Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2020 17:14:50 GMT
The tweet isn't pedantic. Your approach to the conversation is...  You're focusing on trees and ignoring the forest like mainstream journalists do. I've already said (twice now) that I understand how this benefits Trump and I understand the politics of it. What bothers me is how potentially damaging this stuff is, particularly if he loses in November, but even if he doesn't (I'm not following the polling; it's gonna suck regardless who wins). You had people burning ballot application letters over stuff like this, so what he says - even on Twitter - has real world consequences. We've been undermining our own election integrity over partisan politics for quite a while now by hyper-inflating voter fraud concerns (yes, it occurs but usually doesn't impact an election), foreign interference (yes it occurred, but had a very limited impact), etc. Now, we're turning that up to 11. We're creating a political culture where, at some point, the losing side isn't going to accept the result (regardless of a recount or election contest). This is bigger than who wins the 2020 election; it's bigger than Trump. It's a long-term, on-going problem with our politics, which are - frankly - spiraling downward. The longer you and I carry on a conversation, the more likely we are to agree. It's like a Godwin's law thing. Even if I don't observe I agree with you in a thread, I don't stop thinking when I walk away from the keyboard. I wasn't trying to be insulting with the pedantic comment btw ... hence the smiley face. Just observing your laser like focus on the content of Trump's tweet and providing my critique on laser like focus on anything Trump (or political in general.) Six months ago, I would have argued we were nowhere near Civil War. There wasn't enough pain. In fact I *was* arguing that with people. Now ... after the incredible damage political opportunists have done in the past 5 months (none of them Trump) ... I think it's quite possible and perhaps the only way out of this divide. We weren't even this divided when the founders launched our Revolution. So let me try to get us back to a point of disagreement. I don't blame Trump for any of this division. Nor do I hold him accountable for it. And I see people trying to blame Trump as people trying to hang Trump to pay for their sins. And I am very much against letting them all get a pass. Because to date, I don't see them learning anything from this. I see them trying to close ranks and protect themselves. Our media is the most divisive force in human history. Bar none. And for decades now the establishment political parties have been playing their games with the media and the American people. And now we're reaping what they have sown. The reaction to Trump has convinced me the only way we're going to get the American people back in charge is through revolution. Elections won't do it. Or we accept that the American people aren't in charge and don't deserve to be in charge. Which is ... ironically ... the Democrat position. Queshank |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,194
|
Post by demos on Jun 23, 2020 17:32:18 GMT
The longer you and I carry on a conversation, the more likely we are to agree. It's like a Godwin's law thing. Even if I don't observe I agree with you in a thread, I don't stop thinking when I walk away from the keyboard. I wasn't trying to be insulting with the pedantic comment btw ... hence the smiley face. Just observing your laser like focus on the content of Trump's tweet and providing my critique on laser like focus on anything Trump (or political in general.)Six months ago, I would have argued we were nowhere near Civil War. There wasn't enough pain. In fact I *was* arguing that with people. Now ... after the incredible damage political opportunists have done in the past 5 months (none of them Trump) ... I think it's quite possible and perhaps the only way out of this divide. We weren't even this divided when the founders launched our Revolution. So let me try to get us back to a point of disagreement. I don't blame Trump for any of this division. Nor do I hold him accountable for it. And I see people trying to blame Trump as people trying to hang Trump to pay for their sins. And I am very much against letting them all get a pass. Because to date, I don't see them learning anything from this. I see them trying to close ranks and protect themselves. Our media is the most divisive force in human history. Bar none. And for decades now the establishment political parties have been playing their games with the media and the American people. And now we're reaping what they have sown. The reaction to Trump has convinced me the only way we're going to get the American people back in charge is through revolution. Elections won't do it. Or we accept that the American people aren't in charge and don't deserve to be in charge. Which is ... ironically ... the Democrat position. Queshank My laser like focus on some things can get in the way of my making the more general point; I'll get around to it eventually though.  Where I do blame Trump and where he should be held accountable is pouring gas on a fire (like this mail-in ballot stuff), particularly because I doubt he actually believes some of this stuff (maybe he does, but I kinda doubt it). But who's going to hold him accountable? The party he leads who created this boogieman? Not likely. Which is what really concerns me. I think I said this on the other board in one of the police threads: what scares me is what comes after Trump. I'm a lot less worried about Trump than I am an establishment GOPer who has adopted "Trumpism" (the hardline rhetoric on foreign affairs for example) but actually has the wherewithal and capability to follow through on it and is accepted by the GOP establishment. A Tom Cotton candidacy/presidency is my nightmare. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2020 18:15:02 GMT
The longer you and I carry on a conversation, the more likely we are to agree. It's like a Godwin's law thing. Even if I don't observe I agree with you in a thread, I don't stop thinking when I walk away from the keyboard. I wasn't trying to be insulting with the pedantic comment btw ... hence the smiley face. Just observing your laser like focus on the content of Trump's tweet and providing my critique on laser like focus on anything Trump (or political in general.)Six months ago, I would have argued we were nowhere near Civil War. There wasn't enough pain. In fact I *was* arguing that with people. Now ... after the incredible damage political opportunists have done in the past 5 months (none of them Trump) ... I think it's quite possible and perhaps the only way out of this divide. We weren't even this divided when the founders launched our Revolution. So let me try to get us back to a point of disagreement. I don't blame Trump for any of this division. Nor do I hold him accountable for it. And I see people trying to blame Trump as people trying to hang Trump to pay for their sins. And I am very much against letting them all get a pass. Because to date, I don't see them learning anything from this. I see them trying to close ranks and protect themselves. Our media is the most divisive force in human history. Bar none. And for decades now the establishment political parties have been playing their games with the media and the American people. And now we're reaping what they have sown. The reaction to Trump has convinced me the only way we're going to get the American people back in charge is through revolution. Elections won't do it. Or we accept that the American people aren't in charge and don't deserve to be in charge. Which is ... ironically ... the Democrat position. Queshank My laser like focus on some things can get in the way of my making the more general point; I'll get around to it eventually though. Where I do blame Trump and where he should be held accountable is pouring gas on a fire (like this mail-in ballot stuff), particularly because I doubt he actually believes some of this stuff (maybe he does, but I kinda doubt it). But who's going to hold him accountable? The party he leads who created this boogieman? Not likely. Which is what really concerns me. I think I said this on the other board in one of the police threads: what scares me is what comes after Trump. I'm a lot less worried about Trump than I am an establishment GOPer who has adopted "Trumpism" (the hardline rhetoric on foreign affairs for example) but actually has the wherewithal and capability to follow through on it and is accepted by the GOP establishment. A Tom Cotton candidacy/presidency is my nightmare. Trump is definitely pouring gas on a fire. But it's not a fire he started. That's the point I keep coming back to. And when the stakes are this big, you use the tools at your disposal. That fire ... started over the past 60 years but fanned to a white hot heat in the past 10 to 20 ... is just one of the tools. Nobody's putting it out. So you might as well use it. Because the alternative is just letting the other side burn you alive with it. And what comes next is something I was addressing before the 2016 election. Trump is a sole proprietor. Only he can do what he's doing. The party apparatus is a franchise. They can plug any moron in there. As they're proving with Joe Biden. (Not that Joe's a moron. I *like* Joe god damnit. Just like I *liked* Hillary Clinton. But he's past his expiration date and is not in charge of this operation.) I don't think anybody picks up Trumpism and just runs with it without smoothing out *a lot* of rough edges. And at it's worst, Trumpism is just a mix of left and right wing policies from the past 100 years. Some bad, and some actually quite good. Tom Cotton doesn't have Trump's charisma or his media manipulation skills and talents. He's not going to bulldog the Republican party into submission. And he's not going to be able to lead an uprising within the party the way Trump did to crush anybody trying to smooth out those rough edges. I also don't think we should be wasting much time worrying about what comes after. The worldbreaking event is now. We're deciding between Julius Caesar or Augustus. I have seen nothing in the past 4 years to shake me from that observation. We are either going to bring down Trump (Julius) and destroy the Republic by instituting more controls over the population at the governmental level so another Julius can't happen. Or we are going to break that by re electing Trump and giving us another 4 years to figure out how to avoid authoritarianism. Queshank |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,194
|
Post by demos on Jun 23, 2020 18:28:25 GMT
I don't think anybody picks up Trumpism and just runs with it without smoothing out *a lot* of rough edges. And at it's worst, Trumpism is just a mix of left and right wing policies from the past 100 years. Some bad, and some actually quite good. Tom Cotton doesn't have Trump's charisma or his media manipulation skills and talents. He's not going to bulldog the Republican party into submission. And he's not going to be able to lead an uprising within the party the way Trump did to crush anybody trying to smooth out those rough edges. That's the thing. He doesn't have to lead an uprising or make them submit. He IS the GOP. He's Bill Kristol's creation. Notice no Republicans - like Kristol - were criticizing Tom Cotton for his op-ed to bring in the troops to deal with protesters, even though they were criticizing Trump. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2020 20:12:24 GMT
I don't think anybody picks up Trumpism and just runs with it without smoothing out *a lot* of rough edges. And at it's worst, Trumpism is just a mix of left and right wing policies from the past 100 years. Some bad, and some actually quite good. Tom Cotton doesn't have Trump's charisma or his media manipulation skills and talents. He's not going to bulldog the Republican party into submission. And he's not going to be able to lead an uprising within the party the way Trump did to crush anybody trying to smooth out those rough edges. That's the thing. He doesn't have to lead an uprising or make them submit. He IS the GOP. He's Bill Kristol's creation. Notice no Republicans - like Kristol - were criticizing Tom Cotton for his op-ed to bring in the troops to deal with protesters, even though they were criticizing Trump. But that's the thing. Bill Kristol was unable to stop Trump from becoming president in 2016. And he tried. Kristol is practically the originator of the "Never Trump" movement among Republicans. He's certainly not going to be able to sway the Republican base by supporting Tom Cotton. Kristol's conservatism has been dead for decades. Trump gave the Republican party a last gasp at life. I think the Republican party removed from Trump himself, is dead. I think the only real danger post Trump is the Republicans being in the trash heap of yesterday. If not for Trump, they would have lost 2016 handily. If the Republicans *don't* figure out a way to incorporate the workable parts of Trumpism ... his noninterventionist instincts ... his "American citizens first" push ... a drive to produce a trade economy that works for all Americans instead of the well connected ... there's no reason for anyone to vote Republican. Because everything else is already well ensconced in the Democrat party. So what's the point of "Democratic Party" spelled Republican? There was nothing really that outrageous in Tom Cotton's op ed. You're saying he said to "bring in the troops to deal with protesters" ... the same club journalists keep using to attack Trump ... but his op ed repeatedly referenced the rioters that were burning down buildings and turning over police cars. He talked about 4 police officers shot in St Louis for trying to stop rioters from throwing bricks and dumping gasoline. He referenced a retired police captain shot for trying to stop looters in a pawnshop. If Trump wasn't president, Joe Biden would have written that op ed. So I'm not sure I see that as an example of "post Trump danger" related to the Republican party. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your point? Queshank |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,194
|
Post by demos on Jun 23, 2020 20:36:39 GMT
But that's the thing. Bill Kristol was unable to stop Trump from becoming president in 2016. And he tried. Kristol is practically the originator of the "Never Trump" movement among Republicans. He's certainly not going to be able to sway the Republican base by supporting Tom Cotton. Kristol's conservatism has been dead for decades. Trump gave the Republican party a last gasp at life. I think the Republican party removed from Trump himself, is dead. I think the only real danger post Trump is the Republicans being in the trash heap of yesterday. If not for Trump, they would have lost 2016 handily. If the Republicans *don't* figure out a way to incorporate the workable parts of Trumpism ... his noninterventionist instincts ... his "American citizens first" push ... a drive to produce a trade economy that works for all Americans instead of the well connected ... there's no reason for anyone to vote Republican. Because everything else is already well ensconced in the Democrat party. So what's the point of "Democratic Party" spelled Republican? Kristol won't need to sway the base; I bring up Kristol, because he will support someone like Cotton. The establishment - even the never-Trumpers - will go along with "Trumpism" once he is gone, because there will be no obstacles to their worst foreign policy instincts. I don't know how much Trump's support is deeply committed to things like noninterventionism (much in the same way I don't know how much Trump is committed to it). And the party is adopting the more nationalist aspects of trade policy (see Hawley, etc.). The thing about Cotton's op-ed is that there was no need for the military by that point. By the time the military was being called in, especially for DC, there were pretty much peaceful protests. There was certainly nothing along the scale of the 1992 LA riots (the last time the Insurrection Act was used) that I recall. And politicians just tossing around 'let's bring in the military' and invoke the Insurrection Act bothers/concerns me as a classical liberal. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2020 22:24:53 GMT
Kristol won't need to sway the base; I bring up Kristol, because he will support someone like Cotton. The establishment - even the never-Trumpers - will go along with "Trumpism" once he is gone, because there will be no obstacles to their worst foreign policy instincts. I don't know how much Trump's support is deeply committed to things like noninterventionism (much in the same way I don't know how much Trump is committed to it). And the party is adopting the more nationalist aspects of trade policy (see Hawley, etc.). But now you need to convince me about what is bad about Trumpism divorced from Trump's twitter account (which is the source of nearly all angst vis a vis Trump coming from Kristol et al), that wasn't already bad about the Republican Party. On immigration, Trump was just trying to enforce the laws on immigration Bush the Younger signed into law in 2005. Even the "wall" idea is just an outgrowth of Democrat *and* Republican talking points from when they passed the Secure Fence Act in 2006 (and then failed to live up to their many and oft repeated promises ... which is where Trump came in.) The other night in his speech I was cringing when I heard him talk about a 1 year prison term for burning an American flag. But...shit...the Flag Protection Act of 2005 ... cosponsored by Hillary Clinton ... was far worse. 1 year in prison and $100,000 in fines. Both doubled if the gubmint owned the flag. The only new approach Trump has had has been on trade. And as regards trade policy, our trade policy pre Trump wasn't working. Trump had that right. A change was in the works whether it came from the Bernie crowd on the left, or the Trump crowd on the right. I've spent a lot of time wrestling with myself over this in the past 20 years. And ... in theory, I'm right there with you on free trade. Freer and more open trade has historically been a huge win win for both countries engaging in these agreements. But at no time in history have the disparate economies of different countries been so far apart. So we don't ever get free trade agreements. It's not possible. In practice, free trade doesn't exist anywhere in the world. And I don't buy the argument that any of these agreements are a "step in the right direction." We get managed trade agreements that pick winners and losers with the winners being the politically well connected. (Ala Carlos Slim and NAFTA.) Can you tell me what industries will be dominant in 10 years? How about 5? I bet we both can after we read a new "free trade" agreement put together by all the "free traders" (haha) in Washington. So while I understand your consternation ... it seems a little more like fear of the dark than fear of anything concrete. I don't mean that dismissively. I'm simply trying to draw out something that evokes the same reaction from me. I've been having a lot of conversations with people about the "authoratarian/personal responsibility" dynamic. If the US government had sent in the military because of people rioting, killing people and starting fires ... I wouldn't have blamed Tom Cotton. I wouldn't have blamed Trump. I'd have blamed the rioters. Actions have consequences. And I think it's a dangerous time to be tempting authoritarian actions from our government. Especially over somewhat random bullshit like these riots. Because either side of the aisle is ready to drop the hammer at a moment's notice. They just want to drop the hammer on different targets. I can't view these riots and protests out of context as "riots for justice." Because they're not. They're just people wanting to break some shit. Tom Cotton published that op ed on June 3rd. By June 3rd, 200 cities had imposed curfews because of riots, and 30 states had called up the National Guard. On June 9th, the Star Tribune was estimating to date 570 businesses in Minneapolis had been vandalized "or destroyed" with 67 burned to the ground. I don't think June 3rd was really that late in the game. You didn't really address this point I made, but do you disagree that if Trump wasn't president, a Democrat similar in beliefs to Joe Biden could have and possibly would have written the same op ed in the same cirstances? If your concern is about "our government" in general and the actions they may take post Trump ... I'm right there with you. If your concern is about the Republican Party I don't get it. Queshank |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jun 24, 2020 12:27:29 GMT
That's what he says anyway...
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
·
1h
RIGGED 2020 ELECTION: MILLIONS OF MAIL-IN BALLOTS WILL BE PRINTED BY FOREIGN COUNTRIES, AND OTHERS. IT WILL BE THE SCANDAL OF OUR TIMES!
OK....
Greg
Be prepared for a win or a loss. This way, he "never legitimately loses." |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,096
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 24, 2020 15:09:54 GMT
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,194
|
Post by demos on Jun 24, 2020 15:10:32 GMT
But now you need to convince me about what is bad about Trumpism divorced from Trump's twitter account (which is the source of nearly all angst vis a vis Trump coming from Kristol et al), that wasn't already bad about the Republican Party. That's what I mean though. Their main issues were with Trump himself and his statements about Bush, Iraq War, etc. With Trump gone, they can accept some of the more hardline, nationalist rhetoric (in some cases already have), and more concerning, actually implement it if they ever get control. Think Bolton on roids and no brake. <shudder> Some of those Democrats exist. I don't know that they would've written that op-ed though. I think enough of them sense the moment and what's going on within their own party that they wouldn't. My specific concerns about the Republican is it becoming more strident and nationalist. There's a shift coming though, and Republicans are probably about to be the minority party across much the country. That's what tempers my concern about the direction they're headed. |
|
RWB
Legend
Posts: 12,761
|
Post by RWB on Jun 24, 2020 17:21:16 GMT
That's what he says anyway...
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
·
1h
RIGGED 2020 ELECTION: MILLIONS OF MAIL-IN BALLOTS WILL BE PRINTED BY FOREIGN COUNTRIES, AND OTHERS. IT WILL BE THE SCANDAL OF OUR TIMES!
OK....
Greg
Does this mean that he will be re-elected with russian and chinese mail-in ballots? NO the Corrupt DNC has already secured those votes for Senile Joe Biden. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2020 13:50:37 GMT
But now you need to convince me about what is bad about Trumpism divorced from Trump's twitter account (which is the source of nearly all angst vis a vis Trump coming from Kristol et al), that wasn't already bad about the Republican Party. That's what I mean though. Their main issues were with Trump himself and his statements about Bush, Iraq War, etc. With Trump gone, they can accept some of the more hardline, nationalist rhetoric (in some cases already have), and more concerning, actually implement it if they ever get control. Think Bolton on roids and no brake. <shudder> Some of those Democrats exist. I don't know that they would've written that op-ed though. I think enough of them sense the moment and what's going on within their own party that they wouldn't. My specific concerns about the Republican is it becoming more strident and nationalist. There's a shift coming though, and Republicans are probably about to be the minority party across much the country. That's what tempers my concern about the direction they're headed.
And I don't see that at all. You seem to be thinking the "establishment" is going to take the party back over and use Trumpism to "fool" the base into thinking they're like them like they used "conservatism" to fool the base into thinking they're like them for so many years. I'm thinking the base is going to hang onto control.
I'm saving my concern for that "shift coming" you're referencing. Because I see almost no good coming from it.
Queshank
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,194
|
Post by demos on Jun 25, 2020 14:32:23 GMT
And I don't see that at all. You seem to be thinking the "establishment" is going to take the party back over and use Trumpism to "fool" the base into thinking they're like them like they used "conservatism" to fool the base into thinking they're like them for so many years. I'm thinking the base is going to hang onto control.
I'm saving my concern for that "shift coming" you're referencing. Because I see almost no good coming from it.
Queshank
What do we mean by the base hanging onto control though? Serious question. One good I see is the shift on foreign policy, e.g., Engel losing the other night, despite the support for the Democrat establishment (Hillary, et al). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2020 22:04:10 GMT
And I don't see that at all. You seem to be thinking the "establishment" is going to take the party back over and use Trumpism to "fool" the base into thinking they're like them like they used "conservatism" to fool the base into thinking they're like them for so many years. I'm thinking the base is going to hang onto control.
I'm saving my concern for that "shift coming" you're referencing. Because I see almost no good coming from it.
Queshank
What do we mean by the base hanging onto control though? Serious question. One good I see is the shift on foreign policy, e.g., Engel losing the other night, despite the support for the Democrat establishment (Hillary, et al). I think the American people, on both the left and the right, have been waking up to the fact that they're in charge. I think they'd forgotten that for awhile. As you're seeing with Engel losing the other night, despite all the Democratic Party support. I don't think the parties are going to have the freedom to campaign on X, Y and Z talking point anymore. The idea that the Republican base would go back to the Bolton / Wolfowitz / Bush the Younger mindset they rejected in 2016 seems illogical to me. Queshank |
|
You're focusing on trees and ignoring the forest like mainstream journalists do.
