When Clinton was impeached in 1998, Newt was speaker of the House and the leader of the Republicans in Congress. During those times the divide started.
At least they could share a laugh and fit into the same picture...
It's interesting that the Tea Party, a movement that morphed from Ron Paul's 2008 campaign basically to the Tea Party Caucus in 2010, came up at similar time as there was Occupy Wall Street (happening in 2011, which then died quickly as it had no leadership). Before that there of course were the Seattle WTO protests in 1999, but otherwise there were long periods between the movements.
And now? Well, unfortunately there are deeply alienated people believing that they have lost their democracy, which is quite sad for the future. The Great American Train Wreck of the Trump train would be an apt name for this.
But then, maybe it's because there's a lot of them, so they're a big audience. You can lead them up the garden path for commercial advantage. That seems the MO of the so-called 'right wing media'.
What is lacking here is how to stop this trainwreck of becoming even a bigger disaster.
Arguably the rhetoric of "healing" is utterly stupid from the Republicans. A simple zero tolerance violence and loud condemnation of the insurrection would be the first move. One ought to be consistent, if one has prior condemned the looting in the summer.
And those that indeed want to sink with the Trump ship and want to be on the crazy side of history (which historians obviously will find interesting later), they should turn the focus on 2024 and to treat the conspiracy theorist crowd by saying that now those contemplating violence are actually false flag operators that want to tarnish the reputation of Messiah Trump's image. Or something as bizarre like that.
Or then you make everything worse and the country goes to the similar kind of hysteria it was after 9/11 with arresting sikhs, because they wore turbans. And even more stupid.
Those who are 'given power' are those who can satisfy the whims of corporate America, that's it.
And if a system keeps people stupid, then it's quite obvious that politics of that population might end up being stupid.
Actually I agree, it was atrocious, but then, so is what we've been seeing.
Quoting ssu
It's more than just politics. The culture itself encourages and coddles stupidity. Obviously there are very many brilliant people in the US, but the existence of large masses of those clinging to delusional fantasies is the problem. And how to combat that. I agree with some commentators is that it requires patient but thorough prosecution.
That would be the bare minimum; and even then it would be useless if universities remain nothing more than for-profit vocational institutes - excuses for hedge funds, in some cases - while budgets get slashed for actual vocational institutes along with K-12 education, under the guise of 'austerity' and 'balancing the budgets'. It doesn't help that the US funds their schools by property taxes, meaning that poor areas - those with the lowest property values - literally get the worst education. The poor are kept undereducated. But yeah, sure, blame the uneducated for everything that's going on :roll: This is not about 'academic graduates', this is literally about anyone at all who wants to grow up to be an autonomous human being.
Sure. Romney isn't magnficent, or a world-conquering hero, or the greatest guy in history. But he's a decent bloke, which is about the best you could hope for in the circumstances.
I also have to say I think Mike Pence deserves kudos for his response on January 6th - after a mob broke into the Capitol with the explicit aim of ‘hanging Mike Pence’ and his worthless boss rubbished him in front of stadium crowds, that he went through the formality of the certification process without missing a beat, never visibly loosing his cool.
It's funny (or it would be if it weren't so tragic) that right-wing anti-democratic rhetoric so often employs the notion of "the mob", the hoi polloi, the unwashed masses -- y'know, the bad people who aren't like you, that you don't want making decisions that affect you just because there's more of them than you -- and now, they are exactly such a mob themselves.
But of course, everything the right every complains about is projection, so I should have seen this coming.
That's an American phenomenon, leftists do the same in the US...when it's not the politically correct poor, but those for example who support Trump. Do note the extremely condescending way that so-called liberals often talk about Southern or countryside people as rednecks and hillbillies.
You see, there's a very strange phenomenon is the US where people fear above all to be called a racist, because of the ugly history. Yet for some reason, it's then totally OK to use similar language that racists would use at people of your own race. I get it, in many countries country folk or poor people are ridiculed, but not with such hostility and contempt as in the US. For example, the term "White Trash" comes I think from early 19th Century and is still used. If their would be more social cohesion, Americans wouldn't call poor people garbage, it simply would be a taboo. Such derogatory names for poor people vanished from use for example here in the early 20th Century.
Quoting Pfhorrest
So, do you see how more worse it's going to get?
Q Anon is Destroying the Republican Party from Within
And as usual, the Republicans aren't the sissies in US politics:
Sasse's essay picks up on that:
[quote=Ben Sasse]Conspiracy theories are a substitute [i.e. for faith]. Support Donald Trump and you are not merely participating in a mundane political process—that’s boring. Rather, you are waging war on a global sex-trafficking conspiracy! No one should be surprised that QAnon has found a partner in the empty, hypocritical, made-for-TV deviant strain of evangelicalism that runs on dopey apocalypse-mongering. (I still consider myself an evangelical, even though so many of my nominal co-religionists have emptied the term of all historic and theological meaning.) A conspiracy theory offers its devotees a way of inserting themselves into a cosmic battle pitting good against evil. This sense of vocation that makes it dangerous is also precisely what makes it attractive in our era of isolated, alienated consumerism.[/quote]
QAnon is already in Australia. Look around you to understand what kind of people are willing to embrace it.
Quoting frank
I don’t see many. A couple of sleazebag climate denialist anti vaxxer politicians but they’re hardly mainstream.
I don't particularly want it to make a difference. Trump tore the Republican party into pieces. I think it would be to the benefit of all if it stayed that way.
Give it time.
Yes, It Was a Stolen Election (John Perazzo; Frontpagemag; Dec 23, 2020)
(The Federalist, Breitbart, The Epoch Times, Washington Examiner, The Daily Wire, Project Veritas, ...)
Quoting Media Bias Fact Check: Frontpage Magazine
Free expression with accountability of some sort seems like a good idea.
There are people out there only getting their news from such publications, e.g. having been told everything else is ungodly deception and lies, and when that turns to action, problems happen.
If I told my hopeless colleague that drinking a liter of Vodka + bleach would take care of their headache, then I might just be right, and I'd definitely be immoral and have committed a crime.
Commitment to honesty, to facts, is all that is required. It goes for all sides, all factions, all movements, all parties. Given the facts, arguments can be made across the spectrum, but without that commitment, then corruption is the only possibility.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nationalreview.com/2021/01/witless-ape-rides-helicopter/amp/
also by the same writer (re: appeal of MAGA, etc)
Big White Ghetto: Dead Broke, Stone-Cold Stupid, and High on Rage in the Dank Woolly Wilds of the "Real America", Kevin D. Williamson
It is a really tiresome piece of hyperbole and exaggeration. Again, the entire Republican party is now to blame, in some insane logic, for a few hundred people who broke in and entered government buildings are equated to those who refused to do so. A protest gone awry an a few bad apples is what it is.
The Republican party is fine, despite wishes to the contrary. Anyone can see the character of their representatives such as Mitchell McConnell . If people wish to demonize Republicans for voting with their conscience, and having a right to non-conformity of opinion, then it is indeed a huge reversal of what the progress towards freedom of speech and especially a failure to respect the Constitution. There was no danger of the party being led by Alex Jones. What is dangerous if forbidding the Republicans for agreeing in any way with the polices that Trump, in any case the winning Republican candidate of 2016. It is this sort of thing that has damaged democracy, people do not have a freedom to express their opinion without being censured, so be it, but I guess reason if not literacy has taken a real step backwards.
McConnell was a bigger villain in all of this than Trump ever was, and I think you're right that he represents the real core of the Republican party. Trump was just a useful idiot for the real Republicans.
Bill Buckley would be proud, though probably a bit more restrained. Except where Gore Vidal was concerned.
Just to be clear, the received truth is that the Republican party is bad and the Democratic party is good, is that correct? An objective standard would be if anything they do violates the constitution.
Personal insults and vilification as well as accusing the others side as being communists or traitors or idiots is not expressly or tacitly unconstitutional, is that how it works?
I am trying to figure out how the system works that a free fair election produced Donald Trump in 2016 and then Joe Biden in 2020. Are the voters to blame, and is it always the voters on the other side?
The framers of the Constitution did not write it for a two-party system.
No, they’re both bad, the Reps are just the much worse of the two.
America needs something much better than either.
Quoting FreeEmotion
The system is designed in a way that breaks when you have a country with population density disparities the likes of which we currently have. The people overall overwhelmingly lean more toward D than R, but the system gives disproportionate representation to a demographic that also tends to lean R, meaning every election is really close and down to tiny unpredictable factors.
Quoting FreeEmotion
That is correct, but they did unknowingly write it in a way that guarantees a two-party system. That two-party system plus the disproportionate representation in turn sets where the threshold of the country’s politics falls: one party (currently D) represents the underrepresented majority’s interests plus enough of the overrepresented rural minority’s interests to actually stand a chance of crossing that threshold, and the other party (currently R) leans as hard as it can on the differences between those two demographics to pull as much as possible away from the other party’s acceptable standards, daring them to compromise their principles for a chance to win, or else hold on to them and lose completely.
That inevitable two-party system, plus more recent intentional political exploitation of it, results in an intensely polarized politics, where the differences between the two factions are played up harder and harder. Except for the golden rule: whoever has the gold makes the rules. Anyone who opposes that is quickly shut out by the people who own the people who put the people in charge in charge.
You will be screwed by both the Republicans and Democrats; the difference is that the Republicans won't use vaseline.
• Trump and Justice Dept. Lawyer Said to Have Plotted to Oust Acting Attorney General (The New York Times; Jan 22, 2021)
• New York Times: Trump and DOJ attorney had plan to replace his acting AG and undo Georgia election result (Washington's Top News; Jan 22, 2021)
The Georgia runoffs later seemed to confirm the election results.
I'm not complaining.
Now, the Senate is unlikely to convict. I still say the second impeachment was mandatory. And I would ask those Republicans who vote to acquit, what it is they're defending, because it sure ain't the Constitution.
[quote=US Constitution, Article I, section 3]The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of TWO THIRDS OF THE MEMBERS PRESENT.[/quote]
So if, for instance, 20 GOP senators are absent when the vote is taken, 53 (rather than 67) votes will be needed to convict, or 2 GOP senators + 50 Dems + 1 VP. Only 2 Republicans. Don't be distracted by the kabuki theatre courtesy of Mssrs. Paul, Graham, Grassley, Cruz, Hawley et al; no Putin's Bitch-enabling senator wants to face this vote, and the only out for many of these craven crypto-fascist shits is to be absent on the day ... (quasi-deniably) allowing the US Senate to convict tr45h.
:victory: :mask:
I hadn't seen this before.
Sasse writes that he's an evangelical, and claims conspiracy theories are a substitute for faith. But he says it's the deviant evangelicals that that fall for the conspiracy theories. This means, I suppose, that the true religion will save us from conspiracy theories--spawned by evil consumerism--believed by bad evangelicalism. Jesus--the right Jesus--will save us from the effects of rampant secularism.
To wit: e.g. Evangelical 'vicarious redemption via human sacrifice memorialized by ritual incantations culminating in symbolic cannibalism' dogma is indistinguishable in absurdity from the e.g. QAnon 'pedophiliac cannibalizing lizard people disguised as "deep state" politicians & functionaries' conspiracy ... consequently followed by blindly self-righteous atrocities.
Maybe a variation of 's Voltaire quote could be something like ...
"If you've come to believe enough absurdities, then what's one more?"
Might be evident to some extent:
Quoting Cognitive biases explain religious belief, paranormal belief, and belief in life’s purpose (2013)
Quoting Judgments About Fact and Fiction by Children From Religious and Nonreligious Backgrounds (2014)
Quoting Does Poor Understanding of Physical World Predict Religious and Paranormal Beliefs? (2016)
Quoting Metacognitive Failure as a Feature of Those Holding Radical Beliefs (2018)
They call themselves Christians but really it's a degenerate form of Christianity.
:brow:
Maybe? Watch for generalization across conspiracy theorists. And the "no true Christian" thing. Well, the QAnon'ers are goners anyway.
It's been shocking to see how many purported 'Christians' have gone about wailing for Trump, as if he's a prophet, when he's obviously such a phony, not to mention a liar and obvious narcissist. But then, some Christian media have railed against them, as in this article from the 7th January https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2021/january-web-only/trump-capitol-mob-election-politics-magi-not-maga.html
Related anecdote: I was raised in a very loosely religious family, and exposed at a young age to Christian original fiction that seemed to me just like any other fantasy literature, equally real or unreal... and as I grew up and outgrew Santa Claus, etc, I shifted all the religious stories into that same category of well-meaning “lies for children”, metaphorical fictions for pedagogical purposes... and then was shocked to realize by my adolescence that so many adults actually believed that these fantasy stories were real.
Holy Hate: The Far Right’s Radicalization of Religion (2018)
Accompanied by a hyperbolic "red scare"...
This is how Sasse explains the "bad" Republicans and Trumpists, you see. The members of the Republican Party and others accept Trumpism (I like "Trumpery" myself) and wacky conspiracy theories because Americans no longer understand themselves as "children of a loving God" and no longer see themselves as having "a role to play in loving their neighbors."
But when, I wonder, and how often have we (or American Christians generally, as it's clear enough he refers to the loving God of Christianity) actually "played" such a role? Was the Capitol building attacked, and do conspiracy theories abound, because we no longer love our neighbors, or no longer "see" ourselves as doing so? It can't reasonably be claimed we ever loved our neighbors except in odd moments, no matter how many times we may have thought or said we did or should.
If you look at the charity organizations in your community, like the ones that run thrift shops and soup kitchens, you'll probably find that most of them are Christian organizations. I'm not a Christian, but that 'love your neighbor' actually is a thing.
I suspect Sasse wasn't referring to these charities when he opined regarding Americans no longer believing as he thinks we did once. If he was, though, then it seems he is wrong. Because in that case what happened, and is happening takes place despite the fact that Americans still believe themselves to be children of a loving (Christian) God, and love their neighbors and see themselves as having a role in lovin their neighbors.
But my guess is that Sasse, like me, doesn't think these charities are representative of American society at large. If they were, it's likely they wouldn't be needed.
Charity is a complicated notion in contemporary society. Prior to the secularization of society, charity was mandatory. It was a commandment, not just a recommendation. Once theocracies ended, so did mandatory charitable contributions. What we now have in terms of mandatory contributions are not "charitable" (as that term is currently defined), but they appear in the form of taxation and enforced income redistribution.
When someone suggests that charity is distinct from taxation because charity is from the heart, it is voluntary, and that it arises from a feeling you are to love your neighbor, they are speaking not from a theological perspective, but they are simply identifying an interesting historical development, namely that religious mandates are no longer mandated now that that the state has usurped their historical power.
Theologically speaking, what makes this even more complicated is the Protestant abandonment of good acts for salvation. That leaves Protestants without a specific reason for loving one's neighbor other than it is a trait of Jesus one might wish to emulate. What is clear though is that the eternal reward of heaven is not made any more likely regardless of how much love one expresses for one's neighbor. Salvation is gained through faith alone, despite whatever sort of love or evil you impart on the world.
My point is that you have casted a soup kitchen as being an example of loving one's neighbor, but you don't make the same comment when you see free and reduced lunches at public school. The reason for that I'd suggest is because the former is voluntary, but voluntariness really has no role in determining morality, love, caring, or even in assuring oneself a spot in heaven. Voluntariness simply describes that amount of charity people give beyond what is required by law. If we wish to judge the morality of the charitable, we can either judge them on the basis of how much they actually give or we can judge them on the basis on how much they think ought be required to give.
The US started taking the role of protector of labor and the poor during the Progressive Era, whose star was hardcore Presbyterian Woodrow Wilson, but I think your point is that we don't know if Wilson actually loved children when he backed laws against child labor. Since he was guided by his Christian faith, he might have just done it because he felt like God was commanding that he be a freakin do-gooder. I guess that's true.
Quoting Hanover
Are you talking about Calvinism? For Calvinists, good acts don't lead to salvation, but you still do good acts every day "for the glory of God", whatever that means.
Quoting Hanover
This is Baptists.
Revising God's Prophecy! (16m:47s youtube)
Greg Locke has substance-free demagoguery nailed to a T. Sid Roth laughs in tongues, too. :D
[quote=Hank Kunneman Prophecy (Omaha, NE)]Do not pay attention to the news, to the headlines, to the reports[/quote]
And there are people following just that — "lying left media", "news in the pocket of evil socialists", "'they' suppress or censor opposing views", ... And so a problem emerges. Problems. Popularization of "free" "alternate" (and extremist) "information" sources, isolation, echo chambers, mis-dis-trust, ... QAnon is more of the same madness.
The Bill of Rights grants freedom to such stuff, and maybe that's fine, after all, it equally allows those "Holy Koolaid" people freedom to expose the madness. A minimum of generally available, mandatory/expected education (and skills in critical inquiry) might be better. That takes resources, though.
This is Protestantism generally. Salvation by faith alone is a central tenant of Martin Luther's protest against Catholicism.
You said, "Salvation is gained through faith alone, despite whatever sort of love or evil you impart on the world."
Lutherans believe faith and works go hand in hand, works doing the job of expressing faith. It's just that salvation is a result of faith, not the accompanying works.
Baptists believe that as well because that's pretty clearly explained by Paul and Baptists pride themselves in their knowledge of the Bible. Their strong emphasis on God's forgiveness has given them the reputation of being overly forgiving of themselves, though.
Not sure we're disagreeing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sola_fide
The murderer who accepts Jesus as his savior on his death bed goes to heaven, but the nonbeliever who had led the saintly life sees eternal damnation.
Capitol Hill Police Officer murdered by a mob of MAGA-QAnon insurrectionists while tr45h enthusiastically watched from the WH
https://www.themarysue.com/fox-news-ignores-officer-sicknick-memorial/
Let the media and the democrats attack Greene, let Cheney and the other ten Republicans in the House that went for impeachment simply be and see if Kinziger gets support. Now it ought to be crystal clear what a disaster Trump was, but his voters are their supporters. At least in a way. Avoid at all costs the party fracturing. Trump simply hasn't got the leadership and organizational abilities to create a new party. And the ban from Twitter shows just how totally inept this guy is to reach his followers when his smartphone is "taken away".
As time goes, the democrats will go to excesses in their disdain and simply start to annoy all Republicans. Likely the voters in general will be disappointed at the Biden administration, if Covid-19 doesn't go away and the economy stays as bad as it is. At that time people like Liz Cheney and Kinziger can start themselves calling that enough is enough and we will, hopefully, have normal mid-terms.
In short, the GOP can take example from the Democrats on how to deal with their annoying but eager and important supporters called the "progressives" or "democratic socialists". The DNC never kicks these buffoons out, but gives them enough crumbs that they stay in the party and here Bernie tows the party line extremely well. Bernie gets the young and the radicals all excited, but always tows the party line. The GOP handled the tea-party crowd extremely well in a similar manner. The Trump crowd is different and problematic (to say the least), but still quite malleable.
That's of course assuming that the goal for the republicans is a return to relative "normalcy", with power switching hands between two parties at regular intervals.
Another way to read the events is that the GOP not trying to slowly ease out Trimpism, but instead slowly ease out the traditional idea of the conservative, as a way to deal with the ever dwindling number of these kinds of voters.
Well, this symbiosis with the DNC has worked for them very well. The last thing the DNC and the GOP want is their duopoly on political power to be broken and a viable third party would emerge.
Quoting Echarmion
What is obvious is that there's a power struggle going on inside the GOP. For example, the Lincoln Project didn't cease it's adds once the election is over, but is attacking one side of the GOP.
If it would have been the loss of the Presidency and both houses in Congress, the GOP may have gone as business as usual. But January 6th happened as the final crash with an explosion of the Trump train wreck leaving things so much in shatters, that they do have to think about this shit.
The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election
True to form, the anti-Trumpers justify their actions by repeating glittering generalities about “democracy” and convincing themselves their actions would save America from some dire future. It’s a racket, of course. But shadow campaigns, vast sums of dark money, altering election laws, war games, colluding with corporations, big tech and the press to steer information doesn’t seem to me to represent the spirit of democracy.
I suppose it's anti Trump to insist on fair elections... :rofl:
There was. It involved getting a buttload of sane people to the polls.
It worked!!!
One can say the same of any form of influence. But in this case dark money, corporate interest and media collusion pushed they finger on the scale. “Hey, it worked” isn’t a great answer.
(NOS, you can go do your thing on the Biden thread.)