Did you vote? If not, why not? If you did, do you expect your candidates to win?
Me: I voted today. There was a steady stream of people at my polling location, but no lines. I do not expect my state-wide candidates to win, as my political persuasion is not favored in my current state, but I do expect my local candidates to win.
Mailed mine in yesterday.
Hoping for peace, respect, strong turnout, and a healthy, robust system of voter participation with no violence, especially over the next week.
M.
I voted this AM on my way to campus - my Dad would reach down from the great beyond and whack me upside the head if I didn't vote at every opportunity. One of my statewide options was a choice between "Oh, h*ll no!" and "Are you freakin' kidding me?" but for the local races, I think my chosen candidates have a pretty good chance. We'll see. I too hope for a peaceful reaction to the results, both in my state and nationwide.
ALHS and I will go to the polls together after I get home from work (mid-afternoon). Our governor's and US Senator's races should be easy wins for the incumbents. I did a lot of campaign work for the governor, though he's widely hated in our MAGA part of the state.
I was going to vote, and at first glance it ought to have been quite easy for me, no ID asked for (though I always carry mine), but then I remembered my wife said she would leave me if I voted for any republicans. Voter suppression!
I polled my students this morning. None (of 12) of them had voted, nor did they intend to.
Two didn't even know it was election day, which is doubly amazing since you have to pass a voting site to get onto campus.
The city's public school system is closed today. (Explains all the kids coming with their parents/adult family members to the library) The elementary school up the street is a voting center.
There are places offering freebies and services for the day:
https://wtop.com/elections/2022/11/election-day-deals-donuts-pizza-and-cheap-rides-2/ (https://wtop.com/elections/2022/11/election-day-deals-donuts-pizza-and-cheap-rides-2/)
Scroll past ad breaks to read full article. Posted on WTOP 11/8/22
A run down of DC, MD, and VA (DMV) races and state specific questions on the ballots:
https://wtop.com/local-politics-elections-news/2022/11/election-day-2022-voters-in-dc-md-va-head-to-the-polls/ (https://wtop.com/local-politics-elections-news/2022/11/election-day-2022-voters-in-dc-md-va-head-to-the-polls/)
Scroll past ad breaks to read full article.
I voted by mail a week or so ago.
I'm in a traditionally red state that has voted blue from time to time in the past. Polling is pretty close, so impossible to predict who will win with any certainty, but if I had to bet I'd put my money on the Republicans.
I voted this morning, around 10am. The polling place was very busy—I've never seen so many people for a midterm election. I have no idea what that means for either party. Perhaps one thing bringing people out is the ballot question on early voting, which our (blue) state does not have.
We could request absentee ballots by checking the box for temporary illness, including Covid. I took mine to the post office a couple of weeks ago.
Our current guv was handed the position on a platter, so to speak, but because of various missteps, her opponent has a good chance of defeating her. The first mistake was appointing a Lieutenant Governor who was then under investigation for federal corruption charges, and who subsequently resigned because he was arraigned on bribery charges. Other missteps soon followed.
I live in another country, so I vote by absentee ballot. My candidates always lose, and thus it always will be.
But still I vote.
No, and no intention to.
The district in which I live has only the House member on the ballot. The district votes 75% Democratic, so I'm not going to vote.
I voted. I'm in a state with some contentious congressional elections , but my district ain't one of them, unfortunately.
I hope of the people I voted for pulls off some sort of upset, but I kind of doubt it.
I'm not a Democrat, and have voted for a number of Republicans in the past, but the developments of the last 6 years have lead to me swearing off most Republicans.
Its probably not going to be a great night for Dems, but I do hope that if they can't keep Senate, that they at least pull off some surprises (though probably keeping Senate will amount to them pulling off a surprise or two---though there is rather boring way of doing it--keep Georgia, don't lose anything else!)
We requested absentee/mail-in ballots again. Our state offers a lot of different types of voting opportunities, and I appreciate that. We delayed too much in filling them out and mailing them (just too much to read up on to do so in an informed way) and wanted to make sure they were received in time, so my husband dropped the ballots off at a locked drop box over the weekend. I hope my choices won, of course, especially for some of the senior state leadership positions. Two such incumbents have been under fire from one of the parties for the ways they handled the pandemic and previous elections, but I think they're both great. We'll see.
In addition to the thousand campaign mailers and the numerous texts from different factions harassing me to vote here, I also got a bunch from my former state. I wouldn't have been surprised to have received them on the phone number I still have from that state (though I didn't receive many on that phone at all), but I am not sure how they got my newer number. In any case, there is a major race going on there that I definitely hope goes in favor of one of the candidates. The other guy's team sent plenty of texts on his behalf, but I cannot emphasize enough how much I would never, ever vote for him. Unfortunately, recent events have made it more of a race than it should have been.
I voted this morning on the way to campus and sported my "I Voted" sticker all day, as did many colleagues. Family busy at my small ton's small polling place.
I wish there were an official "I didn't vote" sticker that one could wear. That could spark some interesting conversations between strangers. :-)
Quote from: mahagonny on November 08, 2022, 09:07:48 AM
I was going to vote, and at first glance it ought to have been quite easy for me, no ID asked for (though I always carry mine), but then I remembered my wife said she would leave me if I voted for any republicans. Voter suppression!
Just kidding, I did vote. But the rest is true, though she's not going to know. Only one of my votes (referendum) will matter. On all the rest, I expect the democrats will win.
I tried watching coverage on MSNBC. The first thing they mention is how many 'election deniers' are on the ballot. No mention of voting deniers, e.g. Stacey Abrams.
Voted by mail, which is the norm in my state. We love it because we can sit down with the Voter's Pamphlet and really weigh the issues as we go.
So far, things are looking better for Democrats than most would have predicted.
We had an at large city council election. The three I voted for are dead last!
The results are not dissimilar to the other elections I voted. It matters not what candidates I support, in my area, I am in (at least) the electoral minority.
Voted, after being turned away initially because my driver's license had (unbeknownst to me; the DMV apparently doesn't send renewal notices!) expired a short time ago. Returned with a bank statement as alternative ID and was allowed to vote. (Have since renewed license!)
Brought the toddler, who got to vote on such pressing issues as "favorite pet" and "favorite color" on the kids' ballot. The toddler was more interested in examining the HVAC system and the drains around the polling place.
Results were mixed, with some surprises. Some issues and candidates I supported were successful; others were not.
Always grateful to have the opportunity to vote.
Interesting experience this time, a relative of one of my colleagues was elected to state office. Congratulations.
Ron DeSantis had a great night because Donald Trump did not.
Karl Rove seems to know every county on the map. Almost.
I voted by mail quite some time ago.
The comment upthread by FishProf made me glad that I did not cancel today's class.
I canceled class back in mid-October of 2020, and bugged students for weeks leading up to the November 2020 election, to use that free time to go vote. I didn't cancel class this time. Maybe I shouldn't have canceled class in 2020, either.
My state had 4 referendums. I backed the losing horse in all 4.
I find that...interesting.
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 08, 2022, 07:49:13 PM
So far, things are looking better for Democrats than most would have predicted.
Speaking with Wellington about Waterloo: It was a close-run thing!
Quote from: dismalist on November 09, 2022, 10:37:56 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 08, 2022, 07:49:13 PM
So far, things are looking better for Democrats than most would have predicted.
Speaking with Wellington about Waterloo: It was a close-run thing!
there won't be any more things like Newt Gingrich's tsunami of the 1990's. there aren't that many seats that can be flipped any more. Gerrymandering* from both sides. Then too, we (the Nazis) already had a good share of them by 2020.
My goodness, what the heck is going on in AZ?
*oops, so sorry. It's called 'redistricting' when the dems do it.
con't
It wasn't the red wave some predicted, but flipping the House of Rep's will bring change if it happens. Who knows, the FBI and DOJ's days as agents for the democratic party may be numbered. The millions doled out to the big guy VEEP from the Chinese may just get into the news a bit. Some of the media may get a bit tired of the pitfalls of stumping for old Joe. Death by 1,000 cuts? (Speaking figuratively. Not an actual threat.)
Quote from: Hegemony on November 08, 2022, 05:58:43 PM
Voted by mail, which is the norm in my state. We love it because we can sit down with the Voter's Pamphlet and really weigh the issues as we go.
A "Voter's Pamphlet" sounds potentially very good. Wish all states had that.
Quote from: Cheerful on November 09, 2022, 02:01:39 PM
Quote from: Hegemony on November 08, 2022, 05:58:43 PM
Voted by mail, which is the norm in my state. We love it because we can sit down with the Voter's Pamphlet and really weigh the issues as we go.
A "Voter's Pamphlet" sounds potentially very good. Wish all states had that.
We usually look at the guide put together by the League of Women Voters. They ask the same set of questions to each candidate for a particular office and summarize the amendments, bonds, referendums, etc. It's a good starting point, at least. They've got some good resources: https://www.lwv.org/elections/vote411
Quote from: Cheerful on November 09, 2022, 02:01:39 PM
Quote from: Hegemony on November 08, 2022, 05:58:43 PM
Voted by mail, which is the norm in my state. We love it because we can sit down with the Voter's Pamphlet and really weigh the issues as we go.
A "Voter's Pamphlet" sounds potentially very good. Wish all states had that.
I sampled some candidates across parties in the "Voter's Pamphlet". The content consists of the usual campaign messaging. The pamphlets seem to me to be a method to reduce the costs of politicians to get their messages out, substituting tax money for donations.
I'll tell what would help. A pamphlet that tells you what each candidate would like to do once elected, that they might be able to do, that they're not telling you. They could have told us about Joe Biden's planned Ministry of Truth, for example.
The dems managed to smear Herschel Walker for paying for his girlfriend's abortion, which is what about half of them would have done. got to admit, they're good at what they do.
Quote from: dismalist on November 09, 2022, 02:39:41 PM
Quote from: Cheerful on November 09, 2022, 02:01:39 PM
Quote from: Hegemony on November 08, 2022, 05:58:43 PM
Voted by mail, which is the norm in my state. We love it because we can sit down with the Voter's Pamphlet and really weigh the issues as we go.
A "Voter's Pamphlet" sounds potentially very good. Wish all states had that.
I sampled some candidates across parties in the "Voter's Pamphlet". The content consists of the usual campaign messaging. The pamphlets seem to me to be a method to reduce the costs of politicians to get their messages out, substituting tax money for donations.
The LWV, which has in the past published newsprint pamphlets and now includes online summaries, as noted above, is a private organization, not a governmental one.
M.
I was given a slightly torn ballot, maybe the first off the pad of them for my district. The machine kept rejecting it (so it said!); the helpful scrutineers tried sliding it in this way and that way. I give credit now for my candidate winning. I must have voted several times. All those votes! I saw no one standing by glaring suspiciously, open carrying, but alert the stolen post-election squadron!
Quote from: mamselle on November 09, 2022, 02:56:52 PM
Quote from: dismalist on November 09, 2022, 02:39:41 PM
Quote from: Cheerful on November 09, 2022, 02:01:39 PM
Quote from: Hegemony on November 08, 2022, 05:58:43 PM
Voted by mail, which is the norm in my state. We love it because we can sit down with the Voter's Pamphlet and really weigh the issues as we go.
A "Voter's Pamphlet" sounds potentially very good. Wish all states had that.
I sampled some candidates across parties in the "Voter's Pamphlet". The content consists of the usual campaign messaging. The pamphlets seem to me to be a method to reduce the costs of politicians to get their messages out, substituting tax money for donations.
The LWV, which has in the past published newsprint pamphlets and now includes online summaries, as noted above, is a private organization, not a governmental one.
M.
I was referring to https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Pages/Voters-Pamphlet.aspx (https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Pages/Voters-Pamphlet.aspx), not League of Women Voters. LWV can do what it pleases in my book. Oregon.gov is a cost shifting exercise.
This what you get in Colorado. It is only about referenda, not candidates. It was REALLY useful.
https://leg.colorado.gov/content/initiatives/initiatives-blue-book-overview/ballot-information-booklet-blue-book
Quote from: mahagonny on November 09, 2022, 02:48:30 PM
The dems managed to smear Herschel Walker for paying for his girlfriend's abortion, which is what about half of them would have done. got to admit, they're good at what they do.
Perhaps they would have, but they are not the ones running on an anti-abortion campaign. Do you really not see the difference or hypocracy?
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 09, 2022, 04:34:13 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 09, 2022, 02:48:30 PM
The dems managed to smear Herschel Walker for paying for his girlfriend's abortion, which is what about half of them would have done. got to admit, they're good at what they do.
Perhaps they would have, but they are not the ones running on an anti-abortion campaign. Do you really not see the difference or hypocracy?
What I suspect is that he regrets being on board with the abortion, or abortions if there was more than one, and his role in the decision. What he should have done was come clean about the past and explain that he learned from the experience and how he felt about it afterwards, and now he's running on a campaign that best represents his beliefs. He was a problematic choice at the time, but the republicans probably figured any white Christian southerner would be told by Warnock in so many words that he needs to go to church and confess his original sin of committing mass oppression, with the democrats cheering. But Warnock's smarter than they figured. He concealed his racism enough throughout the campaign, and the personal attacks against Walker kept him off guard. They should have run one of the other guys or gals available who could have handled themselves better.
Warnock has a slew of vulnerabilities. The half-brother cop running a cocaine ring, then Warnock complaining he was sentenced wrong because of his race. Driving over his wife's foot with his car. Evicting tenants late with the rent while crying about the inequitableness of society. Covering up for accused child molesters in his religious kiddie camp. Missed opportunities by the repubs. Loves Fidel Castro. Hates cops, excepting his criminal half-brother. the right candidate could make mincemeat out of him, if they were lucky.
ETA: where some of the repubs err: the potential impact of showing that black people who understand white america doesn't hate them are often inclined to discover the appeal of conservative values is blunted by the democrat political strategists who just say 'Uncle Tom.' The smear governor Tim that way, Clarence Thomas, Larry Elder. It works. So why bother running a black candidate unless they are truly great candidates instead of just good enough ones, I wonder.
Abortion is murder!
Except when Republican politicians do it, then it's nbd!
In all seriousness, Republicans have read the room all wrong. Trump won in 2016 because Clinton was a terrible candidate. Republican leadership misunderstood this and instead decided that actually Trump and Trumpism are very popular and people in swing states must want snarling fascists, culture warriors, and celebrity know-nothings to represent them. The electorate pushed back in 2018, 2020, and in 2022, robbing Rs of what should have been big wins in two of those years (showing last night was really bad, given fundamentals in Republicans' favor). Hopefully some Rs will see the light and start moving away from Trump, but he's not going to make it easy for them.
Quote from: dismalist on November 09, 2022, 02:39:41 PM
Quote from: Cheerful on November 09, 2022, 02:01:39 PM
Quote from: Hegemony on November 08, 2022, 05:58:43 PM
Voted by mail, which is the norm in my state. We love it because we can sit down with the Voter's Pamphlet and really weigh the issues as we go.
A "Voter's Pamphlet" sounds potentially very good. Wish all states had that.
I sampled some candidates across parties in the "Voter's Pamphlet". The content consists of the usual campaign messaging. The pamphlets seem to me to be a method to reduce the costs of politicians to get their messages out, substituting tax money for donations.
Ours in CA is pretty good.
Candidates put a statement and who their endorsers are. Generally pretty anodyne.
There is a simplified, objective explanation of what the bill does, and what a YES/NO vote will mean. The rest is arguments in favor/against, and who is endorsing/opposed. Those are full of hyperbole but at least it requires the writer to put their name/organization with it. Anything vague like "Citizens for a Better California" is immediately suspect. It's not like they are running against the "Citizens for a Worse California."
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 09, 2022, 06:52:59 PM
In all seriousness, Republicans have read the room all wrong. Trump won in 2016 because Clinton was a terrible candidate. Republican leadership misunderstood this and instead decided that actually Trump and Trumpism are very popular and people in swing states must want snarling fascists, culture warriors, and celebrity know-nothings to represent them. The electorate pushed back in 2018, 2020, and in 2022, robbing Rs of what should have been big wins in two of those years (showing last night was really bad, given fundamentals in Republicans' favor). Hopefully some Rs will see the light and start moving away from Trump, but he's not going to make it easy for them.
MAGAs are reliable voters. So... there's that.
Quote from: ciao_yall on November 09, 2022, 07:01:28 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 09, 2022, 06:52:59 PM
In all seriousness, Republicans have read the room all wrong. Trump won in 2016 because Clinton was a terrible candidate. Republican leadership misunderstood this and instead decided that actually Trump and Trumpism are very popular and people in swing states must want snarling fascists, culture warriors, and celebrity know-nothings to represent them. The electorate pushed back in 2018, 2020, and in 2022, robbing Rs of what should have been big wins in two of those years (showing last night was really bad, given fundamentals in Republicans' favor). Hopefully some Rs will see the light and start moving away from Trump, but he's not going to make it easy for them.
MAGAs are reliable voters. So... there's that.
That's a big part of the problem for the party. The primary voters want the most extreme candidates, but the electorate does not. Dems have some similar dynamics, but moderate wing of the party has done a relatively good job marginalizing the left.
QuoteThe primary voters want the most extreme candidates, but the electorate does not.
That problem never arose in the smoke filled rooms in which candidates were chosen before the rampant primaries.
Quote from: dismalist on November 09, 2022, 07:21:17 PM
QuoteThe primary voters want the most extreme candidates, but the electorate does not.
That problem never arose in the smoke filled rooms in which candidates were chosen before the rampant primaries.
There is something to be said for elite control of candidate selection. No approach is perfect, of course, but this would be better for keeping populism at bay.
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 09, 2022, 07:25:41 PM
Quote from: dismalist on November 09, 2022, 07:21:17 PM
QuoteThe primary voters want the most extreme candidates, but the electorate does not.
That problem never arose in the smoke filled rooms in which candidates were chosen before the rampant primaries.
There is something to be said for elite control of candidate selection. No approach is perfect, of course, but this would be better for keeping populism at bay.
It's not elite control that's desirable. Rather, it's the incentives of the choosers of the candidates that matter. The bosses in the smoke filled rooms, of which there were few, and hence each benefit a lot from fielding a winner, tried to chose candidates that would win the general election. The primary voters, of which there are many, and don't get much of the benefits of fielding a winner, have the incentive to make themselves feel good without regard to the eventual outcome.
The smoke-filled-room mechanism was even sprinkled with a few State primaries in which a broader public got to exercise voice. This was informationally efficient in small States, where a newcomer could have a chance. Remember JFK's breakthrough came in the West Virginia primary! This was duly noted by the bosses.
As with many other things, the smoke-filled-room mechanism was abolished in 1968. Primaries in the large have a different effect than primaries in the small.
Mahag, where did you get this list of bad acts and history committed by Warnock? Obviously it is not heard on MSNBC, but I am wondering what sources you would cite to demonstrate the veracity of this litany of awful?
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 09, 2022, 07:10:16 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on November 09, 2022, 07:01:28 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 09, 2022, 06:52:59 PM
In all seriousness, Republicans have read the room all wrong. Trump won in 2016 because Clinton was a terrible candidate. Republican leadership misunderstood this and instead decided that actually Trump and Trumpism are very popular and people in swing states must want snarling fascists, culture warriors, and celebrity know-nothings to represent them. The electorate pushed back in 2018, 2020, and in 2022, robbing Rs of what should have been big wins in two of those years (showing last night was really bad, given fundamentals in Republicans' favor). Hopefully some Rs will see the light and start moving away from Trump, but he's not going to make it easy for them.
MAGAs are reliable voters. So... there's that.
That's a big part of the problem for the party. The primary voters want the most extreme candidates, but the electorate does not. Dems have some similar dynamics, but moderate wing of the party has done a relatively good job marginalizing the left.
Populism is a different sort of "extremism" than left-right "extremism". What makes populism extreme is its attack on institutions and norms that results in mob rule, which is democracy in its most extreme form. Of course the people who have insisted we must democratize our political institutions to an ever greater extent but then freak out when they don't like the results fail to see the connection.
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 09, 2022, 06:37:36 PM
Abortion is murder!
Except when Republican politicians do it, then it's nbd!
Anyone is free to try prosecuting Herschel Walker for murder under the current laws. If it doesn't work, who should they blame? Hypocrisy, anyone? OTOH, abortion is democratic (black) voter suppression. One might think they'd be interested in that.
ETA: Actually, if Walker had done as I suggested, he would have been able to reiterate that abortion
is a big deal, the experience having brought him to his view of things today.
BTW, anyone remember the movie 'Alfie?' Michael Caine's character gets sick to his stomach upon seeing the fetus that looks like him. Then true to form, buries the memory. Strong stuff! Like, symbolically, he is destroying himself with his careless hedonism.
Regarding Trump, an interesting piece...https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/11/09/an_open_letter_to_donald_trump_148448.html
Trump must be frustrated now because he is the one who figured out how to slay the woke Goliath and he's not getting credit for it. (You don't engage with them, because there's no good faith conversation to be had, just entrapment.) Others like Kari Lake and Ron DeSantis have learned from him and may end up taking the lead.
Quote
Quote
Mahag, where did you get this list of bad acts and history committed by Warnock? Obviously it is not heard on MSNBC, but I am wondering what sources you would cite to demonstrate the veracity of this litany of awful?
Google and ye shall find. I'm not going to play the back-and-forth 'your news source is fact check busted no yours is' game. Where did you get the basis for stating authoritatively that Herschel Walker is the most immoral candidate ever produced in American political life?
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 03:20:35 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 09, 2022, 06:37:36 PM
Abortion is murder!
Except when Republican politicians do it, then it's nbd!
Anyone is free to try prosecuting Herschel Walker for murder under the current laws. If it doesn't work, who should they blame? Hypocrisy, anyone? OTOH, abortion is democratic (black) voter suppression. One might think they'd be interested in that.
ETA: Actually, if Walker had done as I suggested, he would have been able to reiterate that abortion is a big deal, the experience having brought him to his view of things today.
BTW, anyone remember the movie 'Alfie?' Michael Caine's character gets sick to his stomach upon seeing the fetus that looks like him. Then true to form, buries the memory. Strong stuff! Like, symbolically, he is destroying himself with his careless hedonism.
Regarding Trump, an interesting piece...https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/11/09/an_open_letter_to_donald_trump_148448.html
Trump must be frustrated now because he is the one who figured out how to slay the woke Goliath and he's not getting credit for it. (You don't engage with them, because there's no good faith conversation to be had, just entrapment.) Others like Kari Lake and Ron DeSantis have learned from him and may end up taking the lead.
Quote
Quote
Mahag, where did you get this list of bad acts and history committed by Warnock? Obviously it is not heard on MSNBC, but I am wondering what sources you would cite to demonstrate the veracity of this litany of awful?
Google and ye shall find. I'm not going to play the back-and-forth 'your news source is fact check busted no yours is' game. Where did you get the basis for stating authoritatively that Herschel Walker is the most immoral candidate ever produced in American political life?
The point about Walker is that he is a hypocrite with no principles. He is also a know-nothing who is clearly not even marginally qualified for the job. If conservatives were smart, they would take as a lesson from this election that candidate quality matters.
Mahag just throws out allegations against Walker and then tells you to look into them cause he's too busy posting incoherent rants on various forums to provide a link.
If someone's elected, they're qualified. It's up to the electorate, not you. As I wrote, I think they could have run someone else. We'll see what happens.
Quote
Mahag just throws out allegations against Walker and then tells you to look into them cause he's too busy posting incoherent rants on various forums to provide a link.
Where? Show us. I would appreciate your refraining from posting lies about me.
Whether or not the ex-wife's foot was actually driven over by Senator's Tesla, or whether he merely tried to, is disputed. That's about it.
ETA: Why don't you Warnock supporters just go ahead and admit, proudly, that you agree with him that white people should despise their whiteness? Why have a messaging problem when you know what you believe? Take some credit for these uplifting ideas.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 07:34:57 AM
If someone's elected, they're qualified. It's up to the electorate, not you. As I wrote, I think they could have run someone else. We'll see what happens.
Quote
Mahag just throws out allegations against Walker and then tells you to look into them cause he's too busy posting incoherent rants on various forums to provide a link.
Where? Show us. I would appreciate your refraining from posting lies about me.
Whether or not the ex-wife's foot was actually driven over by Senator's Tesla, or whether he merely tried to, is disputed. That's about it.
ETA: Why don't you Warnock supporters just go ahead and admit, proudly, that you agree with him that white people should despise their whiteness? Why have a messaging problem when you know what you believe? Take some credit for these uplifting ideas.
Lol at posting lies about you. You literally did this in the post I quoted:
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 03:20:35 AM
Quote
Quote
Mahag, where did you get this list of bad acts and history committed by Warnock? Obviously it is not heard on MSNBC, but I am wondering what sources you would cite to demonstrate the veracity of this litany of awful?
Google and ye shall find. I'm not going to play the back-and-forth 'your news source is fact check busted no yours is' game. Where did you get the basis for stating authoritatively that Herschel Walker is the most immoral candidate ever produced in American political life?
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 03:20:35 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 09, 2022, 06:37:36 PM
Abortion is murder!
Except when Republican politicians do it, then it's nbd!
Anyone is free to try prosecuting Herschel Walker for murder under the current laws. If it doesn't work, who should they blame? Hypocrisy, anyone? OTOH, abortion is democratic (black) voter suppression. One might think they'd be interested in that.
ETA: Actually, if Walker had done as I suggested, he would have been able to reiterate that abortion is a big deal, the experience having brought him to his view of things today.
BTW, anyone remember the movie 'Alfie?' Michael Caine's character gets sick to his stomach upon seeing the fetus that looks like him. Then true to form, buries the memory. Strong stuff! Like, symbolically, he is destroying himself with his careless hedonism.
Regarding Trump, an interesting piece...https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/11/09/an_open_letter_to_donald_trump_148448.html
Trump must be frustrated now because he is the one who figured out how to slay the woke Goliath and he's not getting credit for it. (You don't engage with them, because there's no good faith conversation to be had, just entrapment.) Others like Kari Lake and Ron DeSantis have learned from him and may end up taking the lead.
Quote
Quote
Mahag, where did you get this list of bad acts and history committed by Warnock? Obviously it is not heard on MSNBC, but I am wondering what sources you would cite to demonstrate the veracity of this litany of awful?
Google and ye shall find. I'm not going to play the back-and-forth 'your news source is fact check busted no yours is' game. Where did you get the basis for stating authoritatively that Herschel Walker is the most immoral candidate ever produced in American political life?
Your take on Walker is quite interesting. If he was so distraught about abortion after paying for it, why did he repeatedly do it? This was not a situation where he did it and deeply regretted it, he only regrets that people learned about it. He is not against abortion, he is one of its biggest supporters.
His take on abortion really isn't the issue though. The problem is that he is obviously just saying what he thinks will get him elected even though it has nothing to do with his moral compass or beliefs. You cant believe anything he says.
This is the same with Trump. He just says and does what he thinks will get him elected and keep him in power.
I know this is somewhat par for the course with politicians, but there are different degrees.
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 10, 2022, 08:30:49 AM
His take on abortion really isn't the issue though. The problem is that he is obviously just saying what he thinks will get him elected even though it has nothing to do with his moral compass or beliefs. You cant believe anything he says.
This is the same with Trump. He just says and does what he thinks will get him elected and keep him in power.
I know this is somewhat par for the course with politicians, but there are different degrees.
Let's take it a step further. Walker is showing that politician's actual behavior and beliefs are irrelevant. People want someone who votes with their "team" and don't seem to care about the human being in the seat.
Suppose a respectable Warnock-type was the R, and a Walker-type was the D. How would you vote?
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 10, 2022, 08:24:28 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 07:34:57 AM
If someone's elected, they're qualified. It's up to the electorate, not you. As I wrote, I think they could have run someone else. We'll see what happens.
Quote
Mahag just throws out allegations against Walker and then tells you to look into them cause he's too busy posting incoherent rants on various forums to provide a link.
Where? Show us. I would appreciate your refraining from posting lies about me.
Whether or not the ex-wife's foot was actually driven over by Senator's Tesla, or whether he merely tried to, is disputed. That's about it.
ETA: Why don't you Warnock supporters just go ahead and admit, proudly, that you agree with him that white people should despise their whiteness? Why have a messaging problem when you know what you believe? Take some credit for these uplifting ideas.
Lol at posting lies about you. You literally did this in the post I quoted:
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 03:20:35 AM
Quote
Quote
Mahag, where did you get this list of bad acts and history committed by Warnock? Obviously it is not heard on MSNBC, but I am wondering what sources you would cite to demonstrate the veracity of this litany of awful?
Google and ye shall find. I'm not going to play the back-and-forth 'your news source is fact check busted no yours is' game. Where did you get the basis for stating authoritatively that Herschel Walker is the most immoral candidate ever produced in American political life?
I'm embarassed enoough to admit I Googled Warnock scandals, etc and didn't find anything. Some questions about legal spending as part of the use of his campaign funds, but it sounds like a gray area.
So does this mean that the Deep State has scrubbed all this information? Or that M's sources are too crazy for Google?
Quote from: ciao_yall on November 10, 2022, 09:04:36 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 10, 2022, 08:30:49 AM
His take on abortion really isn't the issue though. The problem is that he is obviously just saying what he thinks will get him elected even though it has nothing to do with his moral compass or beliefs. You cant believe anything he says.
This is the same with Trump. He just says and does what he thinks will get him elected and keep him in power.
I know this is somewhat par for the course with politicians, but there are different degrees.
Let's take it a step further. Walker is showing that politician's actual behavior and beliefs are irrelevant. People want someone who votes with their "team" and don't seem to care about the human being in the seat.
Suppose a respectable Warnock-type was the R, and a Walker-type was the D. How would you vote?
I don't know about that. One lesson of the election has been that candidate quality matters. Rs probably would have done much better if they did not run a bunch of nuts. In the case of Georgia, it seems to me that a high quality and moderate Republican would have easily won in a midterm year, given high inflation and low presidential approval rating.
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 10, 2022, 09:08:51 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on November 10, 2022, 09:04:36 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 10, 2022, 08:30:49 AM
His take on abortion really isn't the issue though. The problem is that he is obviously just saying what he thinks will get him elected even though it has nothing to do with his moral compass or beliefs. You cant believe anything he says.
This is the same with Trump. He just says and does what he thinks will get him elected and keep him in power.
I know this is somewhat par for the course with politicians, but there are different degrees.
Let's take it a step further. Walker is showing that politician's actual behavior and beliefs are irrelevant. People want someone who votes with their "team" and don't seem to care about the human being in the seat.
Suppose a respectable Warnock-type was the R, and a Walker-type was the D. How would you vote?
I don't know about that. One lesson of the election has been that candidate quality matters. Rs probably would have done much better if they did not run a bunch of nuts. In the case of Georgia, it seems to me that a high quality and moderate Republican would have easily won in a midterm year, given high inflation and low presidential approval rating.
The Democrats should have received an absolute shellacking in these mid-terms, with their recent record, their own nuttiness in some quarters, and the general situation in the past two years. One of the dispiriting things about the current state of national politics in the U.S. is that the Republicans have deteriorated to the point where they don't offer a credible alternative. You find yourself wishing at times that they could both lose. But that means that we're all losing here.
Quote from: ciao_yall on November 10, 2022, 09:04:36 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 10, 2022, 08:30:49 AM
His take on abortion really isn't the issue though. The problem is that he is obviously just saying what he thinks will get him elected even though it has nothing to do with his moral compass or beliefs. You cant believe anything he says.
This is the same with Trump. He just says and does what he thinks will get him elected and keep him in power.
I know this is somewhat par for the course with politicians, but there are different degrees.
Let's take it a step further. Walker is showing that politician's actual behavior and beliefs are irrelevant. People want someone who votes with their "team" and don't seem to care about the human being in the seat.
Suppose a respectable Warnock-type was the R, and a Walker-type was the D. How would you vote?
People want a politician who validates them. So, whether or not the politician's behavior and beliefs are reprehensible or not is not as important as whether that politician's beliefs and behavior validate the voter.
I never claimed Walker was the most immoral candidate ever. That is too silly even to approach strawman.
As to googling Warnock scandals, if you google anything, you will likely get a wide mix of truth and lies. It is basic media literacy 101 to tell students that they need to evaluate the quality of the sources of any claims that they get. Why you do not seem to realize this, well...
Quote from: apl68 on November 10, 2022, 09:32:45 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 10, 2022, 09:08:51 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on November 10, 2022, 09:04:36 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 10, 2022, 08:30:49 AM
His take on abortion really isn't the issue though. The problem is that he is obviously just saying what he thinks will get him elected even though it has nothing to do with his moral compass or beliefs. You cant believe anything he says.
This is the same with Trump. He just says and does what he thinks will get him elected and keep him in power.
I know this is somewhat par for the course with politicians, but there are different degrees.
Let's take it a step further. Walker is showing that politician's actual behavior and beliefs are irrelevant. People want someone who votes with their "team" and don't seem to care about the human being in the seat.
Suppose a respectable Warnock-type was the R, and a Walker-type was the D. How would you vote?
I don't know about that. One lesson of the election has been that candidate quality matters. Rs probably would have done much better if they did not run a bunch of nuts. In the case of Georgia, it seems to me that a high quality and moderate Republican would have easily won in a midterm year, given high inflation and low presidential approval rating.
The Democrats should have received an absolute shellacking in these mid-terms, with their recent record, their own nuttiness in some quarters, and the general situation in the past two years. One of the dispiriting things about the current state of national politics in the U.S. is that the Republicans have deteriorated to the point where they don't offer a credible alternative. You find yourself wishing at times that they could both lose. But that means that we're all losing here.
Just curious what about their recent record is so abhorrent? Not trying to deny anything, just curious. Most of the ills facing the US are global in nature and not a result of decisions made in the last 2 years in the USA. I am in Canada, and it is the same here, a segment of our population are blaming our PM for everything from inflation to supply chain issues that are happening down there too. I dont think the PM of Canada, or even the president of the US, is the primary source of these challenges that have resulted from years of events.
As for both losing, this is where a multiparty system is much better. We get to choose from the lesser of 4 or five evils instead of just 2!
QuoteYour take on Walker is quite interesting. If he was so distraught about abortion after paying for it, why did he repeatedly do it? This was not a situation where he did it and deeply regretted it, he only regrets that people learned about it. He is not against abortion, he is one of its biggest supporters.
I thought the act of choosing abortion didn't mean you support abortion, but you support the right to to make that difficult choice legally. Hmm... in any case, have it your way. Walker was all for abortion a few years ago, but now he's against it. Two years ago I was a guy. Now I'm non-binary. People change. that's how things are now.
Quote
Let's take it a step further. Walker is showing that politician's actual behavior and beliefs are irrelevant. People want someone who votes with their "team" and don't seem to care about the human being in the seat.
Suppose a respectable Warnock-type was the R, and a Walker-type was the D. How would you vote?
I don't know about that. One lesson of the election has been that candidate quality matters. Rs probably would have done much better if they did not run a bunch of nuts. In the case of Georgia, it seems to me that a high quality and moderate Republican would have easily won in a midterm year, given high inflation and low presidential approval rating.
In a healthy society, sure. But we are in The USA coming fully into its
wokeness. salvation obliterates all hardship. It could be worse though. Hey, in Jonestown they drank poison.
A few of the things we like/believe now:
plenty of deadly fentanyl, because it means we're not xenophobic
Not trusting God; he gave you the wrong genitalia.
Confessing that people who looked like us used to be mean to people who look like you.
Criminals are society's victims
White Christians talk about genocide when no one's around
America is obsessed with gay hatred
obesity is beautiful (insulin in every pot!)
Quote from: apl68 on November 10, 2022, 09:32:45 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 10, 2022, 09:08:51 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on November 10, 2022, 09:04:36 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 10, 2022, 08:30:49 AM
His take on abortion really isn't the issue though. The problem is that he is obviously just saying what he thinks will get him elected even though it has nothing to do with his moral compass or beliefs. You cant believe anything he says.
This is the same with Trump. He just says and does what he thinks will get him elected and keep him in power.
I know this is somewhat par for the course with politicians, but there are different degrees.
Let's take it a step further. Walker is showing that politician's actual behavior and beliefs are irrelevant. People want someone who votes with their "team" and don't seem to care about the human being in the seat.
Suppose a respectable Warnock-type was the R, and a Walker-type was the D. How would you vote?
I don't know about that. One lesson of the election has been that candidate quality matters. Rs probably would have done much better if they did not run a bunch of nuts. In the case of Georgia, it seems to me that a high quality and moderate Republican would have easily won in a midterm year, given high inflation and low presidential approval rating.
The Democrats should have received an absolute shellacking in these mid-terms, with their recent record, their own nuttiness in some quarters, and the general situation in the past two years. One of the dispiriting things about the current state of national politics in the U.S. is that the Republicans have deteriorated to the point where they don't offer a credible alternative. You find yourself wishing at times that they could both lose. But that means that we're all losing here.
Couldn't agree more with the bolded.
So we need two parties in the USA, you two? Sounds like you take back that crack y'all made about the republicans planning to end democracy this year. Shades of Maxwell Smart.
ETA: Look for Hunter's name in the news. And the Big Guy tags along.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 01:13:02 PM
Walker was all for abortion a few years ago, but now he's against it. Two years ago I was a guy. Now I'm non-binary. People change. that's how things are now.
In a healthy society, sure. But we are in The USA coming fully into its wokeness. salvation obliterates all hardship. It could be worse though. Hey, in Jonestown they drank poison.
A few of the things we like/believe now:
plenty of deadly fentanyl, because it means we're not xenophobic
Not trusting God; he gave you the wrong genitalia.
Confessing that people who looked like us used to be mean to people who look like you.
Criminals are society's victims
White Christians talk about genocide when no one's around
America is obsessed with gay hatred
obesity is beautiful (insulin in every pot!)
Upset by the lack of a red wave, some conservative thinkers will vent with grotesque displays of bigotry.
And no, there is not a corresponding lunacy on the left. Certainly we would classify the young women who desecrated Van Gogh with soup as "leftist" ecoterrorists, but the Republicans have large swaths of people who justify Walker's overt hypocrisy, deny science (and die for refusal of readily available vaccine), and support malignant narcissists for president and governor.
My wife and one other bystander saved the life of a fentanyl user two weeks ago. They found the guy, lying on the pavement, breathing, but not looking right. At first they thought it was a diabetic episode. They called 911 and the paramedics arrived, immediately found the problem, administered the antidote and he came around. Wife said 'wow! I didn't know it was a fentanyl overdose! He looked like he was breathing.' They said 'breathing, sure, but not breathing right. We got here just in time.' I'm glad they were able to help, but sad that it was necessary.
Another shock recently is, in order to not have to drive in the city, get fleeced for parking, I walk to and from work which takes 50 minutes each way. It's not uncommon to find discarded needles. Downtown, people walking around so stoned you could knock them over with a feather.
It's a personal disappointment, and astonishing that so little has been said about it. I remember when they screamed at Ronald Reagan for not talking about AIDS enough. Has Biden ever mentioned fentanyl? I don't recall it.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 05:36:35 PM
Has Biden ever mentioned fentanyl? I don't recall it.
Remarks by President Biden on the Safer America Plan (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/08/30/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-safer-america-plan/)
Reuters: Biden to unveil new U.S. drug addiction and overdose strategy (https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-unveil-new-us-drug-addiction-overdose-strategy-2022-04-21/)
Actions Taken by the Biden-Harris Administration to Address Addiction and the Overdose Epidemic (https://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/briefing-room/2022/08/31/actions-taken-by-the-biden-harris-administration-to-address-addiction-and-the-overdose-epidemic/)
FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Actions and Funding to Address the Overdose Epidemic and Support Recovery (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/09/23/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-actions-and-funding-to-address-the-overdose-epidemic-and-support-recovery/)
What exactly would you have Biden do anyway?
Despite being a right-wing extremist by the standards of academia, I agree that the Republicans essentially repeated the mistakes of 2010 in nominating a lot of bad candidates. In 2010, they nominated Christine "I'm not a witch" O'Donnell and Sharron "I'm not a Scientologist" Angle. In 2022, they nominated the Wizard of Oz, the protégé of an eccentric gay tech billionaire, a philandering deadbeat dad former athlete, and a conspiracy-minded retired general. This time around, most of the blame can be placed at the doorstep of Trump Tower. In virtually every case there were establishment conservative Republicans who could have won those seats. (The Democrats are better at keeping their craziest members in very safe seats.)
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 10, 2022, 07:10:07 PM
(The Democrats are better at keeping their craziest members in very safe seats.)
No doubt.
But specifically who are the "craziest" dems? Who do you refer to?
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 10, 2022, 07:40:01 PM
But specifically who are the "craziest" dems? Who do you refer to?
For starters, Stacey "I won't concede the 2018 election because of [baseless claims of] voter suppression" Abrams (though not in a safe seat), Bernie Sanders & AOC (populist demagogues like Trump, but on the left), and antisemites Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 04:39:02 PM
So we need two parties in the USA, you two? Sounds like you take back that crack y'all made about the republicans planning to end democracy this year. Shades of Maxwell Smart.
ETA: Look for Hunter's name in the news. And the Big Guy tags along.
I've said many, many times on this forum that the US needs a sane Republican party to oppose the Democrats. It is very unfortunate that Trump era Republicans have instead embraced idiotic conspiracy theories and authoritarianism, culminating in a violent attempt to overturn the results in a free and fair election. Hopefully they will turn over a new leaf, after the embarrassing showing this week.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 10, 2022, 06:51:13 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 05:36:35 PM
Has Biden ever mentioned fentanyl? I don't recall it.
Remarks by President Biden on the Safer America Plan (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/08/30/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-safer-america-plan/)
Reuters: Biden to unveil new U.S. drug addiction and overdose strategy (https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-unveil-new-us-drug-addiction-overdose-strategy-2022-04-21/)
Actions Taken by the Biden-Harris Administration to Address Addiction and the Overdose Epidemic (https://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/briefing-room/2022/08/31/actions-taken-by-the-biden-harris-administration-to-address-addiction-and-the-overdose-epidemic/)
FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Actions and Funding to Address the Overdose Epidemic and Support Recovery (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/09/23/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-actions-and-funding-to-address-the-overdose-epidemic-and-support-recovery/)
What exactly would you have Biden do anyway?
Start having a southern border like the previous guy was trying his best to. And quit putting the cackling VEEP in charge of lying about it. https://www.statista.com/chart/18744/the-number-of-drug-overdose-deaths-in-the-us/
OK, you've provided some sources of Biden talking about drugs. I may get to them in time. Confession: I am so sick of his incompetence, grandstanding, mega spending and fabricated tales about himself over his long life that I can't stomach reading transcripts of him meeting with his sycophants right now. Thanks.
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 10, 2022, 09:07:32 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 04:39:02 PM
So we need two parties in the USA, you two? Sounds like you take back that crack y'all made about the republicans planning to end democracy this year. Shades of Maxwell Smart.
ETA: Look for Hunter's name in the news. And the Big Guy tags along.
I've said many, many times on this forum that the US needs a sane Republican party to oppose the Democrats. It is very unfortunate that Trump era Republicans have instead embraced idiotic conspiracy theories and authoritarianism, culminating in a violent attempt to overturn the results in a free and fair election. Hopefully they will turn over a new leaf, after the embarrassing showing this week.
They haven't exactly embraced the January 6 gang at the capitol, but it may be that they hate them less than they hate the democrats. the January gang at least had the excuse of not being PhD's. If you believe the government is no longer representing the will of the people, you can do something about it. It's in the Declaration of Independence.
The 2020 elections were by no stretch the pristine affair Biden has repeatedly claimed. but then 'fair and balanced' have never been his thing.
1. Someone needed to provide an effective smackdown to the sordid routine from the democrats who poison race relations, call everyone racist, from Mitt Romney, Ronald Reagan on down. Trump provided it. The woke dems still go don't get it. Maybe they will in time.
2. They (repubs) didn't exactly screw up the economy, because...well, it happens to be something they care about. Spending Biden is the extremist.
3. Biden supporters don't seem to notice his attempts at authoritarianism, such as the Ministry of Truth that would have gotten off the ground if there hadn't been such a furor, the student loan forgiveness that used the ruse of COVID emergency to bypass Congress, now apparently set to crash and burn, Merrick Garland making terrorist threat out of parents of public school kids. Pot, kettle.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 10, 2022, 08:21:06 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 10, 2022, 07:40:01 PM
But specifically who are the "craziest" dems? Who do you refer to?
For starters, Stacey "I won't concede the 2018 election because of [baseless claims of] voter suppression" Abrams (though not in a safe seat), Bernie Sanders & AOC (populist demagogues like Trump, but on the left), and antisemites Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib.
Hillary Clinton is preemptively denying the presidential election of 2024. she is considered a pillar of the community by democrats. (Vince Foster could not be reached for comment).
If Kari Lake wins some of the credit (or blame, your choice) belongs to the democrats for their meddling in primaries. We are in a better position to complain about the republican candidates of 2022 than the democrats are, in some cases.
QuoteDespite being a right-wing extremist by the standards of academia, I agree that the Republicans essentially repeated the mistakes of 2010 in nominating a lot of bad candidates. In 2010, they nominated Christine "I'm not a witch" O'Donnell and Sharron "I'm not a Scientologist" Angle. In 2022, they nominated the Wizard of Oz, the protégé of an eccentric gay tech billionaire, a philandering deadbeat dad former athlete,
But, not to quarrel...Walker, appearing with Ted Cruz tonight, repeated the basic theme that is the sanity amid that chaos and fanaticism of our time. That Americans can, need to get past fixations on race and think about success. That alone makes him preferable to the radical, alternative of racial division from the pulpit of the church.
It's not the crazier wing of the democratic party that has overplayed the race card. It's all of them.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 10:34:45 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 10, 2022, 09:07:32 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 04:39:02 PM
So we need two parties in the USA, you two? Sounds like you take back that crack y'all made about the republicans planning to end democracy this year. Shades of Maxwell Smart.
ETA: Look for Hunter's name in the news. And the Big Guy tags along.
I've said many, many times on this forum that the US needs a sane Republican party to oppose the Democrats. It is very unfortunate that Trump era Republicans have instead embraced idiotic conspiracy theories and authoritarianism, culminating in a violent attempt to overturn the results in a free and fair election. Hopefully they will turn over a new leaf, after the embarrassing showing this week.
They haven't exactly embraced the January 6 gang at the capitol, but it may be that they hate them less than they hate the democrats. the January gang at least had the excuse of not being PhD's. If you believe the government is no longer representing the will of the people, you can do something about it. It's in the Declaration of Independence.
The 2020 elections were by no stretch the pristine affair Biden has repeatedly claimed. but then 'fair and balanced' have never been his thing.
1. Someone needed to provide an effective smackdown to the sordid routine from the democrats who poison race relations, call everyone racist, from Mitt Romney, Ronald Reagan on down. Trump provided it. The woke dems still go don't get it. Maybe they will in time.
2. They (repubs) didn't exactly screw up the economy, because...well, it happens to be something they care about. Spending Biden is the extremist.
3. Biden supporters don't seem to notice his attempts at authoritarianism, such as the Ministry of Truth that would have gotten off the ground if there hadn't been such a furor, the student loan forgiveness that used the ruse of COVID emergency to bypass Congress, now apparently set to crash and burn, Merrick Garland making terrorist threat out of parents of public school kids. Pot, kettle.
These sentiments and rhetoric are exactly why Rs are a threat to democracy and, on an optimistic note, why they have had such an embarrassing showing in these midterms. I sincerely hope that the sane branch of Republican leadership succeeds in marginalizing the lunatics that have taken over their asylum.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 10:34:45 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 10, 2022, 06:51:13 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 05:36:35 PM
Has Biden ever mentioned fentanyl? I don't recall it.
Remarks by President Biden on the Safer America Plan (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/08/30/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-safer-america-plan/)
Reuters: Biden to unveil new U.S. drug addiction and overdose strategy (https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-unveil-new-us-drug-addiction-overdose-strategy-2022-04-21/)
Actions Taken by the Biden-Harris Administration to Address Addiction and the Overdose Epidemic (https://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/briefing-room/2022/08/31/actions-taken-by-the-biden-harris-administration-to-address-addiction-and-the-overdose-epidemic/)
FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Actions and Funding to Address the Overdose Epidemic and Support Recovery (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/09/23/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-actions-and-funding-to-address-the-overdose-epidemic-and-support-recovery/)
What exactly would you have Biden do anyway?
Start having a southern border like the previous guy was trying his best to. And quit putting the cackling VEEP in charge of lying about it. https://www.statista.com/chart/18744/the-number-of-drug-overdose-deaths-in-the-us/
OK, you've provided some sources of Biden talking about drugs. I may get to them in time. Confession: I am so sick of his incompetence, grandstanding, mega spending and fabricated tales about himself over his long life that I can't stomach reading transcripts of him meeting with his sycophants right now. Thanks.
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 10, 2022, 09:07:32 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 10, 2022, 04:39:02 PM
So we need two parties in the USA, you two? Sounds like you take back that crack y'all made about the republicans planning to end democracy this year. Shades of Maxwell Smart.
ETA: Look for Hunter's name in the news. And the Big Guy tags along.
I've said many, many times on this forum that the US needs a sane Republican party to oppose the Democrats. It is very unfortunate that Trump era Republicans have instead embraced idiotic conspiracy theories and authoritarianism, culminating in a violent attempt to overturn the results in a free and fair election. Hopefully they will turn over a new leaf, after the embarrassing showing this week.
They haven't exactly embraced the January 6 gang at the capitol, but it may be that they hate them less than they hate the democrats. the January gang at least had the excuse of not being PhD's. If you believe the government is no longer representing the will of the people, you can do something about it. It's in the Declaration of Independence.
The 2020 elections were by no stretch the pristine affair Biden has repeatedly claimed. but then 'fair and balanced' have never been his thing.
1. Someone needed to provide an effective smackdown to the sordid routine from the democrats who poison race relations, call everyone racist, from Mitt Romney, Ronald Reagan on down. Trump provided it. The woke dems still go don't get it. Maybe they will in time.
2. They (repubs) didn't exactly screw up the economy, because...well, it happens to be something they care about. Spending Biden is the extremist.
3. Biden supporters don't seem to notice his attempts at authoritarianism, such as the Ministry of Truth that would have gotten off the ground if there hadn't been such a furor, the student loan forgiveness that used the ruse of COVID emergency to bypass Congress, now apparently set to crash and burn, Merrick Garland making terrorist threat out of parents of public school kids. Pot, kettle.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 10, 2022, 08:21:06 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 10, 2022, 07:40:01 PM
But specifically who are the "craziest" dems? Who do you refer to?
For starters, Stacey "I won't concede the 2018 election because of [baseless claims of] voter suppression" Abrams (though not in a safe seat), Bernie Sanders & AOC (populist demagogues like Trump, but on the left), and antisemites Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib.
Hillary Clinton is preemptively denying the presidential election of 2024. she is considered a pillar of the community by democrats. (Vince Foster could not be reached for comment).
If Kari Lake wins some of the credit (or blame, your choice) belongs to the democrats for their meddling in primaries. We are in a better position to complain about the republican candidates of 2022 than the democrats are, in some cases.
QuoteDespite being a right-wing extremist by the standards of academia, I agree that the Republicans essentially repeated the mistakes of 2010 in nominating a lot of bad candidates. In 2010, they nominated Christine "I'm not a witch" O'Donnell and Sharron "I'm not a Scientologist" Angle. In 2022, they nominated the Wizard of Oz, the protégé of an eccentric gay tech billionaire, a philandering deadbeat dad former athlete,
But, not to quarrel...Walker, appearing with Ted Cruz tonight, repeated the basic theme that is the sanity amid that chaos and fanaticism of our time. That Americans can, need to get past fixations on race and think about success. That alone makes him preferable to the radical, alternative of racial division from the pulpit of the church.
It's not the crazier wing of the democratic party that has overplayed the race card. It's all of them.
You seem way more obsesses with race and gender than any liberal I have met...
I'm a little bit obsessed with today's race-bailing, race obsessed liberal dogma as it is so ubiquitous, intellectually lazy, negative, hope-crushing and, i believe, harms the people it purports to support.
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 11, 2022, 07:13:44 AM
These sentiments and rhetoric are exactly why Rs are a threat to democracy and, on an optimistic note, why they have had such an embarrassing showing in these midterms. I sincerely hope that the sane branch of Republican leadership succeeds in marginalizing the lunatics that have taken over their asylum.
Democrats have no standing to complain about a threat to democracy when they decided to boost the very candidates in the Republican primaries that they regard as being a threat to democracy in order to increase their odds of winning in the general election.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 11, 2022, 09:26:27 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 11, 2022, 07:13:44 AM
These sentiments and rhetoric are exactly why Rs are a threat to democracy and, on an optimistic note, why they have had such an embarrassing showing in these midterms. I sincerely hope that the sane branch of Republican leadership succeeds in marginalizing the lunatics that have taken over their asylum.
Democrats have no standing to complain about a threat to democracy when they decided to boost the very candidates in the Republican primaries that they regard as being a threat to democracy in order to increase their odds of winning in the general election.
I don't approve of that strategy, but it is also ridiculous to blame Democrats for the way Republican politicians chose to run and primary voters choose to vote. If Republicans weren't running a bunch of lunatics in their primaries then that (dangerous) Dem strategy wouldn't have been possible.
And, look, there are plenty of things to criticize Democrats about, but there is nothing close to Trump's efforts to overturn the results of a free and fair election.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 11, 2022, 09:26:27 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 11, 2022, 07:13:44 AM
These sentiments and rhetoric are exactly why Rs are a threat to democracy and, on an optimistic note, why they have had such an embarrassing showing in these midterms. I sincerely hope that the sane branch of Republican leadership succeeds in marginalizing the lunatics that have taken over their asylum.
Democrats have no standing to complain about a threat to democracy when they decided to boost the very candidates in the Republican primaries that they regard as being a threat to democracy in order to increase their odds of winning in the general election.
To say the very least. One could also ask, why are democrats so worried about losing a nation they have so little love for?
Kron3007, if you are interested in what I'm thinking about wrt race in the USA, none are original. My inspiration comes from Walter E. Williams, Shelby Steele, Thomas Sowell, Glenn Loury, Coleman Hughes, John McWhorter, Carol Swain, Jason Riley, Morgan Freeman. Stuff you can find easily if it interests you. I feel fortunate to be learning from these folks.
Cheers, Mahag.
ETA: I was made aware some time ago by Robin D'Angelo that she thinks it's very hard for white people to talk about race. She considers this a problem. If/when people do talk about race more though, as prompted by D'Angelo, it may be that a variety of ideas show up. (Diversity of viewpoint).
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 11, 2022, 09:38:20 AM
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 11, 2022, 09:26:27 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 11, 2022, 07:13:44 AM
These sentiments and rhetoric are exactly why Rs are a threat to democracy and, on an optimistic note, why they have had such an embarrassing showing in these midterms. I sincerely hope that the sane branch of Republican leadership succeeds in marginalizing the lunatics that have taken over their asylum.
Democrats have no standing to complain about a threat to democracy when they decided to boost the very candidates in the Republican primaries that they regard as being a threat to democracy in order to increase their odds of winning in the general election.
I don't approve of that strategy, but it is also ridiculous to blame Democrats for the way Republican politicians chose to run and primary voters choose to vote. If Republicans weren't running a bunch of lunatics in their primaries then that (dangerous) Dem strategy wouldn't have been possible.
And, look, there are plenty of things to criticize Democrats about, but there is nothing close to Trump's efforts to overturn the results of a free and fair election.
Not to mention the Russians helping the R's by pushing Jill Stein, (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/russians-launched-pro-jill-stein-social-media-blitz-help-trump-n951166) Bernie Sanders, (https://www.businessinsider.com/bernie-sanders-central-to-russias-pro-trump-2016-strategy-study-2019-4) and probably other divisive candidates.
Not saying their supporters were not genuine, just that Russian meddling was designed to draw attention and support from Hillary Clinton and at least discouraging her D supporters.
Did the R's know about it? Yep. And they appreciated the help. (https://www.npr.org/2020/08/18/903616315/senate-releases-final-report-on-russias-interference-in-2016-election)
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 10, 2022, 08:21:06 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 10, 2022, 07:40:01 PM
But specifically who are the "craziest" dems? Who do you refer to?
For starters, Stacey "I won't concede the 2018 election because of [baseless claims of] voter suppression" Abrams (though not in a safe seat), Bernie Sanders & AOC (populist demagogues like Trump, but on the left), and antisemites Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib.
Do any of these even come close to Marjorie Taylor Greene or DeSantis?
No, these folks have their points of view but are nowhere near the lunacy of the contemporary right.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 11, 2022, 09:26:27 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 11, 2022, 07:13:44 AM
These sentiments and rhetoric are exactly why Rs are a threat to democracy and, on an optimistic note, why they have had such an embarrassing showing in these midterms. I sincerely hope that the sane branch of Republican leadership succeeds in marginalizing the lunatics that have taken over their asylum.
Democrats have no standing to complain about a threat to democracy when they decided to boost the very candidates in the Republican primaries that they regard as being a threat to democracy in order to increase their odds of winning in the general election.
Conspiracy theory generated from frustration.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 11, 2022, 11:05:05 AM
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 10, 2022, 08:21:06 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 10, 2022, 07:40:01 PM
But specifically who are the "craziest" dems? Who do you refer to?
For starters, Stacey "I won't concede the 2018 election because of [baseless claims of] voter suppression" Abrams (though not in a safe seat), Bernie Sanders & AOC (populist demagogues like Trump, but on the left), and antisemites Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib.
Do any of these even come close to Marjorie Taylor Greene or DeSantis?
No, these folks have their points of view but are nowhere near the lunacy of the contemporary right.
Add ayanna pressley, who says 'we don't need any more black faces that are not black voices.' As if an entire race has made her a spokesperson. Just on sheer arrogance, it's stunning.
Kron3007 - another great thinker of our time is Bob Woodson. (Not enough time the read!)
Still not the same level of insanity as seen on the right.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 11, 2022, 11:06:34 AM
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 11, 2022, 09:26:27 AM
Democrats have no standing to complain about a threat to democracy when they decided to boost the very candidates in the Republican primaries that they regard as being a threat to democracy in order to increase their odds of winning in the general election.
Conspiracy theory generated from frustration.
Hardly. It has been a tactic used by Democrats for a while. It's political hardball under normal circumstances, but if they believe that the candidates that they supported in the primaries constitute a threat to democracy, then they're playing with fire. From an establishment Beltway media source:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/12/democrats-interfere-republican-primaries/
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 11, 2022, 09:38:20 AM
I don't approve of that strategy, but it is also ridiculous to blame Democrats for the way Republican politicians chose to run and primary voters choose to vote. If Republicans weren't running a bunch of lunatics in their primaries then that (dangerous) Dem strategy wouldn't have been possible.
And, look, there are plenty of things to criticize Democrats about, but there is nothing close to Trump's efforts to overturn the results of a free and fair election.
I don't blame Democrats for creating the fire. I blame them for adding fuel to the fire for their own political advantage.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 11, 2022, 12:45:39 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 11, 2022, 11:06:34 AM
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 11, 2022, 09:26:27 AM
Democrats have no standing to complain about a threat to democracy when they decided to boost the very candidates in the Republican primaries that they regard as being a threat to democracy in order to increase their odds of winning in the general election.
Conspiracy theory generated from frustration.
Hardly. It has been a tactic used by Democrats for a while. It's political hardball under normal circumstances, but if they believe that the candidates that they support in the primaries constitute a threat to democracy, then they're playing with fire. From an establishment Beltway media source:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/12/democrats-interfere-republican-primaries/
Paywalled. But again, we have conservatives refusing to look at themselves and their behavior. Again, we have conservatives simply finding some reason to blame the Democrats for something.
No political party or orientation is pristine, but there is simply no way to compare the insanity of the contemporary conservative psyche to anything except the worst movements of human history.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 11, 2022, 01:03:14 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 11, 2022, 12:45:39 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 11, 2022, 11:06:34 AM
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 11, 2022, 09:26:27 AM
Democrats have no standing to complain about a threat to democracy when they decided to boost the very candidates in the Republican primaries that they regard as being a threat to democracy in order to increase their odds of winning in the general election.
Conspiracy theory generated from frustration.
Hardly. It has been a tactic used by Democrats for a while. It's political hardball under normal circumstances, but if they believe that the candidates that they support in the primaries constitute a threat to democracy, then they're playing with fire. From an establishment Beltway media source:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/12/democrats-interfere-republican-primaries/
Paywalled. But again, we have conservatives refusing to look at themselves and their behavior. Again, we have conservatives simply finding some reason to blame the Democrats for something.
No political party or orientation is pristine, but there is simply no way to compare the insanity of the contemporary conservative psyche to anything except the worst movements of human history.
I blame voters for falling for this stuff.
And it's not new - I remember reading in my elementary school US History class about elections in the 1800's and thinking "Wow, those people are kind of nutty." So, not much has changed.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 11, 2022, 01:03:14 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 11, 2022, 12:45:39 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 11, 2022, 11:06:34 AM
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 11, 2022, 09:26:27 AM
Democrats have no standing to complain about a threat to democracy when they decided to boost the very candidates in the Republican primaries that they regard as being a threat to democracy in order to increase their odds of winning in the general election.
Conspiracy theory generated from frustration.
Hardly. It has been a tactic used by Democrats for a while. It's political hardball under normal circumstances, but if they believe that the candidates that they support in the primaries constitute a threat to democracy, then they're playing with fire. From an establishment Beltway media source:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/12/democrats-interfere-republican-primaries/
Paywalled. But again, we have conservatives refusing to look at themselves and their behavior. Again, we have conservatives simply finding some reason to blame the Democrats for something.
No political party or orientation is pristine, but there is simply no way to compare the insanity of the contemporary conservative psyche to anything except the worst movements of human history.
The article is easily accessible using archive.ph if you don't have access, not that I really expect any evidence to pierce your own ideological blinders.
Ilhan Omar, a Somali-American, has come down at least as hard, if not harder, on various Arabic groups, countries, and governments for human rights violations and atrocities, as on Israeli policies and actions--including some with which not even all Israelis are comfortable.
I don't think that can be constituted as "anti-Semitic" in general.
M.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 11, 2022, 01:32:52 PM
I really expect any evidence to pierce your own ideological blinders.
Right out of the conservative playbook for avoidance. I just said "no one is pristine." That didn't touch your blinders, huh? The Dems will misbehave, as all human beings will. But they have a long way to go before they begin threatening the peaceful transference of power of pretending microorganisms are a political ploy.
Keep the buck passing! It is wearing thin.
P.S.-----Did not find it in the archive.
Wahoo and ciao-all:
Guess how many balls am I holding in my underpants at this time? Take as much time as you like.
-Prof Mahag, who is officially non-binary and can get you fired if you say otherwise
Quote from: mamselle on November 11, 2022, 03:35:31 PM
Ilhan Omar, a Somali-American, has come down at least as hard, if not harder, on various Arabic groups, countries, and governments for human rights violations and atrocities, as on Israeli policies and actions--including some with which not even all Israelis are comfortable.
I don't think that can be constituted as "anti-Semitic" in general.
M.
We are to believe that her saying that "it's all about the Benjamins baby" isn't an anti-Semitic trope?
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/241/text
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 11, 2022, 04:08:08 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 11, 2022, 01:32:52 PM
I really expect any evidence to pierce your own ideological blinders.
Right out of the conservative playbook for avoidance. I just said "no one is pristine." That didn't touch your blinders, huh? The Dems will misbehave, as all human beings will. But they have a long way to go before they begin threatening the peaceful transference of power of pretending microorganisms are a political ploy.
Keep the buck passing! It is wearing thin.
P.S.-----Did not find it in the archive.
I granted that it is a threat to a democracy, so I'm not avoiding anything. Helping those people win primaries is also a threat, which you seem to ignore or trivialize.
P.S. Seriously? That's the sort of excuse I'd expect from a student.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 11, 2022, 04:37:33 PM
I granted that it is a threat to a democracy, so I'm not avoiding anything. Helping those people win primaries is also a threat, which you seem to ignore or trivialize.
P.S. Seriously? That's the sort of excuse I'd expect from a student.
Now, now. Let's not let this get childish. I tried the advanced search but did not find it. I'd like to read it, in part to cross-check what I can, so I will try again. I'm glad to know that database is out there.
Okay. I'm glad to know you are not trivializing or ignoring anything. But you were doing what so many conservatives do these days and immediately pivoted to some allegation against the Dems rather than discussing what is happening within your own party.
Found it on your database. Paywall popped up.
Copy'n'paste it here?
Okay, well I found a news stub which I suspect is a reduction of the WaPo article:
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/nov/10/democrats-decision-interfere-gop-primaries-pays/
And a conservative rag which I suspect plagiarized a deal of the WaPo info:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/democratic-meddling-republican-primaries-effective
Quote
not far from the Kentucky state line. Pritzker's campaign and the Democratic Governors Association dropped $35 million on ads attacking a more centrist GOP gubernatorial primary rival to Bailey, the more centrist Aurora Mayor Richard Irvin.
So the theory is that dems targeted the stronger, more broadly appealing opponents with "attack ads" (which are the only kind of ads politicians run these days) in order to force a weaker repub candidate to run. Right?
And then the dems ran ads that supported a GOP candidate who would energize the conservative, hardcore fringe in Maryland yet who would also be less appealing to the more liberal population of that state.
Quote
Seeing Cox as an easy mark in the general election against the winner of a crowded Democratic gubernatorial primary fight, Democrats sought to boost him over Gov. Hogan's preferred Republican candidate, former state Commerce and Labor secretary Kelly Schulz. The Democratic Governors Association's DGA Action super PAC spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on airtime in July targeting the Baltimore TV market to air ads on Cox.
The ad called Cox "Trump's hand-picked candidate" and stated that Cox would "protect the 2nd Amendment at all costs." The idea was to energize Republican primary voters who agreed with Cox's stances, even though they did not align with the views of Maryland's general electorate. Maryland is one of the nation's most Democratic states, having supported Biden over Trump in 2020 65% to 32%.
In other words, the dems duped Maryland Republicans into voting for a dead duck rather than a candidate who might have had a better although still slim chance of winning.
And then the dems did the same thing in Pennsylvania.
Quote
Attorney General Josh Shapiro had the Democratic nomination to himself, while Republican gubernatorial hopefuls fought it out in a crowded field. But Shapiro and Democratic allies knew who they wanted to run against in November — state Sen. Doug Mastriano, a self-proclaimed Christian nationalist who had helped bus Trump supporters to Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6. Mastriano was later subpoenaed by the House Jan. 6 committee.
Shapiro's campaign dropped $840,000 on TV ads highlighting Mastriano's — more than double what the GOP candidate spent on his own ad buys. Shapiro's ads called Mastriano one of "Trump's strongest supporters" and highlighted his belief that the 2020 presidential election was stolen.
Mastriano won his primary with 43.8% of the vote, beating out an otherwise staunch conservative, former Rep. Lou Barletta by more than 23 percentage points.
Is this the substance of the WaPo article?
It is interesting that only the WaPo and a couple of conservative mouthpieces have run with this.
Well, whatever. This sounds firstly like our broken system of campaigning to me, and secondly like the Trumpees are a pretty vulnerable, easily-manipulatable bunch.
Perhaps there should be regulations against this, but it does sound like 1st Amendment stuff to get rational campaign ads on television.
I personally would not support this practice in a political party (I am an independent) but it is simply more dirty politics. I would be surprised if the Republicans did not do the same thing (seems like they got a little help from the Rooskies in 2020). If not, the Republicans will use this tactic next election cycle.
But again, this is not insanity, it is simply our bad way of choosing our leaders, and ultimately the fault falls on the heads of those people who think the government is coming for their guns. We need to be smarter than this.
On Edit: I do find this story in other places.
Anon is right that DCCC spent $millions advertising on behalf of extreme Rs during the primary, in hopes that primary voters would nominate lunatics (which they did) and that these lunatics would struggle to win in general elections (which they did). This was playing with fire, to be sure.
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 11, 2022, 09:35:39 PM
Anon is right that DCCC spent $millions advertising on behalf of extreme Rs during the primary, in hopes that primary voters would nominate lunatics (which they did) and that these lunatics would struggle to win in general elections (which they did). This was playing with fire, to be sure.
You can believe that. I find another explanation more plausible. They do not believe they are playing with fire, because they understand the threat to 'democracy' posed by the Jan 6 antics and Trump's antics have been greatly, intentionally exaggerated. What they are interested in in is power, pure and simple, and they accept the risks that come with their tactics.
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 11, 2022, 09:35:39 PM
Anon is right that DCCC spent $millions advertising on behalf of extreme Rs during the primary, in hopes that primary voters would nominate lunatics (which they did) and that these lunatics would struggle to win in general elections (which they did). This was playing with fire, to be sure.
It is playing with fire, but their actual intent is to give the Republicans a worse chance of winning, not destroy democracy. This is completely different than supporting or even dismissing the Jan 6 gang and related events, which was the original whataboutism this was about.
From this thread, it seems the liberal leaning members are willing to accept this is bad practice by the Dems and do not support it, while the Repubs simply deflect rather than simply admitting there is a rotten core (or segment) in their party.
The Democrats are not perfect, but modern Republicans are on a while different level.
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 12, 2022, 03:32:47 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 11, 2022, 09:35:39 PM
Anon is right that DCCC spent $millions advertising on behalf of extreme Rs during the primary, in hopes that primary voters would nominate lunatics (which they did) and that these lunatics would struggle to win in general elections (which they did). This was playing with fire, to be sure.
It is playing with fire, but their actual intent is to give the Republicans a worse chance of winning, not destroy democracy. This is completely different than supporting or even dismissing the Jan 6 gang and related events, which was the original whataboutism this was about.
From this thread, it seems the liberal leaning members are willing to accept this is bad practice by the Dems and do not support it, while the Repubs simply deflect rather than simply admitting there is a rotten core (or segment) in their party.
The Democrats are not perfect, but modern Republicans are on a while different level.
In order to show that democrats are worried about losing their democracy, you need to show that they want a democracy. They do not. They want a woke religion-state.
ETA:
What the democrats on this thread, (or anywhere, in private) say they support or say they do not support is really not one of the dynamics that is getting us to where we are today. The noisy ones in the democratic party, the squad, et al, the woke mob, abetted by the legacy media, are intimidating the fewer sane democrats who remain into shutting up for fear of being canceled as bigots xenophobes, transphobia, etc. They rule.
Legacy media are a big problem today. They use their venerable status, earned by journalists decades ago of far better quality than the ones present today, to cast themselves as the political center (least biased) with the help of left biased fact checkers. Whereas people like Ben Shapiro honestly announce that they are conservative.
https://www.poynter.org/ethics-trust/2021/us-ranks-last-among-46-countries-in-trust-in-media-reuters-institute-report-finds/
Quote from: mahagonny on November 12, 2022, 03:37:21 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 12, 2022, 03:32:47 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 11, 2022, 09:35:39 PM
Anon is right that DCCC spent $millions advertising on behalf of extreme Rs during the primary, in hopes that primary voters would nominate lunatics (which they did) and that these lunatics would struggle to win in general elections (which they did). This was playing with fire, to be sure.
It is playing with fire, but their actual intent is to give the Republicans a worse chance of winning, not destroy democracy. This is completely different than supporting or even dismissing the Jan 6 gang and related events, which was the original whataboutism this was about.
From this thread, it seems the liberal leaning members are willing to accept this is bad practice by the Dems and do not support it, while the Repubs simply deflect rather than simply admitting there is a rotten core (or segment) in their party.
The Democrats are not perfect, but modern Republicans are on a while different level.
In order to show that democrats are worried about losing their democracy, you need to show that they want a democracy. They do not. They want a woke religion-state.
ETA:
What the democrats on this thread, (or anywhere, in private) say they support or say they do not support is really not one of the dynamics that is getting us to where we are today. The noisy ones in the democratic party, the squad, et al, the woke mob, abetted by the legacy media, are intimidating the fewer sane democrats who remain into shutting up for fear of being canceled as bigots xenophobes, transphobia, etc. They rule.
Legacy media are a big problem today. They use their venerable status, earned by journalists decades ago of far better quality than the ones present today, to cast themselves as the political center (least biased) with the help of left biased fact checkers. Whereas people like Ben Shapiro honestly announce that they are conservative.
https://www.poynter.org/ethics-trust/2021/us-ranks-last-among-46-countries-in-trust-in-media-reuters-institute-report-finds/
They are not the ones denying the outcome of elections.They were not happy when Trump won, but I don't remember them trying to overturn the results. They also are not the ones happy to accept Russian help to win.
As for party members being silenced by the extreme elements of their party, you should look in the mirror. Anyone who opposed Trump early on in the repub party were sidelined. Biden his hardly what I would call extreme, the Dems ended up running a pretty moderate candidate.
I believe I mentioned this already. Perhaps you missed it. I've seen the video. Hillary Clinton: 'Republicans are already planning how to literally steal the 2024 election.'
Stacey Abrams.
QuoteBiden his hardly what I would call extreme, the Dems ended up running a pretty moderate candidate.
They ran a moderate candidate and elected an extreme one. Saying 'democracy is on the ballot' was another one of his many bombastic stunts. Using the DOJ and FBI the way he has is anything but moderate.
Kron, why do you think Americans distrust the media so much?
Quote from: mahagonny on November 12, 2022, 04:05:39 AM
I believe I mentioned this already. Perhaps you missed it. I've seen the video. Hillary Clinton: 'Republicans are already planning how to literally steal the 2024 election.'
Stacey Abrams.
QuoteBiden his hardly what I would call extreme, the Dems ended up running a pretty moderate candidate.
They ran a moderate candidate and elected an extreme one. Saying 'democracy is on the ballot' was another one of his many bombastic stunts. Using the DOJ and FBI the way he has is anything but moderate.
Kron, why do you think Americans distrust the media so much?
To the first part. The Republicans literally did try to deny/steal the 2020 election, so maybe she is just stating fact? Trump has demo started he will deny results, so it is likely this will continue and he would try to steal the next one, learning from his first failed attempt.
As for why Americans distrust media so much, I would hope the answer is Fox, but alas...
'He [Trump] knows he shouldn't be the president.' - Nancy Pelosi, circa 2018 [tears up State Of Union Address on National TV]
Maybe if DeSantis is elected in 2024 we'll get treated to some more 'mostly peaceful demonstrations' featuring arson, looting, assault and homicide. Go, democrats. Riots are your thing.
QuoteAs for why Americans distrust media so much, I would hope the answer is Fox, but alas...
And you'd be mostly wrong, and I'm sure you know that, because conservative, even middle- conservative media is in the minority.
QuoteTrump has demo started he will deny results, so it is likely this will continue and he would try to steal the next one, learning from his first failed attempt.
Perhaps the 2024 elections will be run differently, and better, than the 2020 ones were. Is that an acceptable thing to wonder about, democrats? How about if Donald Trump is the one wondering about it?
con't
In spite of her considerable IQ and energy, Stacey Abrams is the only democrat I know of who was clumsy enough to tank her campaign while advocating for the right to abortion. 'No fetal heartbeat at six weeks -- it's a hoax.' Nice going.
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 12, 2022, 03:32:47 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 11, 2022, 09:35:39 PM
Anon is right that DCCC spent $millions advertising on behalf of extreme Rs during the primary, in hopes that primary voters would nominate lunatics (which they did) and that these lunatics would struggle to win in general elections (which they did). This was playing with fire, to be sure.
It is playing with fire, but their actual intent is to give the Republicans a worse chance of winning, not destroy democracy. This is completely different than supporting or even dismissing the Jan 6 gang and related events, which was the original whataboutism this was about.
From this thread, it seems the liberal leaning members are willing to accept this is bad practice by the Dems and do not support it, while the Repubs simply deflect rather than simply admitting there is a rotten core (or segment) in their party.
The Democrats are not perfect, but modern Republicans are on a while different level.
I'm not putting it in the same ballpark (even in the same stadium) as attacks on democracy from Trump and the Republicans. January 6th and the lies/conspiracies designed to undermine faith in the democratic process are traitorous as far as I'm concerned. But Democrats were playing with fire in a dangerous way with that strategy, especially in a midterm year when Republicans had every fundamental advantage.
Maybe y'all should thank the Supreme Court for keeping the 'red wave' down to a ripple...https://www.salon.com/2022/11/09/are-still-angry-over-the-roe-overturn--abortion-rights-win-big-across-the-us/
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 12, 2022, 03:32:47 AM
From this thread, it seems the liberal leaning members are willing to accept this is bad practice by the Dems and do not support it, while the Repubs simply deflect rather than simply admitting there is a rotten core (or segment) in their party.
The Democrats are not perfect, but modern Republicans are on a while different level.
I do not support what the Dems did. I think it is unethical and it is about to open a yuge can of Pandora worms we do not want open. We need regulations about campaign advertising.
The Republicans of this era are frightening. Some of the hysterical commentary on this very thread illustrates this dynamic.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 12, 2022, 10:22:14 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 12, 2022, 03:32:47 AM
From this thread, it seems the liberal leaning members are willing to accept this is bad practice by the Dems and do not support it, while the Repubs simply deflect rather than simply admitting there is a rotten core (or segment) in their party.
The Democrats are not perfect, but modern Republicans are on a while different level.
I do not support what the Dems did. I think it is unethical and it is about to open a yuge can of Pandora worms we do not want open. We need regulations about campaign advertising.
The Republicans of this era are frightening. Some of the hysterical commentary on this very thread illustrates this dynamic.
May I quote you?
Quote from: mahagonny on November 12, 2022, 12:53:58 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 12, 2022, 10:22:14 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 12, 2022, 03:32:47 AM
From this thread, it seems the liberal leaning members are willing to accept this is bad practice by the Dems and do not support it, while the Repubs simply deflect rather than simply admitting there is a rotten core (or segment) in their party.
The Democrats are not perfect, but modern Republicans are on a while different level.
I do not support what the Dems did. I think it is unethical and it is about to open a yuge can of Pandora worms we do not want open. We need regulations about campaign advertising.
The Republicans of this era are frightening. Some of the hysterical commentary on this very thread illustrates this dynamic.
May I quote you?
Yes, honey, you may.
Remember, not everyone is a zealot. Zealots usually think everyone is zealot like they are----zealots do not seem capable of seeing gray areas. But this is not the case. Most of us are not zealots.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 12, 2022, 10:22:14 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 12, 2022, 03:32:47 AM
From this thread, it seems the liberal leaning members are willing to accept this is bad practice by the Dems and do not support it, while the Repubs simply deflect rather than simply admitting there is a rotten core (or segment) in their party.
The Democrats are not perfect, but modern Republicans are on a while different level.
I do not support what the Dems did. I think it is unethical and it is about to open a yuge can of Pandora worms we do not want open. We need regulations about campaign advertising.
The Republicans of this era are frightening. Some of the hysterical commentary on this very thread illustrates this dynamic.
I thought for sure it was going to be this line mahag wanted.
No thank you. There's nothing new or surprising about that. We already know that tribes square off and fight after declaring 'we are threatened.' It's not that often that they charge in and announce 'we want to dominate through force or intimidation because we believe we can.'
However, saying ceremoniously 'I don't support what was done by the party I always vote straight blue for' on an anonymous forum -- that's got some entertaining irony.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 12, 2022, 02:07:14 PM
No thank you. There's nothing new or surprising about that. We already know that tribes square off and fight after declaring 'we are threatened.' It's not that often that they charge in and announce 'we want to dominate through force or intimidation because we believe we can.'
However, saying ceremoniously 'I don't support what was done by the party I always vote straight blue for' on an anonymous forum -- that's got some entertaining irony.
I think it's just honesty, and not all that rare for supporters on either side. IMO the R's would do so just as often if the opportunity would present itself.
If this story is any indicator, it will continue to be done: https://www.npr.org/2022/11/11/1135878576/the-democrats-strategy-of-boosting-far-right-candidates-seems-to-have-worked
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 12, 2022, 02:16:09 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 12, 2022, 02:07:14 PM
No thank you. There's nothing new or surprising about that. We already know that tribes square off and fight after declaring 'we are threatened.' It's not that often that they charge in and announce 'we want to dominate through force or intimidation because we believe we can.'
However, saying ceremoniously 'I don't support what was done by the party I always vote straight blue for' on an anonymous forum -- that's got some entertaining irony.
I think it's just honesty, and not all that rare for supporters on either side. IMO the R's would do so just as often if the opportunity would present itself.
If this story is any indicator, it will continue to be done: https://www.npr.org/2022/11/11/1135878576/the-democrats-strategy-of-boosting-far-right-candidates-seems-to-have-worked
This is fascinating! Let's look at this symmetrically. Each party spends dollars on promoting losers in the other's primaries. They spend dollars until the probability of the loser winning the primary is big enough to remove enough votes in the general to elect one's own candidate. Compare this to spending dollars to promote one's own candidate to get enough votes to win. Adjust spending to make the last dollar get you the same number of votes.
To put this into words, what are the relative benefits of promoting one's own candidate compared to sabotaging the other side's?
Mercy, that's a tough calculation, fraught with uncertainty. Let me surmise that it pays to a degree only in places where the other's loser is completely out of touch with the median in the general. But if the median in the opponent's primary is not too far from the median in the general, this no woik.
My tentative conclusion: Because everybody knows this, the threat of it is an instrument to move primary candidates closer to the center!
A good idea, in other words.
As for the ethics: All this is fine if voters know where the cash is coming from.
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 12, 2022, 02:16:09 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 12, 2022, 02:07:14 PM
No thank you. There's nothing new or surprising about that. We already know that tribes square off and fight after declaring 'we are threatened.' It's not that often that they charge in and announce 'we want to dominate through force or intimidation because we believe we can.'
However, saying ceremoniously 'I don't support what was done by the party I always vote straight blue for' on an anonymous forum -- that's got some entertaining irony.
I think it's just honesty, and not all that rare for supporters on either side. IMO the R's would do so just as often if the opportunity would present itself.
If this story is any indicator, it will continue to be done: https://www.npr.org/2022/11/11/1135878576/the-democrats-strategy-of-boosting-far-right-candidates-seems-to-have-worked
Right. Assuming you mean this seriously, so who would we boost, who is more radical left than Raphael Warnock.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 12, 2022, 02:52:28 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 12, 2022, 02:16:09 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 12, 2022, 02:07:14 PM
No thank you. There's nothing new or surprising about that. We already know that tribes square off and fight after declaring 'we are threatened.' It's not that often that they charge in and announce 'we want to dominate through force or intimidation because we believe we can.'
However, saying ceremoniously 'I don't support what was done by the party I always vote straight blue for' on an anonymous forum -- that's got some entertaining irony.
I think it's just honesty, and not all that rare for supporters on either side. IMO the R's would do so just as often if the opportunity would present itself.
If this story is any indicator, it will continue to be done: https://www.npr.org/2022/11/11/1135878576/the-democrats-strategy-of-boosting-far-right-candidates-seems-to-have-worked
Right. Assuming you mean this seriously, so who would we boost, who is more radical left than Raphael Warnock.
I do mean it seriously. But, unlike you, I don't think the D's nominated anyone as nutty as the R's did for statewide contests. By nutty I mean the governor candidates like those in CO, PA, MN and WI, and some of the absolutelutely crazy AG candidates. Anyone who advocates a Christian nation state (not I am a church going Christian), or that schools are installing litter boxes for students identifying as furrys, or is a neoNazi qualifies as nutty in my book.
I thought Walker unqualified not by his abortion issues, but rather his obvious mental issues and violence against ex-wives. He also lies in ways that might make President Trump blush in admiration (#1 in hs class, #1 in college class, okay didn't graduate). To be fair I don't know if they are lies or a manifestation of hi personality dissociative disorder.
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 12, 2022, 03:23:47 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 12, 2022, 02:52:28 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 12, 2022, 02:16:09 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 12, 2022, 02:07:14 PM
No thank you. There's nothing new or surprising about that. We already know that tribes square off and fight after declaring 'we are threatened.' It's not that often that they charge in and announce 'we want to dominate through force or intimidation because we believe we can.'
However, saying ceremoniously 'I don't support what was done by the party I always vote straight blue for' on an anonymous forum -- that's got some entertaining irony.
I think it's just honesty, and not all that rare for supporters on either side. IMO the R's would do so just as often if the opportunity would present itself.
If this story is any indicator, it will continue to be done: https://www.npr.org/2022/11/11/1135878576/the-democrats-strategy-of-boosting-far-right-candidates-seems-to-have-worked
Right. Assuming you mean this seriously, so who would we boost, who is more radical left than Raphael Warnock.
I do mean it seriously. But, unlike you, I don't think the D's nominated anyone as nutty as the R's did for statewide contests. By nutty I mean the governor candidates like those in CO, PA, MN and WI, and some of the absolutelutely crazy AG candidates. Anyone who advocates a Christian nation state (not I am a church going Christian), or that schools are installing litter boxes for students identifying as furrys, or is a neoNazi qualifies as nutty in my book.
I thought Walker unqualified not by his abortion issues, but rather his obvious mental issues and violence against ex-wives. He also lies in ways that might make President Trump blush in admiration (#1 in hs class, #1 in college class, okay didn't graduate). To be fair I don't know if they are lies or a manifestation of hi personality dissociative disorder.
I see you want to keep going on about Walker. Fidel Castro isn't available anyway.
Well, maybe he spends part of his waking hours believing he's President Biden, and so must make things up about his academic career.
I didn't say I'd vote for Walker in primary. I say I'd vote for him against Warnock. He at least has matured enough to understand that, as Sowell explains, #2 is the truth:
Worldview #1, held by progressives: good things happen automatically and bad things happen because people are ganging up on you.
Worldview #2, held by conservatives: good things happen because people are planning, thinking, working, caring for themselves and others, going to bed early, staying away from crack, crime and unwanted pregnancy as much as possible, and generally putting some faith in community, family, common sense, maybe even God. Bad things happen all the time to everyone, because that's life.
Walker if he wins will just be another stop-the-chaos pro-republican vote. I don't see him stirring things up. Warnock is energetic radical, full of hate and persuasive with his in-crowd. He is also, in all probability, a believer in worldview #2, because he's not exactly stupid, but a clear peddler of worldview #1 for his race-baiting enterprise, and probably another oppressor of Black Americans by way of his defeatism, negativity and characterization of white people as the enemy.
All I meant was that Walker isn't in the group I was talking about. Sorry that bothers you, but que sera I guess.
FWIW there are several Senators already that I think are unqualified. Tuberville, Kennedy and Johnson on the R's, Menendez and Feinstein on the D's.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 12, 2022, 04:04:01 PM
Well, maybe he spends part of his waking hours believing he's President Biden, and so must make things up about his academic career.
Warnock is energetic radical, full of hate and persuasive with his in-crowd. He is also, in all probability, a believer in worldview #2, because he's not exactly stupid, but a clear peddler of worldview #1 for his race-baiting enterprise, and probably another oppressor of Black Americans by way of his defeatism, negativity and characterization of white people as the enemy.
Conservatives simply cannot look at their own candidates.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 12, 2022, 04:23:13 PM
Conservatives simply cannot look at their own candidates.
McConnell clearly did.
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 12, 2022, 04:19:20 PM
All I meant was that Walker isn't in the group I was talking about. SorRy that bothers you, but sue sera I guess.
I think we agree on that. I think the R's favored Walker because democrats believe they can tar any white republican, most especially southern. as 'a racist' irrespective of his platform or history, and sometimes it works on swing voters, and of course nearly always with their party. Having adopted black children from the third world makes one even more 'a racist colonizer.'
Respectfully, I'll disagree with the above. I think Walker was nominated quite simply because of President Trump's endorsement.
Former President Trump understands the same things about the sickness that is today's democratic party as I do. But it's always a calculated risk of course, who gets selected to face the opposition.
Dems hold the Senate. They'll pick up a seat if they win the Georgia runoff.
House looks like it will go to Rs by a hair, but some possibility Dems hold on.
Only interesting Gov race at this point is Lake vs. Hobbs in AZ. I think you'd rather be in Hobbs' position than Lake's, but there are a lot of ballots left to count and none of the networks are going to call it any time soon.
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 12, 2022, 04:31:18 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 12, 2022, 04:23:13 PM
Conservatives simply cannot look at their own candidates.
McConnell clearly did.
Yes, he did, and he was not very pleased (and rightfully so) with the senate candidates that the Trumpists (with some help from Democrats) saddled the party with. And it's wrong to conflate conservatives with Trumpists. E.g., Gov. Kemp is a conservative and easily beat election denier Stacey Abrams, who garnered the support of fellow election denier Trump.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 12, 2022, 07:24:07 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 12, 2022, 04:31:18 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 12, 2022, 04:23:13 PM
Conservatives simply cannot look at their own candidates.
McConnell clearly did.
Yes, he did, and he was not very pleased (and rightfully so) with the senate candidates that the Trumpists (with some help from Democrats) saddled the party with. And it's wrong to conflate conservatives with Trumpists. E.g., Gov. Kemp is a conservative and easily beat election denier Stacey Abrams, who garnered the support of fellow election denier Trump.
You're wasting your time here, Anon. The democrats on the forum will never that admit that Abrams, Clinton and Pelosi are election deniers, despite the evidence staring them in the face. You can't have honest discussion with dishonest partners.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 12, 2022, 07:24:07 PM
And it's wrong to conflate conservatives with Trumpists.
Weeeeeeeeellllll...no.
Trump is clearly a hard right phenomenon. As I've posted many times, the GOP of today is not the GOP of my parents' generation and certainly not a conservative of the Reagan era. Compared to Trump, Nixon was a Cub Scout, and the GOP did the legal, honorable thing in regards to #37.
Nevertheless, Trump has had the stalwart support of the GOP since he emerged from the swamp.
It is fair to say that not all conservatives are Trumpists, but there are enough conservatives who will not disavow Trump even if he shoots someone in the middle of the street that the conservatives belong to him. It is the GOP which is threatening the democratic process. And the more rational conservatives have done very little to distance themselves from our near-miss tin plated dictator.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 12, 2022, 07:38:40 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 12, 2022, 07:24:07 PM
And it's wrong to conflate conservatives with Trumpists.
Weeeeeeeeellllll...no.
Trump is clearly a hard right phenomenon. As I've posted many times, the GOP of today is not the GOP of my parents' generation and certainly not a conservative of the Reagan era. Compared to Trump, Nixon was a Cub Scout, and the GOP did the legal, honorable thing in regards to #37.
Nevertheless, Trump has had the stalwart support of the GOP since he emerged from the swamp.
It is fair to say that not all conservatives are Trumpists, but there are enough conservatives who will not disavow Trump even if he shoots someone in the middle of the street that the conservatives belong to him. It is the GOP which is threatening the democratic process. And the more rational conservatives have done very little to distance themselves from our near-miss tin plated dictator.
The alternative being...girls with penises in your locker room. Think about it, genius.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 12, 2022, 07:41:50 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 12, 2022, 07:38:40 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 12, 2022, 07:24:07 PM
And it's wrong to conflate conservatives with Trumpists.
Weeeeeeeeellllll...no.
Trump is clearly a hard right phenomenon. As I've posted many times, the GOP of today is not the GOP of my parents' generation and certainly not a conservative of the Reagan era. Compared to Trump, Nixon was a Cub Scout, and the GOP did the legal, honorable thing in regards to #37.
Nevertheless, Trump has had the stalwart support of the GOP since he emerged from the swamp.
It is fair to say that not all conservatives are Trumpists, but there are enough conservatives who will not disavow Trump even if he shoots someone in the middle of the street that the conservatives belong to him. It is the GOP which is threatening the democratic process. And the more rational conservatives have done very little to distance themselves from our near-miss tin plated dictator.
The alternative being...girls with penises in your locker room. Think about it, genius.
Oh mahag. Get help.
I'm thinking of your children. Someone should.
We have no children.
And anyway, the vast majority of offenders are straight men. I do not pay attention to other penises in the locker-room and any penis is welcome there as far as I'm concerned-----although what any of that has to do with the discussion at hand I have no idea...except that you lapse into hysterical bigotry when you get angry.
You know, mahag, I've actually got a friend who transitioned. It has been a while since we have spoken, and perhaps I should send hu a message on Facebook.
Despite this thread's title, I somehow suspect that no-one currently posting to it will care that the Dems now have a 50(51) hold on the Senate.
Just an observation...
M
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 12, 2022, 07:38:40 PM
Weeeeeeeeellllll...no.
Trump is clearly a hard right phenomenon. As I've posted many times, the GOP of today is not the GOP of my parents' generation and certainly not a conservative of the Reagan era. Compared to Trump, Nixon was a Cub Scout, and the GOP did the legal, honorable thing in regards to #37.
Nevertheless, Trump has had the stalwart support of the GOP since he emerged from the swamp.
It is fair to say that not all conservatives are Trumpists, but there are enough conservatives who will not disavow Trump even if he shoots someone in the middle of the street that the conservatives belong to him. It is the GOP which is threatening the democratic process. And the more rational conservatives have done very little to distance themselves from our near-miss tin plated dictator.
Conservatives are not the GOP (which is a political party with various factions) nor are they Trumpists (who are populist-nationalists).
Political parties exist to win elections. Now that the GOP has performed poorly in three consecutive elections with Trump as the leader of the party, we will see if someone like DeSantis is willing and able to displace Trump.
Quote from: mamselle on November 12, 2022, 09:37:18 PM
Despite this thread's title, I somehow suspect that no-one currently posting to it will care that the Dems now have a 50(51) hold on the Senate.
Just an observation...
M
Better change that: I'm thrilled! Terrific news to wake up to this morning. I actually clicked over here to see if anyone else was happy.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 12, 2022, 08:25:37 PM
I'm thinking of your children. Someone should.
Why is it always Republican politicians caught in gay sex scandals? Maybe repressing gay tendencies actually backfires? It is often the most ardent homophobes that get caught in the men's room with their pants down....
Just embrace your inner woman Mahag! From your posts, it is clear you are obsessed.
Quote from: ergative on November 13, 2022, 01:55:41 AM
Quote from: mamselle on November 12, 2022, 09:37:18 PM
Despite this thread's title, I somehow suspect that no-one currently posting to it will care that the Dems now have a 50(51) hold on the Senate.
Just an observation...
M
Better change that: I'm thrilled! Terrific news to wake up to this morning. I actually clicked over here to see if anyone else was happy.
As Liz Cheney said, "Maybe now we can get back to "Team Normal..."
M.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 12, 2022, 09:15:42 PM
And anyway, the vast majority of offenders are straight men.
That's why girl's locker rooms had traditionally been off limits to them, and it mostly worked, and generally works, but only when it's tried. My point.
QuoteWe have no children.
We do. We protect them too. When necessary, from certain contemporary 'social justice' types.
QuoteJust embrace your inner woman Mahag! From your posts, it is clear you are obsessed.
Obsessed about my rights, yes, from time to time. You are welcome to be obsessed with may obsession.
More of an explanation: I maintain that blanket endorsement of progressive (as in 'desiring that society self-consciously and overtly cultivate change, perpetually') agenda as disseminated from academic DEI departments can be resisted by those who are inclined to by their religion and honest beliefs.
And yes, the democrats and their cancel culture are the people one has to be prepared to confront/oppose in order to claim that right, which they do not have the right to take. And I fully expect them to play dumb, pretend they are innocent bystanders, etc.
Your inner male left the toilet seat up again, Kron.
QuoteYou know, mahag, I've actually got a friend who transitioned. It has been a while since we have spoken, and perhaps I should send hu a message on Facebook.
I know two that I see on a regular basis. and then there's me. Whatever stage of transition one is at, or from what to what, is apparently a considered a matter of almost limitless possibilities. But I suspect not everyone believes.
I have managed to stay out of the female person locker rooms.
Quote from: ergative on November 13, 2022, 01:55:41 AM
Quote from: mamselle on November 12, 2022, 09:37:18 PM
Despite this thread's title, I somehow suspect that no-one currently posting to it will care that the Dems now have a 50(51) hold on the Senate.
Just an observation...
M
Better change that: I'm thrilled! Terrific news to wake up to this morning. I actually clicked over here to see if anyone else was happy.
congratulations. look for democratic officials to complain about your neglect of the southern border & urban crime. that's the thing about holding office. sometimes there's work involved.
Quote from: mamselle on November 12, 2022, 09:37:18 PM
Despite this thread's title, I somehow suspect that no-one currently posting to it will care that the Dems now have a 50(51) hold on the Senate.
Just an observation...
M
That is all my wife and I have been thinking about (almost) for days. We were ecstatic last night.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 12, 2022, 11:37:09 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 12, 2022, 07:38:40 PM
Weeeeeeeeellllll...no.
Trump is clearly a hard right phenomenon. As I've posted many times, the GOP of today is not the GOP of my parents' generation and certainly not a conservative of the Reagan era. Compared to Trump, Nixon was a Cub Scout, and the GOP did the legal, honorable thing in regards to #37.
Nevertheless, Trump has had the stalwart support of the GOP since he emerged from the swamp.
It is fair to say that not all conservatives are Trumpists, but there are enough conservatives who will not disavow Trump even if he shoots someone in the middle of the street that the conservatives belong to him. It is the GOP which is threatening the democratic process. And the more rational conservatives have done very little to distance themselves from our near-miss tin plated dictator.
Conservatives are not the GOP (which is a political party with various factions) nor are they Trumpists (who are populist-nationalists).
Political parties exist to win elections. Now that the GOP has performed poorly in three consecutive elections with Trump as the leader of the party, we will see if someone like DeSantis is willing and able to displace Trump.
Yeah, now that "conservatives" are finding out that politically aligning themselves with Trump and MAGA voters is no longer expedient, they want to distance themselves from him (although not necessarily the voting block that was called the "Republican base" under Trump). For four years, though, conservatives benefited from that alignment with the MAGA wing nuts, who otherwise would have stayed on the sidelines in 2020 if it were not for Trump. And, no one will forget that, for at least four years to six years, "conservatives" = "Republican" = "Trump/MAGA." The Jan. 6 event and more importantly, the "Republican" party response stocked with "conservatives" will always remind us of that, when most conservatives and most Republicans would not condemn Trump/MAGA for the Jan. 6 invasion, and were aligned with Trump/MAGA in their practice. Don't disown Trump now--you can't. "Republicans" and "conservatives" own Trump. Trump owns the "Republicans" and "conservatives." "Republicans" and "conservatives" own Jan. 6, and they will be forever linked in history and memories.
I, too, am curious if someone like DeSantis can maintain the coalition of traditional conservatives and MAGA wing nuts, because without the wing nuts, the "Republican" party is not viable, especially with the aging-dying boomer population--where Republicans are losing one vote at a time, to death by natural causes. It should be especially concerning if the boomer voting block concentrates themselves in FL, because that's not good for winning the electoral college and the senate. The Republicans would then have to rely on the rural voting block, which is dying out economically, and nothing can stop that slow death without even more intervention from the state and federal governments, and I'm not convinced that it is in the rural identity to receive more government handouts nor do the "Democrats" feel inclined to give them more.
You are attempting to un-define as "conservative" and un-define as "Republican" to dis-include the Trump-MAGA voting block as part of the definitions (the "Republican base, as it was called for four years"). I'm not sure that is a good political strategy for the Republicans. Even more curious is, if Trump does run for president again, and if DeSantis defeats him, will the MAGA voters stay on the sidelines out of anger & protest, and allow the democratic nominee to take the presidential election, in much the same way that angry Bernie Sanders supporters stayed on the sidelines in 2020, because they didn't like Hillary Clinton. That would be devastating to the Republican party, if the "Republican base" does not want to come out and support a non-Trump Republican nominee.
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 13, 2022, 07:25:57 AM
Quote from: mamselle on November 12, 2022, 09:37:18 PM
Despite this thread's title, I somehow suspect that no-one currently posting to it will care that the Dems now have a 50(51) hold on the Senate.
Just an observation...
M
That is all my wife and I have been thinking about (almost) for days. We were ecstatic last night.
Oh yeah. We were aware.
Quote from: lightning on November 13, 2022, 07:31:42 AM
...
Yeah, now that "conservatives" are finding out that politically aligning themselves with Trump and MAGA voters is no longer expedient, they want to distance themselves from him (although not necessarily the voting block that was called the "Republican base" under Trump). For four years, though, conservatives benefited from that alignment with the MAGA wing nuts, who otherwise would have stayed on the sidelines in 2020 if it were not for Trump. And, no one will forget that, for at least four years to six years, "conservatives" = "Republican" = "Trump/MAGA." The Jan. 6 event and more importantly, the "Republican" party response stocked with "conservatives" will always remind us of that, when most conservatives and most Republicans would not condemn Trump/MAGA for the Jan. 6 invasion, and were aligned with Trump/MAGA in their practice. Don't disown Trump now--you can't. "Republicans" and "conservatives" own Trump. Trump owns the "Republicans" and "conservatives." "Republicans" and "conservatives" own Jan. 6, and they will be forever linked in history and memories.
I, too, am curious if someone like DeSantis can maintain the coalition of traditional conservatives and MAGA wing nuts, because without the wing nuts, the "Republican" party is not viable, especially with the aging-dying boomer population--where Republicans are losing one vote at a time, to death by natural causes. It should be especially concerning if the boomer voting block concentrates themselves in FL, because that's not good for winning the electoral college and the senate. The Republicans would then have to rely on the rural voting block, which is dying out economically, and nothing can stop that slow death without even more intervention from the state and federal governments, and I'm not convinced that it is in the rural identity to receive more government handouts nor do the "Democrats" feel inclined to give them more.
You are attempting to un-define as "conservative" and un-define as "Republican" to dis-include the Trump-MAGA voting block as part of the definitions (the "Republican base, as it was called for four years"). I'm not sure that is a good political strategy for the Republicans. Even more curious is, if Trump does run for president again, and if DeSantis defeats him, will the MAGA voters stay on the sidelines out of anger & protest, and allow the democratic nominee to take the presidential election, in much the same way that angry Bernie Sanders supporters stayed on the sidelines in 2020, because they didn't like Hillary Clinton. That would be devastating to the Republican party, if the "Republican base" does not want to come out and support a non-Trump Republican nominee.
There are interesting thoughts in there, Lightning. I just think deeper things are going on that give rise to these tendencies and personalities.
Just for starters, this map of the current real time distribution of House seats shows that the US is two countries, the interior and the coasts
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/elections/live_results/2022/house/ (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/elections/live_results/2022/house/)
But that's not causal. Over a relatively short period of time, maybe 10 - 20 years, the voters for the two parties changed from mostly similar to highly divergent in education, income, age, and so on. Good charts are here https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2019/09/10/america-has-two-economies-and-theyre-diverging-fast/ (https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2019/09/10/america-has-two-economies-and-theyre-diverging-fast/) The Republican voters on average are poor compared to Democratic voters.
By and large, the Republican Party has become home to the Forgotten Man. He had no place else to go. I've always seen Trump as a mere collector of these votes. Nothing depends on him.
Does this bode well for the Democratic Party in the future? Not necessarily, on account population of States changes. For whatever reason -- presumably economic and social policy -- big Democratic states are losing and big Republican states are gaining. Just as an example, if electoral votes in 2020 had been distributed as they will be in 2024, the Democrats would have received three electoral votes fewer.
Quote from: dismalist on November 13, 2022, 09:43:49 AM
Just for starters, this map of the current real time distribution of House seats shows that the US is two countries, the interior and the coasts
How do you account for the counter examples like IL and CO? I still think (for the most part) it is education levels and age that are the big determiners. Both mean (again, for the most part) larger cities have higher concentration of D's.
BTW, thanks to you and lightning for those two posts!
Quote from: dismalist on November 13, 2022, 09:43:49 AM
Does this bode well for the Democratic Party in the future? Not necessarily, on account population of States changes. For whatever reason -- presumably economic and social policy -- big Democratic states are losing and big Republican states are gaining. Just as an example, if electoral votes in 2020 had been distributed as they will be in 2024, the Democrats would have received three electoral votes fewer.
Are these states becoming Bluer, however, like Georgia and Texas?
Who are these "forgotten men," anyway?
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 13, 2022, 10:00:23 AM
Quote from: dismalist on November 13, 2022, 09:43:49 AM
Just for starters, this map of the current real time distribution of House seats shows that the US is two countries, the interior and the coasts
How do you account for the counter examples like IL and CO? I still think (for the most part) it is education levels and age that are the big determiners. Both mean (again, for the most part) larger cities have higher concentration of D's.
BTW, thanks to you and lightning for those two posts!
At the State level it does look that way. The factor is population density. Cities are D, rural areas are R. The percentage of a state's population living in a city determines its statewide political leaning.
Quote from: lightning on November 13, 2022, 07:31:42 AM
Yeah, now that "conservatives" are finding out that politically aligning themselves with Trump and MAGA voters is no longer expedient, they want to distance themselves from him (although not necessarily the voting block that was called the "Republican base" under Trump). For four years, though, conservatives benefited from that alignment with the MAGA wing nuts, who otherwise would have stayed on the sidelines in 2020 if it were not for Trump. And, no one will forget that, for at least four years to six years, "conservatives" = "Republican" = "Trump/MAGA." The Jan. 6 event and more importantly, the "Republican" party response stocked with "conservatives" will always remind us of that, when most conservatives and most Republicans would not condemn Trump/MAGA for the Jan. 6 invasion, and were aligned with Trump/MAGA in their practice. Don't disown Trump now--you can't. "Republicans" and "conservatives" own Trump. Trump owns the "Republicans" and "conservatives." "Republicans" and "conservatives" own Jan. 6, and they will be forever linked in history and memories.
I, too, am curious if someone like DeSantis can maintain the coalition of traditional conservatives and MAGA wing nuts, because without the wing nuts, the "Republican" party is not viable, especially with the aging-dying boomer population--where Republicans are losing one vote at a time, to death by natural causes. It should be especially concerning if the boomer voting block concentrates themselves in FL, because that's not good for winning the electoral college and the senate. The Republicans would then have to rely on the rural voting block, which is dying out economically, and nothing can stop that slow death without even more intervention from the state and federal governments, and I'm not convinced that it is in the rural identity to receive more government handouts nor do the "Democrats" feel inclined to give them more.
You are attempting to un-define as "conservative" and un-define as "Republican" to dis-include the Trump-MAGA voting block as part of the definitions (the "Republican base, as it was called for four years"). I'm not sure that is a good political strategy for the Republicans. Even more curious is, if Trump does run for president again, and if DeSantis defeats him, will the MAGA voters stay on the sidelines out of anger & protest, and allow the democratic nominee to take the presidential election, in much the same way that angry Bernie Sanders supporters stayed on the sidelines in 2020, because they didn't like Hillary Clinton. That would be devastating to the Republican party, if the "Republican base" does not want to come out and support a non-Trump Republican nominee.
Good points. Kevin McCarthy was quoted as realizing his side of the aisle was a bunch of old white men, and that his caucus did not "look like America." Same thing the GOP after Mitt Romney lost - gotta increase the size of the tent.
Unfortunately, others figured out that angry White racists were super reliable voters and decided to use Trump to get them all excited, doubling down on the MAGA message.
Are we going back to the "throw-red-meat-on-the-ballot" strategy? Last decade's partial-birth abortion and defense-of-marriage have given way to anti-shariah, critical race theory, trans kids playing sports, and drag queen story hour.
Quote from: ciao_yall on November 13, 2022, 10:07:45 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 13, 2022, 10:00:23 AM
Quote from: dismalist on November 13, 2022, 09:43:49 AM
Just for starters, this map of the current real time distribution of House seats shows that the US is two countries, the interior and the coasts
How do you account for the counter examples like IL and CO? I still think (for the most part) it is education levels and age that are the big determiners. Both mean (again, for the most part) larger cities have higher concentration of D's.
BTW, thanks to you and lightning for those two posts!
At the State level it does look that way. The factor is population density. Cities are D, rural areas are R. The percentage of a state's population living in a city determines its statewide political leaning.
Yeah, that, too. But all these things are correlated with each other. I'm an income man for an explanation of voting patterns. It is, after all, correlated with everything else. But I'm not gonna do the work to prove it!
I didn't mean the map to be causal, just descriptive, at best suggestive. For population growth and decline, yes, Colorado could be like Italy's San Marino, mountains and all, and Chicago like Venice, water and all! :-)
But in the end all these things are more durable in explanation than "ideology", "party base", "certain policies", "racism", "Trump", "Biden", and so on, I think.
Quote from: lightning on November 13, 2022, 07:31:42 AM
You are attempting to un-define as "conservative" and un-define as "Republican" to dis-include the Trump-MAGA voting block as part of the definitions (the "Republican base, as it was called for four years"). I'm not sure that is a good political strategy for the Republicans. Even more curious is, if Trump does run for president again, and if DeSantis defeats him, will the MAGA voters stay on the sidelines out of anger & protest, and allow the democratic nominee to take the presidential election, in much the same way that angry Bernie Sanders supporters stayed on the sidelines in 2020, because they didn't like Hillary Clinton. That would be devastating to the Republican party, if the "Republican base" does not want to come out and support a non-Trump Republican nominee.
Trumpists and conservatives are two parts of the coalition that make up the GOP like the Biden and Bernie wings of the Democrats that nonetheless remain distinct. I agree that if DeSantis beats Trump but is unable to hold on to the bulk of Trump supporters, then he has a problem. But his win in Florida shows that he was able to broaden his coalition to include a solid majority of independent voters in his state, so the question is whether he can attract enough independent voters (who are the largest voting bloc by identification) on a national scale to offset any loss of disgruntled Trumpists.
And how long can the democrats pick up votes by making it patriotic to hate the Supreme Court? That was quite a trick. But then, many hands make light work. As Marco Rubio said, we did pretty well considering everyone's against us.
I think that may have been a one-off though. The Dobbs ruling may have paid its last dividend to the dems. And if they rule against race discrimination in college admissions --- just doesn't have the same legs as a rallying issue.
I don't think the "anti-woke" messaging of he and Youngkin will cut it nationally. Its just not a big enough thing for most people to really matter. An economic message could work, but only if the economy still has some issues.
Quote from: Ruralguy on November 13, 2022, 11:00:11 AM
I don't think the "anti-woke" messaging of he and Youngkin will cut it nationally. Its just not a big enough thing for most people to really matter. An economic message could work, but only if the economy still has some issues.
Biden didn't run just now. His party did. He will have an abysmal record to run on if they let him run. If they don't someone else will have to try to sell his abysmal record. Inflation could go back to Trump-era levels today, and we've still lost thousands in retirement savings. The crash-and-burn of social security has been moved to warp speed too, on Biden's watch. Not having lost the senate means he'll keep his nutty agenda going if he can get away with it. DeSantis is running his state well.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 13, 2022, 10:56:22 AM
And how long can the democrats pick up votes by making it patriotic to hate the Supreme Court? That was quite a trick.
We saw it before in the 1960s. The Midwest was littered with "Impeach Earl Warren" signs, and backlash to the Civil Rights movement was coupled with it in the R messaging.
David Hogg (School shooting survivor, activist, and now in college) observed the other day that the new generation of voters have all been raised with classroom lockdown drills as a matter of course.
Invited to participate in a roundtable on the issues of gun violence, he and other young invitees (nearly all white, middle-class) immediately asked to include friends in their movement--and brought along youth of color from less privileged schools and neighborhoods where the idea of 'lockdown' could not obtain because it was literally their whole living space.
All were strongly in favor of gun control and determined to see it through.
Another great part of young voters, animated by Dobbs, floated the Democratic vote in several states, as well--and they, too, in interviews, were articulate, with a range of backgrounds, as able and thoughtful contributors to the conversation.
A wise party leader would be reaching out to those folks right this minute, engaging their help in canvassing for anti-NRA petitions, getting them involved in local and regional drives to see SCOTUS reform, etc.
Maxwell Frost (D-FL, Gen-Z, 25 y.o.) just won a House seat.
I was never so proud of the up-and coming generation (whom we all teach) as when I saw those interviews and announcements over the past week.
That 'wide tent' is spreading itself, at least in one camp, as the kids come creeping under the tent flaps, seems to me.
Start teaching them acrobatics, say I.
M.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 13, 2022, 10:56:22 AM
And how long can the democrats pick up votes by making it patriotic to hate the Supreme Court? That was quite a trick.
The Progressives ("three generations of imbeciles are enough") and FDR ("switch in time to save nine") managed to do quite well when it suited their political goals.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 13, 2022, 11:57:11 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 13, 2022, 10:56:22 AM
And how long can the democrats pick up votes by making it patriotic to hate the Supreme Court? That was quite a trick.
The Progressives ("three generations of imbeciles are enough") and FDR ("switch in time to save nine") managed to do quite well when it suited their political goals.
FDR famously lost his court packing enterprise in 1937, even though he had a >2/3 Democratic majority in both houses. The long-lasting Democratic control of the Supreme Court occurred because FDR served four terms.
All nine of the Warren Court were appointed by Eisenhower and Truman. Then Kennedy got some appointments.
Quote from: mamselle on November 13, 2022, 11:46:03 AM
David Hogg (School shooting survivor, activist, and now in college) observed the other day that the new generation of voters have all been raised with classroom lockdown drills as a matter of course.
Invited to participate in a roundtable on the issues of gun violence, he and other young invitees (nearly all white, middle-class) immediately asked to include friends in their movement--and brought along youth of color from less privileged schools and neighborhoods where the idea of 'lockdown' could not obtain because it was literally their whole living space.
All were strongly in favor of gun control and determined to see it through.
Another great part of young voters, animated by Dobbs, floated the Democratic vote in several states, as well--and they, too, in interviews, were articulate, with a range of backgrounds, as able and thoughtful contributors to the conversation.
A wise party leader would be reaching out to those folks right this minute, engaging their help in canvassing for anti-NRA petitions, getting them involved in local and regional drives to see SCOTUS reform, etc.
Maxwell Frost (D-FL, Gen-Z, 25 y.o.) just won a House seat.
I was never so proud of the up-and coming generation (whom we all teach) as when I saw those interviews and announcements over the past week.
That 'wide tent' is spreading itself, at least in one camp, as the kids come creeping under the tent flaps, seems to me.
Start teaching them acrobatics, say I.
M.
I completely agree! And, so does Alexandra Petri!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/11/12/republicans-raise-voting-age-satire/
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 13, 2022, 12:26:52 PM
All nine of the Warren Court were appointed by Eisenhower and Truman. Then Kennedy got some appointments.
The Warren Court:
--Hugo Black was FDR's appointee;
--Stanley reed was FDR's;
--Felix Frankfurter was FDR's;
--William O Douglas was FDR's;
--Robert Jackson was FDR's;
--Harold Burton [1945] was Harry Truman's;
--Toma Clark [1949] was Harry Truman's;
--Sherman Minton [1949] was Harry Truman's;
and Earl Warren [1953] was Dwight Eisenhower's appointee.
Five FDR appointees that lasted into Truman's, indeed Eisenhower's, presidency. Not bad! Beats Trump by 40% percent! :-)
Quote from: dismalist on November 13, 2022, 12:45:55 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 13, 2022, 12:26:52 PM
All nine of the Warren Court were appointed by Eisenhower and Truman. Then Kennedy got some appointments.
The Warren Court:
--Hugo Black was FDR's appointee;
--Stanley reed was FDR's;
--Felix Frankfurter was FDR's;
--William O Douglas was FDR's;
--Robert Jackson was FDR's;
--Harold Burton [1945] was Harry Truman's;
--Toma Clark [1949] was Harry Truman's;
--Sherman Minton [1949] was Harry Truman's;
and Earl Warren [1953] was Dwight Eisenhower's appointee.
Five FDR appointees that lasted into Truman's, indeed Eisenhower's, presidency. Not bad! Beats Trump by 40% percent! :-)
Here is where I was looking. It suggests that FDR had 9, DDE had 5 and HST had 4:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_the_United_States_by_judicial_appointments
Quote from: dismalist on November 13, 2022, 12:21:51 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 13, 2022, 11:57:11 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 13, 2022, 10:56:22 AM
And how long can the democrats pick up votes by making it patriotic to hate the Supreme Court? That was quite a trick.
The Progressives ("three generations of imbeciles are enough") and FDR ("switch in time to save nine") managed to do quite well when it suited their political goals.
FDR famously lost his court packing enterprise in 1937, even though he had a >2/3 Democratic majority in both houses. The long-lasting Democratic control of the Supreme Court occurred because FDR served four terms.
The threat of court-packing was enough to induce the "switch in time to save nine," so enacting it wasn't necessary. Those Democrats today who want to undermine judicial independence by packing the Court are threatening democracy too.
Quote from: mamselle on November 13, 2022, 11:46:03 AM
That 'wide tent' is spreading itself, at least in one camp, as the kids come creeping under the tent flaps, seems to me.
Start teaching them acrobatics, say I.
M.
Yes, more politicized teaching is just what we need and won't generate more backlash.
QuoteUnfortunately, others figured out that angry White racists were super reliable voters and decided to use Trump to get them all excited, doubling down on the MAGA message.
Curious about a few things. Which of the Trump administration's
policy decisions enacted during his term were white racist, or the most white racist, in your view?
Second, if a black racist want to vote for Raphael Warnock, does Warnock tell him not to?
If a white racist wants to vote for Trump, is
that proof that he, Trump, is a white racist who seeks power for racist ends?
ETA: Who votes the way they do because they are angry? Just democrats, just repubs, or anyone at all?
Do you have any theories about why DJT got more black vote than the republican candidates before him and also why he was able to get even more in 2020 than in 2016?
You obviously have a response ready to anyone who answers your question. So lets just please skip the antics.
Please just state your opinion.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 13, 2022, 01:14:42 PM
Quote from: dismalist on November 13, 2022, 12:21:51 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 13, 2022, 11:57:11 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 13, 2022, 10:56:22 AM
And how long can the democrats pick up votes by making it patriotic to hate the Supreme Court? That was quite a trick.
The Progressives ("three generations of imbeciles are enough") and FDR ("switch in time to save nine") managed to do quite well when it suited their political goals.
FDR famously lost his court packing enterprise in 1937, even though he had a >2/3 Democratic majority in both houses. The long-lasting Democratic control of the Supreme Court occurred because FDR served four terms.
The threat of court-packing was enough to induce the "switch in time to save nine," so enacting it wasn't necessary. Those Democrats today who want to undermine judicial independence by packing the Court are threatening democracy too.
The threat must be credible, and Roosevelt's clearly wasn't. But threats like this only work if the justices don't have intestinal fortitude. In cases like this, where a small number of people decide, personality matters.
Quote from: Ruralguy on November 13, 2022, 01:32:42 PM
You obviously have a response ready to anyone who answers your question. So lets just please skip the antics.
Please just state your opinion.
My opinion is Trump tried his best while in office to improve life in the USA for black people. With decent success too.
My opinion of race baiting dems, if and when I encounter them, here and elsewhere -- you don't want to know.
(keeping it simple)
con't
I do have some level of interest in what people post here though, so I may ask questions. If they annoy you, I'm terribly sorry. Someone can always decline to answer if they are annoyed or if they know they don't have an answer, and I'd consider that the right choice. The questions are interesting.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 13, 2022, 01:44:28 PM
Quote from: Ruralguy on November 13, 2022, 01:32:42 PM
You obviously have a response ready to anyone who answers your question. So lets just please skip the antics.
Please just state your opinion.
My opinion is Trump tried his best while in office to improve life in the USA for black people. With decent success too.
My opinion of race baiting dems, if and when I encounter them, here and elsewhere -- you don't want to know.
(keeping it simple)
Yes. Because Black people don't want to vote. Or they just like standing in really long lines.
It could be that people need a nudge. Donna Brazile thinks so.
"It used to take courage for Black people to vote. Thanks to the courage of those who did, today it simply takes commitment.
The website Vote411.org, run by the nonpartisan League of Women Voters, has information on where and how you can vote. If you experience any problems, please call (866) OUR-VOTE.
Don't squander the precious right to vote that was denied to Black people for so much of American history — a right that an earlier generation fought so hard to achieve and sometimes died for. Don't just complain about our country's problems to your family and friends. Vote for candidates who will make things better. Stand in your power and proudly vote this Nov. 8."
I think we may have found the progressive who wants to create racial equality in the U.S.A. by reminding us that they notice Black people are too stupid to figure out how to get a valid ID card.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 13, 2022, 10:44:08 AM
Trumpists and conservatives are two parts of the coalition that make up the GOP like the Biden and Bernie wings of the Democrats that nonetheless remain distinct.
From The Guardian: Democrats celebrate retaining control of Senate as Republicans take stock (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/nov/13/us-midterms-democrats-retain-senate-power-house-undecided):
Quote
As fallout from the midterm elections continues, attention is likely to pivot to Florida next week, where Trump is expected to announce a 2024 run for the presidency at his private members' club in Palm Beach.
Although polling still indicates Trump is the preferred candidate among the Republican base, his support has shown signs of fracture after many of his endorsed candidates performed poorly last week. One poll released on Saturday showed Trump's support declining by six points to 50%, while far-right governor Ron DeSantis, who cruised to re-election last week, saw support increase.
<snip>
"He's still the 800-lb gorilla," Hogan said. "It's still a battle and it's going to continue for the next few years. We're still two years out from the next election, and ... the dust is still settling from this one. I think it would be a mistake, as I mentioned Trump's cost us the last three elections and I don't want to see it happen a fourth time."
The first step to beating an addiction is to admit you have a problem.
The "conservatives" are going to need to openly and clearly rebuke Trump if they ever want to rid themselves of the MAGA taint.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 13, 2022, 04:52:37 PM
The first step to beating an addiction is to admit you have a problem.
The "conservatives" are going to need to openly and clearly rebuke Trump if they ever want to rid themselves of the MAGA taint.
Democrats are the flip side of the same coin in being addicted to anti-MAGA as an organizing principle (what will they do when they don't have Trump to kick around anymore?). The GOP needs to replace Trump but does not need to pass the Democrats' anti-MAGA purity test to win.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 13, 2022, 05:47:43 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 13, 2022, 04:52:37 PM
The first step to beating an addiction is to admit you have a problem.
The "conservatives" are going to need to openly and clearly rebuke Trump if they ever want to rid themselves of the MAGA taint.
Democrats are the flip side of the same coin in being addicted to anti-MAGA as an organizing principle (what will they do when they don't have Trump to kick around anymore?). The GOP needs to replace Trump but does not need to pass the Democrats' anti-MAGA purity test to win.
And there we have it!
The conservative pivot!!!
Admit that you have a problem and are powerless against it.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 13, 2022, 01:44:28 PM
Quote from: Ruralguy on November 13, 2022, 01:32:42 PM
You obviously have a response ready to anyone who answers your question. So lets just please skip the antics.
Please just state your opinion.
My opinion is Trump tried his best while in office to improve life in the USA for black people. With decent success too.
My opinion of race baiting dems, if and when I encounter them, here and elsewhere -- you don't want to know.
(keeping it simple)
I'm sorry, but I think that is silliest opinion you've ever expressed. President Trump frankly cares about nothing but himself. Just look at his interviews for heaven's sake. And to preempt other things you might express he doesn't care about veterans, the military, seniors, women or for that matter Rs. I'm hoping like heck DeSantis wins the nomination so I can watch the formation of a third party candidate in 2024.
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 13, 2022, 06:21:12 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 13, 2022, 01:44:28 PM
Quote from: Ruralguy on November 13, 2022, 01:32:42 PM
You obviously have a response ready to anyone who answers your question. So lets just please skip the antics.
Please just state your opinion.
My opinion is Trump tried his best while in office to improve life in the USA for black people. With decent success too.
My opinion of race baiting dems, if and when I encounter them, here and elsewhere -- you don't want to know.
(keeping it simple)
I'm sorry, but I think that is silliest opinion you've ever expressed. President Trump frankly cares about nothing but himself. Just look at his interviews for heaven's sake. And to preempt other things you might express he doesn't care about veterans, the military, seniors, women or for that matter Rs. I'm hoping like heck DeSantis wins the nomination so I can watch the formation of a third party candidate in 2024.
Don't be clown, Jim. All you convey is his personality rubs you the wrong way. You have given me an opinion and no reason whatsoever to consider it.
I asked which policies of his were racist, etc. Since we know he is a flaming white supremacist who only got elected to enact white supremacist policies, which his loyal following are endlessly grateful for, to this day, all according to the political left, of which you are ardently a member, you should be able to answer some of this by naming at least a few such policies:
QuoteCurious about a few things. Which of the Trump administration's policy decisions enacted during his term were white racist, or the most white racist, in your view?
Second, if a black racist want to vote for Raphael Warnock, does Warnock tell him not to?
If a white racist wants to vote for Trump, is that proof that he, Trump, is a white racist who seeks power for racist ends?
ETA: Who votes the way they do because they are angry? Just democrats, just repubs, or anyone at all?
Do you have any theories about why DJT got more black vote than the republican candidates before him and also why he was able to get even more in 2020 than in 2016?
my goodness. even ciao_yall tried harder than that.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 13, 2022, 05:47:43 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 13, 2022, 04:52:37 PM
The first step to beating an addiction is to admit you have a problem.
The "conservatives" are going to need to openly and clearly rebuke Trump if they ever want to rid themselves of the MAGA taint.
Democrats are the flip side of the same coin in being addicted to anti-MAGA as an organizing principle (what will they do when they don't have Trump to kick around anymore?). The GOP needs to replace Trump but does not need to pass the Democrats' anti-MAGA purity test to win.
The republican candidate in 2024 will be campaigned against by getting portrayed as a threat to democracy by the incumbent POTUs. First time ever in my life.
I've told you (I mean, you-all), Joe Biden is a reckless, dangerous moron.
ETA: BTW, remember, we would have had our first highly qualified African-American Supreme Court Justice around 2006 if it hadn't been for Joe Biden.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 13, 2022, 06:31:02 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 13, 2022, 06:21:12 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 13, 2022, 01:44:28 PM
Quote from: Ruralguy on November 13, 2022, 01:32:42 PM
You obviously have a response ready to anyone who answers your question. So lets just please skip the antics.
Please just state your opinion.
My opinion is Trump tried his best while in office to improve life in the USA for black people. With decent success too.
My opinion of race baiting dems, if and when I encounter them, here and elsewhere -- you don't want to know.
(keeping it simple)
I'm sorry, but I think that is silliest opinion you've ever expressed. President Trump frankly cares about nothing but himself. Just look at his interviews for heaven's sake. And to preempt other things you might express he doesn't care about veterans, the military, seniors, women or for that matter Rs. I'm hoping like heck DeSantis wins the nomination so I can watch the formation of a third party candidate in 2024.
Don't be clown, Jim. All you convey is his personality rubs you the wrong way. You have given me an opinion and no reason whatsoever to consider it.
I asked which policies of his were racist, etc. Since we know he is a flaming white supremacist who only got elected to enact white supremacist policies, which his loyal following are endlessly grateful for, to this day, all according to the political left, of which you are ardently a member, you should be able to answer some of this by naming at least a few such policies:
QuoteCurious about a few things. Which of the Trump administration's policy decisions enacted during his term were white racist, or the most white racist, in your view?
Second, if a black racist want to vote for Raphael Warnock, does Warnock tell him not to?
If a white racist wants to vote for Trump, is that proof that he, Trump, is a white racist who seeks power for racist ends?
ETA: Who votes the way they do because they are angry? Just democrats, just repubs, or anyone at all?
Do you have any theories about why DJT got more black vote than the republican candidates before him and also why he was able to get even more in 2020 than in 2016?
my goodness. even ciao_yall tried harder than that.
I did not say his policies were racist; that is apparently the only thing that will affect your opinion. I told you what informs my opinion. I said, and continue to point to, his words. Please say you are unaware of his actions and words against Blacks through redlining (see the suits), his actions and words pertaining to the Central Park 5, his actions and words about birtherism regarding President Obama. Don't forget shithole countries, Mexico only sends us rapists and murderers, and "there were very good people on both sides" at Charlottesville.
Keep deluding yourself.
BTW, I never called you anything. I spoke of your opinion. Even a clown like me can be an informed clown.
You will not reach our friend, mahag.
I didn't call you name. I gave you advice.
So your opinion is Trump's policy decisions as president were not racist. I agree. Why do you think black support for republican POTUS increased during the Trump years, if it's not imposing too much?
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 13, 2022, 06:00:45 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 13, 2022, 05:47:43 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 13, 2022, 04:52:37 PM
The first step to beating an addiction is to admit you have a problem.
The "conservatives" are going to need to openly and clearly rebuke Trump if they ever want to rid themselves of the MAGA taint.
Democrats are the flip side of the same coin in being addicted to anti-MAGA as an organizing principle (what will they do when they don't have Trump to kick around anymore?). The GOP needs to replace Trump but does not need to pass the Democrats' anti-MAGA purity test to win.
And there we have it!
The conservative pivot!!!
Admit that you have a problem and are powerless against it.
We have a problem. We democrats had that problem, or thought we did, in 2020. Because the lecherous, lying Bill Clinton had so embarrassed us, Al Gore chose Joe Lieberman, the senator who had challenged Clinton, thinking it would offset the anti-Clinton vibes. While doing that he just about forgot to mention the eight years of pretty decent prosperity and lost. And Lieberman, not a liberal, was no help.
You democrats have a problem. Without the 'threat to democracy' chant, what do you have for swing voters? Inflation, fentanyl, eternal confession of whiteness, the right of men to have babies and abortions. I would think it's time to get busy with some ideas.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 13, 2022, 07:10:03 PM
I didn't call you name. I gave you advice.
So your opinion is Trump's policy decisions as president were not racist.
As to point A, that is a nice deflection.
As to point B, don't try to put words in my mouth. I didn't respond to that request. I pointed out why I think he's racist. You were the one in your statement who said that you believed you knew what his intentions were.
Lake isn't getting the numbers she needs in AZ. Looks like Dems will flip the state. Another embarrassing loss for Trump and another win for democracy and for decency.
On the other hand, Rs look like they'll take the house by a few seats. Will be a very slim majority and will be interesting to watch the majority leader (presumably McCarthy) try to keep the crazies in line.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 13, 2022, 05:47:43 PM
what will they do when they don't have Trump to kick around anymore?
Quote from: mahagonny on November 13, 2022, 07:32:25 PM
I would think it's time to get busy with some ideas.
First let's get the toxic stench of MAGA out of the air and then we can get to work, all of us who are sane.
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 13, 2022, 07:47:23 PM
Lake isn't getting the numbers she needs in AZ. Looks like Dems will flip the state. Another embarrassing loss for Trump and another win for democracy and for decency.
On the other hand, Rs look like they'll take the house by a few seats. Will be a very slim majority and will be interesting to watch the majority leader (presumably McCarthy) try to keep the crazies in line.
I agree. There is still a significant percentage uncounted in Apache and Pima, and Hobbs is way ahead in both.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 13, 2022, 07:58:37 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 13, 2022, 05:47:43 PM
what will they do when they don't have Trump to kick around anymore?
Quote from: mahagonny on November 13, 2022, 07:32:25 PM
I would think it's time to get busy with some ideas.
First let's get the toxic stench of MAGA out of the air and then we can get to work, all of us who are sane.
Now that Trump is officially a threat to democracy can't they just assassinate him?
QuoteYou were the one in your statement who said that you believed you knew what his intentions were.
Well, since he got more black vote in 2016 than his republican predecessors did, and more in 2020 than he did in 2016, I wouldn't suspect he had any intention not to.
But you don't name any racist policy decisions during his term, so you are just slinging mud. LBJ, the darling of the left & Civil Rights was known to use the 'n-word' and make belittling comments about blacks in his earlier career. 'Shithole country' is something he would have said.
Since there were no racist policy decisions from Trump, the people who voted for him 'because he was racist' should have been mightily disappointed. But they love him more than ever. Something doesn't fit the narrative.
ETA: Telling a person of color 'if you're not sure if you're for me or for Trump, you ain't black' is racist. It suggests that someone is not competent to speak for his own interests.
It is never appropriate to threaten violence. Please remove the part of your post that suggests that it is appropriate to kill someone.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 14, 2022, 03:35:13 AM
Now that Trump is officially a threat to democracy can't they just ************?
Trump is neutered. He is no longer a threat.
And we're the not the ones threatening civil war, my friend, nor are we the ones who resort to provable lies about election results and violent sedition when we lose a valid election.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 14, 2022, 05:43:16 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 14, 2022, 03:35:13 AM
Now that Trump is officially a threat to democracy can't they just ************?
Trump is neutered. He is no longer a threat.
And we're the not the ones threatening civil war, my friend, nor are we the ones who resort to provable lies about election results and violent sedition when we lose a valid election.
OK....how about if they run Kari Lake? I don't have a crystal ball, but I think the democrats will rely on the horror of the 'MAGA' threat to democracy. Especially when it just worked so well.
Quote from: arcturus on November 14, 2022, 05:41:22 AM
It is never appropriate to threaten violence. Please remove the part of your post that suggests that it is appropriate to kill someone.
Three words: Osama bin laden
I recall Trump saying the press is the enemy of the people. It shocked me a bit at first. Less now. I don't recall him saying the democrats are a threat to democracy. That's even stronger. I recall a lot of bluster. Things like 'lock her up.' But not acted on. sure, I've forgotten a few things from the four years.
It seems to be terribly difficult for democrats to admit that Biden is a very intemperate speaker.
I think Lake should take an ivermectin suppository and run.
QuoteTrump is neutered. He is no longer a threat.
And we're the not the ones threatening civil war, my friend, nor are we the ones who resort to provable lies about election results and violent sedition when we lose a valid election.
Taking the subject 'talking to the public about elections truthfully to the best of one's knowledge' (which ought to be a duty covered by the oath of office, my hunch) I seem to recall Biden declaring the 2020 election was the most meticulously run presidential election in history, or such. I don't know for a fact that that's false, but I strongly suspect it is. I also doubt very much he believes it, but instead calculates he can get away with saying it because his party dominates media, government, wokademia, late night 'comedy' (political left spite, for the most part) TV, teachers' unions, damn near everything, as Marco Rubio puts it.
The dems want it to be acceptable for Abrams to talk about voter suppression but talking about ballot harvesting is travesty.
There were more votes for republicans in the midterms than for the democrats. I would be absolutely amazed if the public's trust in the democrats has not fallen in the last several years.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 14, 2022, 06:12:21 AM
I think Lake should take an ivermectin suppository and run.
You're jealous cause she won't date you.
Who said she won't date me?
B'sides, I'm a married man. My days of dating loonies are long behind me.
^ + 1!!
And no kids? I envy you in a way, although I've (we've) been happy to be a parent. Life is full of so many opportunities! Why not adopt a couple undocumented immigrants?
1. Apparently to the Democrats "victory" means not getting decimated by the opposition.
2. DeSantis is Trump with a functioning brain. I suspect he will either get the nomination or seriously hobble Trump during the primaries. Might even see a MAGA party rear its tin foil hat wearing head.
3. Mahag - you are needed over on the job search and interview board where the woke-ists are deep into a discussion of diversity statements. Go non-binary person - do your thing.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 14, 2022, 12:05:39 PM
^ + 1!!
And no kids? I envy you in a way, although I've (we've) been happy to be a parent. Life is full of so many opportunities! Why not adopt a couple undocumented immigrants?
See, and later you will get your knickers all twisted because normal people *mistake* conservatives for racists and then wonder why "liberals" always bring up race. (Unless you are referring to undocumented immigrants from Sweden?)
I really, really, really, really hope you are not passing this on to your kids.
Quote from: secundem_artem on November 14, 2022, 12:20:28 PM
1. Apparently to the Democrats "victory" means not getting decimated by the opposition.
Under the circumstances, yes.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 14, 2022, 02:12:26 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 14, 2022, 12:05:39 PM
^ + 1!!
And no kids? I envy you in a way, although I've (we've) been happy to be a parent. Life is full of so many opportunities! Why not adopt a couple undocumented immigrants?
See, and later you will get your knickers all twisted because normal people *mistake* conservatives for racists and then wonder why "liberals" always bring up race. (Unless you are referring to undocumented immigrants from Sweden?)
Let someone else pay for/ take care of the immigrants so you can signal your virtue by voting the for blues. True to form. This from the people who complain that 'republicans care about the fetus right up until the day she is born, then no more.'
I do not usually do this, have never actually done it on these fora or their predecessors, but my vote would be to resuspend, long-term, mahagonny, whose behavior is increasingly, ahem, problematic and who monopolizes every thread he is on with his often delusional conspiracy thinking and assorted bilge. He needs to get his mental health under control...
Quote from: mahagonny on November 14, 2022, 06:55:56 PM
This from the people who complain that 'republicans care about the fetus right up until the day she is born, then no more.'
Pivot!! Pivot!! Refuse to look yourself in the face.
And that's kind'a true too. Virtue signal by taking women's rights away.
The truth hurts, don't it?
Think Lake will date me now?
Get help, buddy.
Quote from: kaysixteen on November 14, 2022, 07:27:11 PM
I do not usually do this, have never actually done it on these fora or their predecessors, but my vote would be to resuspend, long-term, mahagonny, whose behavior is increasingly, ahem, problematic and who monopolizes every thread he is on with his often delusional conspiracy thinking and assorted bilge. He needs to get his mental health under control...
+1
M.
Quote from: mamselle on November 14, 2022, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on November 14, 2022, 07:27:11 PM
I do not usually do this, have never actually done it on these fora or their predecessors, but my vote would be to resuspend, long-term, mahagonny, whose behavior is increasingly, ahem, problematic and who monopolizes every thread he is on with his often delusional conspiracy thinking and assorted bilge. He needs to get his mental health under control...
+1
M.
+1 I feel something like the way writing prof did when he announced he was leaving. I have placed myself smack dab in the middle of the social activist and progressive culture of today that nauseates me, and more vividly expressed. And I could be using my time better. Well, maybe it's the steroids talking. But not entirely.
In addition, it's occurred to me that some of you here have the same views as some of my colleagues who are good friends. And this experience might run the risk of influencing me to look upon them differently, and not in a way I would want. And in those real life relationships we are more cautious, and that's a good thing. I have mixed feelings about what the pseudonymous online chat culture offers. Always have. And, rhetorically, I am typically outmatched here, having much less education than most of you. That doesn't help.
Well there's always this...https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2hwqn9
Que sera sera!
Mahagonny's (roughly speaking) "Trump may be a horrible human being, but his actual policies were pretty middle-of-the-road Republican" isn't an unheard of argument. I think there's some truth to it, although my take (and perhaps history's) is a bit different. This is a pretty even-handed account of Trump's day-to-day in-your-face bigotry coupled with his actual (often indeed pretty racist) policies, with the section "Housing" being particularly informative:
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/01/trump-black-americans-policies-433744
Trump was, for four years, a really Useful Idiot. He was useful to McConnell, until he decidedly wasn't, going from Useful to Useless Idiot. And he was useful to Putin, who didn't need to invade anyone to create chaos in the U.S. as long as Trump was President. For a day or two, he was even useful to Schumer and Pelosi as they forged the infrastructure bill. The key was basically say many, many nice things about Trump, and let him believe he came up with the great idea (Dems probably should have tried that more often).
And finally, with regard to banning, leaving, and comparisons to WritingProf, well, WritingProf got a kick out of taking the piss, until he didn't. If that's what's happening with you, Mahagonny, then vaya con Dios.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 15, 2022, 04:53:25 AM
Quote from: mamselle on November 14, 2022, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on November 14, 2022, 07:27:11 PM
I do not usually do this, have never actually done it on these fora or their predecessors, but my vote would be to resuspend, long-term, mahagonny, whose behavior is increasingly, ahem, problematic and who monopolizes every thread he is on with his often delusional conspiracy thinking and assorted bilge. He needs to get his mental health under control...
+1
M.
+1 I feel something like the way writing prof did when he announced he was leaving. I have placed myself smack dab in the middle of the social activist and progressive culture of today that nauseates me, and more vividly expressed. And I could be using my time better. Well, maybe it's the steroids talking. But not entirely.
In addition, it's occurred to me that some of you here have the same views as some of my colleagues who are good friends. And this experience might run the risk of influencing me to look upon them differently, and not in a way I would want. And in those real life relationships we are more cautious, and that's a good thing. I have mixed feelings about what the pseudonymous online chat culture offers. Always have. And, rhetorically, I am typically outmatched here, having much less education than most of you. That doesn't help.
Well there's always this...https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2hwqn9
Que sera sera!
Oh Dear Sir Mahogg.... Please, I beg of you on bended knee, with hand to heart, do not even considering abandoning this thread. We need your deep insights on wokeness; your brilliant rhetoric on the weaknesses of democrats; your perceptiveness on the role of whiteness in academic. Without you, we will be bereft, forlorn, saddened, alone in a liberal morass of wokeness and support for crime and all those other evils you, as under educated as you wrongfully claim to be, articulate so beautifully and incisively. I plead with you: consume hands full of steroids if need be, but, as tears stream down my cheeks as I gaze into the abyss of The Fora without you.....Oh, I cannot go on......
This is an online discussion board. Just like society at large and our schools, many of the opinions expressed will appear extreme or just plain irrational. One need not read a poster if one does not appreciate hu's commentary. I generally skim or ignore a couple of posters. Sometimes I engage them, even if I shouldn't.
Just a thought.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 15, 2022, 12:56:05 PM
This is an online discussion board. Just like society at large and our schools, many of the opinions expressed will appear extreme or just plain irrational. One need not read a poster if one does not appreciate hu's commentary. I generally skim or ignore a couple of posters. Sometimes I engage them, even if I shouldn't.
Just a thought.
I ignore Mahogg but occasionally I can't resist temptation.
What if the Mahagonny character is a piece of performance art? If that is the case, then let me be the first to tip my hat to the artist.
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 15, 2022, 08:36:48 PM
What if the Mahagonny character is a piece of performance art? If that is the case, then let me be the first to tip my hat to the artist.
That's plausible, since he is in the fine arts area (I think). However, if it is performance art, I have to disagree with you on your complimentary reception, because Mahagonny is not very good at performance art, due to his unoriginality of ideas, poorly thought-out & un-developed concepts, superficiality of conviction, roughness in craft, untutored technique, un-compelling rhetoric, and slipshod execution.
How about we all stop piling on to the poor non-binary dude. If they annoy you, move on and don't engage. Honestly, this place is getting to look like a junior high where all the cool kids gang up on the kid with the funny accent or generic brand jeans.
Personally, I rarely agree with Mahag and to a lesser extent Marshie. But they keep the place honest. And if I'm honest, I don't see things the way Wahoo does either. If this entire fora sounded like the discussion over on the positionality and diversity statements thread - one of the woker threads on these here fora, I'd just leave.
Meaningful discussions are really hard to have online - anybody remember teaching via Zoom?
Read what you want to read, ignore what you want to ignore, say your piece and good luck and god bless to us all.
Artem out.
I'm starting to wonder--given the dogfight erupting in the House--if the Democratic not only won control of the Senate, but, indirectly, of the Congress as well.
Seems like the GOP won just enough rope to tie themselves up in knots.
M.
I'm relieved that the elections seem overall to have gone as well as they did. And that a particularly awful and misguided voter initiative in our state was strongly defeated. I've also seen statistics that indicate that controversial voter ID laws and the like have not affected voter turnout--which should put to rest incipient conspiracy theories regarding elections stolen by voter suppression.
Quote from: secundem_artem on November 16, 2022, 08:51:14 AM
And if I'm honest, I don't see things the way Wahoo does either.
This is a discussion forum. And I have an open mind and listen to rational commentary.
What do you disagree with?
Quote from: secundem_artem on November 16, 2022, 08:51:14 AM
How about we all stop piling on to the poor non-binary dude. If they annoy you, move on and don't engage. Honestly, this place is getting to look like a junior high where all the cool kids gang up on the kid with the funny accent or generic brand jeans.
Personally, I rarely agree with Mahag and to a lesser extent Marshie. But they keep the place honest. And if I'm honest, I don't see things the way Wahoo does either. If this entire fora sounded like the discussion over on the positionality and diversity statements thread - one of the woker threads on these here fora, I'd just leave.
Meaningful discussions are really hard to have online - anybody remember teaching via Zoom?
Read what you want to read, ignore what you want to ignore, say your piece and good luck and god bless to us all.
Artem out.
All good advice, but it needs to be directed more at the troll than to me or the others here.
I have been practicing what you preach, but there does come a point where you can't ignore the BS spewing forth because ignoring it and moving on might ruin the community. At that point we MUST engage & speak up, for the sake of the community as a whole. People have left the community because of Mahagonny. I'm thinking of leaving it, as I type.
And no, Mahagonny is not the kid with the funny accent and/or generic jeans, there are no "cool kids" beating up on him.
Mahagonny is the drunk that hangs out at the end of the bar every night, who comes over and sits down next to you and starts drunkenly spewing and ranting all sorts of grievances, conspiracies, non-sequiturs, and random semi-unpleasant stuff, with occasional intermingled pleasantries. Everyone knows him. Sometimes you just play along in a humorous and self-entertaining way, but most of the time he just makes you want to leave the bar early, because you can't simply ignore him or move to another seat.
Using the bar analogy, it's time for me to leave the bar.
It's been nice hanging out with all of you. I learned a lot, among the many other things that the fora has given me.
You win Mahaog. Finally, you beat me. Enjoy your very temporary feeling of agency, as you wipe away the tears and fears caused by what you feel is the "liberal" dominance of your pathetic life and career, with no red wave or red tsunami coming to save your fragile identity.
Dr. Lightning out, at 746 posts.
PS
B.L.M.
Quote from: mamselle on November 16, 2022, 10:20:14 AM
I'm starting to wonder--given the dogfight erupting in the House--if the Democratic not only won control of the Senate, but, indirectly, of the Congress as well.
Seems like the GOP won just enough rope to tie themselves up in knots.
M.
Good point. Will McCarthy find it easier to get things passed with cooperation from moderate D's than the MAGAs?
It depends. Biden has found some moderate Republicans to be reliable on some issues, but not others, at least in the Senate.
Maybe this what stopped the Red Wave:
https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7vjx8/almost-twice-as-many-republicans-died-from-covid-before-the-midterms-than-democrats
Biden's biggest problems will be: (1) to convince Manchin that he's actually a Democrat; (2) to convince Sinema to stop chasing butterflies and actually figure out what she hope to accomplish in the Senate - other than wobbling back and forth on whose position she supports on any given day.
QuoteAnd no, Mahagonny is not the kid with the funny accent and/or generic jeans, there are no "cool kids" beating up on him.
Mahagonny is the drunk that hangs out at the end of the bar every night, who comes over and sits down next to you and starts drunkenly spewing and ranting all sorts of grievances, conspiracies, non-sequiturs, and random semi-unpleasant stuff, with occasional intermingled pleasantries. Everyone knows him. Sometimes you just play along in a humorous and self-entertaining way, but most of the time he just makes you want to leave the bar early, because you can't simply ignore him or move to another seat.
How will I ever live this down. OMG.
Uh...try another bar (ignore function?...)
back to topic
Quote from: Anselm on November 16, 2022, 01:00:47 PM
Maybe this what stopped the Red Wave:
https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7vjx8/almost-twice-as-many-republicans-died-from-covid-before-the-midterms-than-democrats
And the youth vote.
Quote from: secundem_artem on November 16, 2022, 01:55:23 PM
Biden's biggest problems will be: (1) to convince Manchin that he's actually a Democrat; (2) to convince Sinema to stop chasing butterflies and actually figure out what she hope to accomplish in the Senate - other than wobbling back and forth on whose position she supports on any given day.
Both true. But if Warnock wins the runoff at least he'll only have to convince one of the two to get legislation passed.
Quote from: Anselm on November 16, 2022, 01:00:47 PM
Maybe this what stopped the Red Wave:
https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7vjx8/almost-twice-as-many-republicans-died-from-covid-before-the-midterms-than-democrats
Comment withdrawn
Looks like the Republicans got the House. Here is Reuters https://www.reuters.com/world/us/republicans-one-seat-away-winning-house-us-midterm-vote-2022-11-16/ (https://www.reuters.com/world/us/republicans-one-seat-away-winning-house-us-midterm-vote-2022-11-16/)
The headline laments divided government. I'd bet on gridlock, which I wholeheartedly welcome!
Cheers!
Seems like this is an optimal political outcome for Biden:
Dems won't be able to pass anything that the electorate would see as too far out there, but Biden and Schumer can still stack the judiciary in a way that will make the base happy, while maybe passing some bipartisan legislation here and there. In the meantime, Rs in the house will constantly remind the electorate how crazy they are, taking brief breaks from that to fight with one other. And even if McCarthy is somehow able to keep his colleagues from acting on their own worst impulses (unlikely), Trump will be in full swing.
Biden really couldn't ask for a better set-up for the 2024 election (assuming he plans to run).
Optimal political setup for the republicans for 2024, liberals continue thinking their impressions are the the impressions of the electorate.
ETA:
QuoteMahagonny's (roughly speaking) "Trump may be a horrible human being, but his actual policies were pretty middle-of-the-road Republican" isn't an unheard of argument. I think there's some truth to it, although my take (and perhaps history's) is a bit different. This is a pretty even-handed account of Trump's day-to-day in-your-face bigotry coupled with his actual (often indeed pretty racist) policies, with the section "Housing" being particularly informative:
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/01/trump-black-americans-policies-433744
Trump was, for four years, a really Useful Idiot. He was useful to McConnell, until he decidedly wasn't, going from Useful to Useless Idiot. And he was useful to Putin, who didn't need to invade anyone to create chaos in the U.S. as long as Trump was President. For a day or two, he was even useful to Schumer and Pelosi as they forged the infrastructure bill. The key was basically say many, many nice things about Trump, and let him believe he came up with the great idea (Dems probably should have tried that more often).
And finally, with regard to banning, leaving, and comparisons to WritingProf, well, WritingProf got a kick out of taking the piss, until he didn't. If that's what's happening with you, Mahagonny, then vaya con Dios.
It must be accurate anaylsis, free of spin. Politico published it. Besides, it says 'fact check' at the top.
But thank you for this. It's interesting. I did better than Wilfred Reilly, I think it was, did when he asked ibram Kendi whether a policy that helps black Americans economically while helping white Americans even more would be racist and unacceptable. And the genius next door replied something like 'let me give that some thought. I'll have an answer for you later on.'
Yes, my point was the policies were not radical. No one got put back in chains and republican policies became more popular among voters of color under Trump than they had been in the recent past. Either that, or they just found him more likable than Mitt Romney or John McCain...?
CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2016/10/05/politics/obama-race-relations-poll/index.html
Quote from: mahagonny on November 17, 2022, 04:48:15 AM
Optimal political setup for the republicans for 2024, liberals continue thinking their impressions are the the impressions of the electorate.
Sure, that worked out great for Rs over the last week
QuoteBiden really couldn't ask for a better set-up for the 2024 election (assuming he plans to run).
Yes, it's a Democratic Party victory in disguise.
Damn good disguise, as Churchill said when his wife suggested the 1945 Conservative election loss might be a victory in disguise.
Though he'd have to worry about sounding a bit too much like Warren and some others, he's in decent shape, all things considered. Think of how much worse of a position he'd be in if (a) the Republicans really had a wave and (b) inflation numbers from last week had shown increases instead of decreases. Obviously things could have been better, and the "Dems look good and Trump et al look bad" line is definitely spin that won't necessarily be as obvious when the next Congress gets going.
Quote from: dismalist on November 17, 2022, 08:11:49 AM
QuoteBiden really couldn't ask for a better set-up for the 2024 election (assuming he plans to run).
Yes, it's a Democratic Party victory in disguise.
Damn good disguise, as Churchill said when his wife suggested the 1945 Conservative election loss might be a victory in disguise.
Not really in disguise. Dems picked up governorships, state majorites, and maybe a senate seat.
By all rights, there should have been a red wave. Inflation is soaring. The price of gas is soaring. Both financial crises feed into each other. Wages cannot keep up. None of this is directly Biden's fault, but he has not been terribly proactive or he has been slow to act. People usually take out their frustrations on the incumbent party at midterms. But this is not what happened. Somehow the NY Dems blew it big time, otherwise this would have been a pretty good blue sweep.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 17, 2022, 09:25:18 AM
By all rights, there should have been a red wave. Inflation is soaring. The price of gas is soaring. Both financial crises feed into each other. Wages cannot keep up. None of this is directly Biden's fault, but he has not been terribly proactive or he has been slow to act. People usually take out their frustrations on the incumbent party at midterms. But this is not what happened. Somehow the NY Dems blew it big time, otherwise this would have been a pretty good blue sweep.
Just saw gas for $2.99/gal.
Quote from: nebo113 on November 17, 2022, 11:47:11 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 17, 2022, 09:25:18 AM
By all rights, there should have been a red wave. Inflation is soaring. The price of gas is soaring. Both financial crises feed into each other. Wages cannot keep up. None of this is directly Biden's fault, but he has not been terribly proactive or he has been slow to act. People usually take out their frustrations on the incumbent party at midterms. But this is not what happened. Somehow the NY Dems blew it big time, otherwise this would have been a pretty good blue sweep.
Just saw gas for $2.99/gal.
As long as Americans insist on driving enormous environmental crime scenes that get 8 miles per gallon, I have ZERO sympathy for those who howl about the price of gas. My parents brought up 3 kids in the back seat of something the size of a Chevy Malibu. Ain't no reason on earth why families with 2 kids need a Suburban and similar sized vehicles.
I wasn't going to mention it because Clean told me to shut up on his "What's the price of gas in your neighborhood" thread, but now Nebo brought it up on this thread, saying:
QuoteJust saw gas for $2.99/gal.
Adjusted for overall inflation, the price of gas in the current Ukrainian war episode never reached prices seen in the late 'seventies, in 2008/09, or 2010/15.
Perhaps the voters are wiser than the media.
Edit: A date.
Quote from: dismalist on November 16, 2022, 06:59:03 PM
Looks like the Republicans got the House. Here is Reuters https://www.reuters.com/world/us/republicans-one-seat-away-winning-house-us-midterm-vote-2022-11-16/ (https://www.reuters.com/world/us/republicans-one-seat-away-winning-house-us-midterm-vote-2022-11-16/)
The headline laments divided government. I'd bet on gridlock, which I wholeheartedly welcome!
Cheers!
A dissenting economic-based opinion:https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/17/opinions/midterm-elections-us-economy-zandi/index.html
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 17, 2022, 02:21:54 PM
Quote from: dismalist on November 16, 2022, 06:59:03 PM
Looks like the Republicans got the House. Here is Reuters https://www.reuters.com/world/us/republicans-one-seat-away-winning-house-us-midterm-vote-2022-11-16/ (https://www.reuters.com/world/us/republicans-one-seat-away-winning-house-us-midterm-vote-2022-11-16/)
The headline laments divided government. I'd bet on gridlock, which I wholeheartedly welcome!
Cheers!
A dissenting economic-based opinion:https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/17/opinions/midterm-elections-us-economy-zandi/index.html
Oh, pshaw! There won't be a big fiscal expansion or contraction, which is fine, while the Federal Reserve does it's thing with interest rate, which is important and has nothing to do with the government in the immediate future.
More fundamentally, all this economic claptrap from journalists appears to believe that we are in a Great Depression, and that macro policy is what matters. We are not in a Great Depression!
Quote from: dismalist on November 17, 2022, 02:30:17 PM
More fundamentally, all this economic claptrap from journalists appears to believe that we are in a Great Depression, and that macro policy is what matters. We are not in a Great Depression!
The link I posted was essentially quotes from a Moody's analyst though. Not a journalist.
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 17, 2022, 02:36:58 PM
Quote from: dismalist on November 17, 2022, 02:30:17 PM
More fundamentally, all this economic claptrap from journalists appears to believe that we are in a Great Depression, and that macro policy is what matters. We are not in a Great Depression!
The link I posted was essentially quotes from a Moody's analyst though. Not a journalist.
Moody's analysts are trying to make money. It looks to me like merely blabbing about these things is sufficient. Maybe it's just entertainment.
I repeat: We are not in a Great Depression.
https://www.hoodedutilitarian.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/af3237e05db8012ee3bf00163e41dd5b.gif
Quote from: dismalist on November 16, 2022, 06:59:03 PM
Looks like the Republicans got the House. Here is Reuters https://www.reuters.com/world/us/republicans-one-seat-away-winning-house-us-midterm-vote-2022-11-16/ (https://www.reuters.com/world/us/republicans-one-seat-away-winning-house-us-midterm-vote-2022-11-16/)
The headline laments divided government. I'd bet on gridlock, which I wholeheartedly welcome!
Cheers!
'A good day in government isn't getting a good thing done. It's preventing a bad thing from being done.' - Bob Dole
Pelosi all done. Where's my martini shaker?
Republicans in the House getting right to it:
"Monday, right-wing lawmakers including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia extracted a promise that their leaders would investigate Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Justice Department for their treatment of defendants jailed in connection with the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol."
I'm sure this is exactly what the median voter wants.
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 17, 2022, 05:18:10 PM
Republicans in the House getting right to it:
"Monday, right-wing lawmakers including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia extracted a promise that their leaders would investigate Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Justice Department for their treatment of defendants jailed in connection with the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol."
I'm sure this is exactly what the median voter wants.
No, they want more well known racist black violent career criminals released on $1000 cash or no cash bail so they can drive their SUV into crowd of white people a week after running over a relative with that same vehicle, causing seven fatalities and dozens of injuries. And then they want to read the press and wokeademics describing the massacre as 'an out-of-control vehicle accident.' And that way we know we are striving for equity (fairness). Waukesha, WI
con't
[taking a break from sarcasm]
Things are happening already.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/saraharnold/2022/11/17/pa-house-impeaches-philadelphia-da-over-his-policies-that-spiked-crime-n2616093
In other news, https://www.citizen-times.com/story/news/2022/11/16/madison-cawthorn-vacates-offices-before-end-of-term-congress-house-of-representatives/69653520007/
QuoteMadison Cawthorn vacates offices before end of term; constituents' calls go unanswered
Quote from: mahagonny on November 17, 2022, 05:31:47 PM
they want more well known racist black violent career criminals released on $1000 cash or no cash bail so they can drive their SUV into crowd of white people
True colors showing here, my poor friend Mahag?
Mahagonny, get help. I mean that sincerely.
Again, I'm glad that the voting, whatever the results, went as smoothly as it did. That's a great relief right there. Hopefully future elections will occur at a lower temperature.
Quote from: apl68 on November 18, 2022, 07:34:00 AM
Again, I'm glad that the voting, whatever the results, went as smoothly as it did. That's a great relief right there. Hopefully future elections will occur at a lower temperature.
That's up to the GOP. MTG is already frothing about investigations and impeachments.
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 16, 2022, 08:32:16 PM
Seems like this is an optimal political outcome for Biden:
Dems won't be able to pass anything that the electorate would see as too far out there, but Biden and Schumer can still stack the judiciary in a way that will make the base happy, while maybe passing some bipartisan legislation here and there. In the meantime, Rs in the house will constantly remind the electorate how crazy they are, taking brief breaks from that to fight with one other. And even if McCarthy is somehow able to keep his colleagues from acting on their own worst impulses (unlikely), Trump will be in full swing.
Biden really couldn't ask for a better set-up for the 2024 election (assuming he plans to run).
Yep, Rs will have the mirror image of the narrow majority Ds have had for the past 2 years, and it was only the remarkable caucus wrangling skills of Speaker Pelosi that made it possible to do anything with a narrow majority in a big tent. To put it mildly, McCarthy is no Pelosi, and a lot his members are running around naked outside the tent.
Quote from: apl68 on November 18, 2022, 07:34:00 AM
Again, I'm glad that the voting, whatever the results, went as smoothly as it did. That's a great relief right there. Hopefully future elections will occur at a lower temperature.
Agreed. This was a good election, all things considered: Election deniers lost and, in most cases, conceded, there was no political violence and little voter intimidation, and turnout was high, suggesting that policies that many considered to be voter suppression did not have that effect.
Quote from: Puget on November 18, 2022, 08:33:08 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on November 16, 2022, 08:32:16 PM
Seems like this is an optimal political outcome for Biden:
Dems won't be able to pass anything that the electorate would see as too far out there, but Biden and Schumer can still stack the judiciary in a way that will make the base happy, while maybe passing some bipartisan legislation here and there. In the meantime, Rs in the house will constantly remind the electorate how crazy they are, taking brief breaks from that to fight with one other. And even if McCarthy is somehow able to keep his colleagues from acting on their own worst impulses (unlikely), Trump will be in full swing.
Biden really couldn't ask for a better set-up for the 2024 election (assuming he plans to run).
Yep, Rs will have the mirror image of the narrow majority Ds have had for the past 2 years, and it was only the remarkable caucus wrangling skills of Speaker Pelosi that made it possible to do anything with a narrow majority in a big tent. To put it mildly, McCarthy is no Pelosi, and a lot his members are running around naked outside the tent.
I wonder if we will be able to pass even more progressive legislation. Gen-Z is coming up and much more progressive.
And the "average American" might not like Socialism or Big Government or Union Special Interests, but they do like good wages, affordable food and fuel prices, affordable health care, Social Security, good schools for their kids and all that sort of stuff that comes with it.
The overlooked reason the Latino vote is turning right (https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/elections-2022-shows-latino-vote-moving-right-rcna57553)
Quote
The overall arc of progress suggests that more Hispanics are going to be voting conservative in the future.
Quote
Political conservatism means just that — maintaining institutions and traditions — which helps explain why the wealthy vote more conservatively than the poor and the oppressed, who understandably long for change. There are certainly many Hispanic Americans who are poor and oppressed, but there's considerable evidence that many are doing better than ever.
Recent analysts are suggesting the a more accurate phrase may be "Latino voters," since, as you observe, there is more apparent segmentation now, with no one "bloc" of votes to be called "The Latino vote," going forward (which was always a bit paternalistic anyway...).
M.