Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On September 19 2024 05:53 GreenHorizons wrote: While I generally agree with Simberto about the billionaires, Democrats won't substantively do that because plenty of the billionaires donate just as much to Democrats, Trump being a poignant example of that for most of his despicable life. It's an ostensibly rational thing to do as a billionaire.
Democrats already decided what they will "talk about" in this context and it was supposed to be bodily autonomy. That flopped because (among other reasons) even a cursory examination of their rhetoric exposed it as cynically hollow at best.
Democrats intended to spend the week talking about Amber Thurman and presumably some of them are, it's just not what the national Conversation is focused on because Democrats can't help themselves and Republicans are better at controlling it (in part because of bipartisan efforts to insist those two are and will always be people's only choices)
I think Massachusetts could be pointed to as an example here. They made a very small change. Way less than what I consider a moral imperative. And they still raked in a huge amount of money.
Similar to how a lot of our current tax structure issues are from a slow and steady erosion of reasonable taxation, I think it’s reasonable to recognize pulling it back an inch is still an enormous gain. If Oregon suddenly had another billion dollars, it would help a ton of people.
This isn’t just incrementalism. The cultural impact of “we raised taxes on rich people and it was a good thing long term” is really important. It makes a big difference. The working class will keep losing the culture war being pushed by the ruling class until we have something to point at as evidence or recent, direct, targeted taxation.
Edit: to more clearly specify my point: Cletus isn’t on the fence right now. Cletus firmly believes it is better to give billionaires a tax break. We need to win over Cletus. We need to show him his life can be better by taxing the rich. The working class has already been successfully divided and we’ll never get to a good place if we don’t win over Cletus first. Cletus will fight against his own wellbeing to the death until we change his mind.
I believe the US has passed a point of no return and it's just taking the population a while to come to grips with what that actually means.
Basically there's plenty of space for Democrats (social and otherwise) to occupy between being as bad as Republicans and actually fixing things (even to their standards, let alone objectively fixing things). They have no intention of leaving that space and their supporters have no intention of forcing them to, so they won't. Short of something extremely drastic happening outside of their control, the course is set to a destination none of us (even the people supporting the parties) actually wants.
What you're suggesting isn't new, people have been telling Democrats that for decades. One of the key roadblocks is that the US is a capitalist system and capitalists run capitalist systems, not politicians or the masses. What people most commonly know as "regulatory capture" isn't a bug, it's a feature and an inevitability of capitalist systems.
I agree in every single way. But here is the issue: Cletus is a proud capitalist. He identifies with capitalism because he has been victimized to such an extreme that all he has is his admiration of billionaires to keep him from killing himself. He is ride or die capitalism. He loves it. We need to help change his mind.
What I am saying is that Cletus will swat your hand away when you try to give him a better life through an alternative economic/political system. He will fight against it. Cletus is like 40% of voters. Until he is on board, its dead. We need to find ways to show him his life can be better.
Also, generations of inbreeding have completely eliminated his inner monologue. He's literally not capable of modeling future events in his head. He can only experience the canned hamburger he is eating at a given moment. The only way to change his mind is for him to experience the sensation of purchasing more canned hamburgers with the same paycheck.
Or, alternatively, drag his bumpkin ass along with the rest of American society or leave him to rot. Being beholden to the minority needs to fucking stop and we need to progress forward at any and all costs. If you can't evolve, then you choose to die. Simple 1's and 0's.
That works if it is a small minority. But in the US, it is a large minority. They managed to get a president elected only a few years back, and have had the majority in a lot of courts since then. You can ignore 10% of the population (as long as they are not too violent), but you cannot really ignore 40%.
And regarding your last point, murdering 40% of the population generally doesn't make people believe that you are the good guys. It is also pretty ambitious, i think Stalin, Hitler and Mao all set their goals far lower. Even the Khmer Rouge only managed 25%.
Don't take the word die literally. It's just meant to illustrate that if they fight or refuse to evolve with society, then we leave them to live how they want and they no longer have access to the rest of what society has established and built. They don't want healthcare to be affordable and universal? Then they can't access what the rest has access to. Intentionally and consciously voting against their own interests and hindering that of others shouldn't be tolerated. It's some kind of sick perversion to gleefully put lives in danger because of some conspiracy or willfully engrained ignorance of the world at large. This isn't a game. This is real life. And should carry real consequences for continually doing things of this nature. Dems have a very long way to go in order to get their morals where they say they are, but at least they're not voting against IVF because "reasons" or other life-saving/bettering policies. It's all nonsense.
I don't see an actual policy in this that isn't problematic. It's speaking to a problem with knowledge and education (Cletus is ignorant and stupid) and talking of solving it with... exclusion? denial to services? seems like a good path to big brother.
Those kinds of things are bad even if you could somehow singularly target Cletuses. I don't think you could.
Also, from reading oBlade or introvert, the issue doesn't seem like they're inbred and moronic. oBlade's core frustration with the dog-eating thing is that the government granted migrants asylum and then gave them a place to live. Racist rhetoric aside it seems somewhat sensible to oppose that. Less government control and intervention is seen as a good thing, voting for the incompetent potato has logic to it.
In short, I don't think it's useful to follow this 'Republican voters are cletuses and we should remove them from the country" line.
On September 19 2024 05:53 GreenHorizons wrote: While I generally agree with Simberto about the billionaires, Democrats won't substantively do that because plenty of the billionaires donate just as much to Democrats, Trump being a poignant example of that for most of his despicable life. It's an ostensibly rational thing to do as a billionaire.
Democrats already decided what they will "talk about" in this context and it was supposed to be bodily autonomy. That flopped because (among other reasons) even a cursory examination of their rhetoric exposed it as cynically hollow at best.
Democrats intended to spend the week talking about Amber Thurman and presumably some of them are, it's just not what the national Conversation is focused on because Democrats can't help themselves and Republicans are better at controlling it (in part because of bipartisan efforts to insist those two are and will always be people's only choices)
I think Massachusetts could be pointed to as an example here. They made a very small change. Way less than what I consider a moral imperative. And they still raked in a huge amount of money.
Similar to how a lot of our current tax structure issues are from a slow and steady erosion of reasonable taxation, I think it’s reasonable to recognize pulling it back an inch is still an enormous gain. If Oregon suddenly had another billion dollars, it would help a ton of people.
This isn’t just incrementalism. The cultural impact of “we raised taxes on rich people and it was a good thing long term” is really important. It makes a big difference. The working class will keep losing the culture war being pushed by the ruling class until we have something to point at as evidence or recent, direct, targeted taxation.
Edit: to more clearly specify my point: Cletus isn’t on the fence right now. Cletus firmly believes it is better to give billionaires a tax break. We need to win over Cletus. We need to show him his life can be better by taxing the rich. The working class has already been successfully divided and we’ll never get to a good place if we don’t win over Cletus first. Cletus will fight against his own wellbeing to the death until we change his mind.
I believe the US has passed a point of no return and it's just taking the population a while to come to grips with what that actually means.
Basically there's plenty of space for Democrats (social and otherwise) to occupy between being as bad as Republicans and actually fixing things (even to their standards, let alone objectively fixing things). They have no intention of leaving that space and their supporters have no intention of forcing them to, so they won't. Short of something extremely drastic happening outside of their control, the course is set to a destination none of us (even the people supporting the parties) actually wants.
What you're suggesting isn't new, people have been telling Democrats that for decades. One of the key roadblocks is that the US is a capitalist system and capitalists run capitalist systems, not politicians or the masses. What people most commonly know as "regulatory capture" isn't a bug, it's a feature and an inevitability of capitalist systems.
I agree in every single way. But here is the issue: Cletus is a proud capitalist. He identifies with capitalism because he has been victimized to such an extreme that all he has is his admiration of billionaires to keep him from killing himself. He is ride or die capitalism. He loves it. We need to help change his mind.
What I am saying is that Cletus will swat your hand away when you try to give him a better life through an alternative economic/political system. He will fight against it. Cletus is like 40% of voters. Until he is on board, its dead. We need to find ways to show him his life can be better.
It's hard enough to change the minds of progressive Democrats to not support genocide. Maybe at some point focusing on changing "Cletuses'" minds makes sense, but now isn't really it.
Whether it’s Karen saying “but why don’t they just work their way through college like I did before marrying your father” or Cletus saying “Elon needs money for freedom”, it’s the same issue. The thought experiments don’t work on them. They need to have the experience first. They need evidence.
I understand your point and I don’t want to pretend I am not seeing the issue. The issue is real and you’re right. But the way you are framing this issue implies some kind of new situation. It isn’t new. These Karens (got mine democrats) and Cletuses are not budging. It’s not reasonable to say we need to just keep this up. We can keep your messaging while also doing things like what Massachusetts has done and what Oregon is trying to do.
Can I just ask you directly? Do you agree there is an issue of people not being convinced? People can hear what you’re saying and think you’re wrong? And they just keep sucking that capitalist dick because it’s a part of their identity?
I’m saying the only way to erode that is with evidence and to give them a chance to feel the impact. We can’t just talk to them. It’s not enough. And we can do both.
This discussion was basically thoroughly hashed in the 60's/70's and working with Democrats (and their Republican friends) to do what you're suggesting was what won.
50+ years in, I think we can safely say it's clearly not working under their guidance.
I think we're talking past each other so I will try to be more clear.
Today, American voters would vote against the ideas you and I both agree are necessary. I am asking you how we change their minds. I am saying I think baby steps are necessary to give people a chance to witness those benefits.
What are you saying is the better path to changing people's minds?
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
In before he becomes their next presidential nominee >.>
Many Republicans just don't care about hypocrisy or being Nazis or publicly-being-anti-trans-while-privately-enjoying-trans-porn. The things that matter most to them are undoing progress and undermining Democratic (and democratic) values.
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
Because in America a party doesn't get to chose who runs in their name.
(The party has apparently been calling for him to step down, he refused. No idea if it was because of this or for other reasons)
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
In before he becomes their next presidential nominee >.>
Many Republicans just don't care about hypocrisy or being Nazis or publicly-being-anti-trans-while-privately-enjoying-trans-porn. The things that matter most to them are undoing progress and undermining Democratic (and democratic) values.
I understand your view.
I do not understand the Republican view because I don't believe any of them would agree that your last sentence is there reason. I was hoping one of them could answer because this is a hard one to believe it is some deep state conspiracy against a solid Christian, with solid morals. It is pretty clear who this man is and what is he about.
The answer might end up being a round about way of saying what you said in the sort of he's better than the other guy thing. But I'm hoping for something more insightful and interesting. Or perhaps even, this is not someone who holds my/our values and we need to get rid of him right away.
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
Because in America a party doesn't get to chose who runs in their name.
(The party has apparently been calling for him to step down, he refused. No idea if it was because of this or for other reasons)
Didn't the dems kick the guy who they found a bar of gold in his house? I get that maybe they can't get him off the ballot but they could certainly pull all support, which would more or less force him to retire. Heck I'm sure they could even offer him a pretty sweet golden parachute.
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
Because in America a party doesn't get to chose who runs in their name.
(The party has apparently been calling for him to step down, he refused. No idea if it was because of this or for other reasons)
Because it's now public that he's into trans porn? Because it sure isn't due to him being a Nazi.
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
Same reason the church pastor gets a pass. Same reason the high school football coach gets a pass. Same Reason the sheriff gets a pass. There is a fundamental admiration of authority and a compulsion to identify with leaders. This is how we end up with so many situations that appear to be sunk cost fallacy stuff. It’s not. It’s reverence of authority and a commitment to hold the line and protect their leaders because they identify with their leaders.
However, this is way out there. It’s very conclusive evidence. It’s really damning and extreme. It feels like this will manage to overcome everything I described above. But I’ve been shocked before. Too early to say how this will go.
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
In before he becomes their next presidential nominee >.>
Many Republicans just don't care about hypocrisy or being Nazis or publicly-being-anti-trans-while-privately-enjoying-trans-porn. The things that matter most to them are undoing progress and undermining Democratic (and democratic) values.
I understand your view.
I do not understand the Republican view because I don't believe any of them would agree that your last sentence is there reason. I was hoping one of them could answer because this is a hard one to believe it is some deep state conspiracy against a solid Christian, with solid morals. It is pretty clear who this man is and what is he about.
The answer might end up being a round about way of saying what you said in the sort of he's better than the other guy thing. But I'm hoping for something more insightful and interesting. Or perhaps even, this is not someone who holds my/our values and we need to get rid of him right away.
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
Because in America a party doesn't get to chose who runs in their name.
(The party has apparently been calling for him to step down, he refused. No idea if it was because of this or for other reasons)
Didn't the dems kick the guy who they found a bar of gold in his house? I get that maybe they can't get him off the ballot but they could certainly pull all support, which would more or less force him to retire. Heck I'm sure they could even offer him a pretty sweet golden parachute.
No, dems did not kick out their criminal senator, in fact he was reelected after a hung jury once before. However, he lost his primary this time. That's the difference here. Robinson already won the primary, he can't be removed that easily. He's also the sitting LG who won in 2020 while the GOP candidate for governor lost. Pretty normal for an LG to win a primary foe thr top spot, running for governor is basically the only thing some of these LGs do anyways. He may have had controversy in the last few years, but he did win while the other guy lost, normally voters take that into consideration.
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
In before he becomes their next presidential nominee >.>
Many Republicans just don't care about hypocrisy or being Nazis or publicly-being-anti-trans-while-privately-enjoying-trans-porn. The things that matter most to them are undoing progress and undermining Democratic (and democratic) values.
I understand your view.
I do not understand the Republican view because I don't believe any of them would agree that your last sentence is there reason. I was hoping one of them could answer because this is a hard one to believe it is some deep state conspiracy against a solid Christian, with solid morals. It is pretty clear who this man is and what is he about.
The answer might end up being a round about way of saying what you said in the sort of he's better than the other guy thing. But I'm hoping for something more insightful and interesting. Or perhaps even, this is not someone who holds my/our values and we need to get rid of him right away.
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
Because in America a party doesn't get to chose who runs in their name.
(The party has apparently been calling for him to step down, he refused. No idea if it was because of this or for other reasons)
Didn't the dems kick the guy who they found a bar of gold in his house? I get that maybe they can't get him off the ballot but they could certainly pull all support, which would more or less force him to retire. Heck I'm sure they could even offer him a pretty sweet golden parachute.
No, dems did not kick out their criminal senator, in fact he was reelected after a hung jury once before. However, he lost his primary this time. That's the difference here. Robinson already won the primary, he can't be removed that easily. He's also the sitting LG who won in 2020 while the GOP candidate for governor lost. Pretty normal for an LG to win a primary foe thr top spot, running for governor is basically the only thing some of these LGs do anyways. He may have had controversy in the last few years, but he did win while the other guy lost, normally voters take that into consideration.
This can all be true while “I’m a Nazi” perhaps warrants a unique approach. If Trump tried to rape someone on live TV while yelling racial slurs, live broadcasted, of course the Republican Party would force him to be replaced. It’s not that rules or whatever existing on some book somewhere means some invisible wall will prevent changes. It’s all just humans making decisions.
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
In before he becomes their next presidential nominee >.>
Many Republicans just don't care about hypocrisy or being Nazis or publicly-being-anti-trans-while-privately-enjoying-trans-porn. The things that matter most to them are undoing progress and undermining Democratic (and democratic) values.
I understand your view.
I do not understand the Republican view because I don't believe any of them would agree that your last sentence is there reason. I was hoping one of them could answer because this is a hard one to believe it is some deep state conspiracy against a solid Christian, with solid morals. It is pretty clear who this man is and what is he about.
The answer might end up being a round about way of saying what you said in the sort of he's better than the other guy thing. But I'm hoping for something more insightful and interesting. Or perhaps even, this is not someone who holds my/our values and we need to get rid of him right away.
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
Because in America a party doesn't get to chose who runs in their name.
(The party has apparently been calling for him to step down, he refused. No idea if it was because of this or for other reasons)
Didn't the dems kick the guy who they found a bar of gold in his house? I get that maybe they can't get him off the ballot but they could certainly pull all support, which would more or less force him to retire. Heck I'm sure they could even offer him a pretty sweet golden parachute.
No, dems did not kick out their criminal senator, in fact he was reelected after a hung jury once before. However, he lost his primary this time. That's the difference here. Robinson already won the primary, he can't be removed that easily. He's also the sitting LG who won in 2020 while the GOP candidate for governor lost. Pretty normal for an LG to win a primary foe thr top spot, running for governor is basically the only thing some of these LGs do anyways. He may have had controversy in the last few years, but he did win while the other guy lost, normally voters take that into consideration.
This can all be true while “I’m a Nazi” perhaps warrants a unique approach. If Trump tried to rape someone on live TV while yelling racial slurs, live broadcasted, of course the Republican Party would force him to be replaced. It’s not that rules or whatever existing on some book somewhere means some invisible wall will prevent changes. It’s all just humans making decisions.
No they wouldn't. They'd blame Aunt Tifa and Biden and the media for making it such a big deal and anyway what about jobs. The Republican Party has tried to turn on Trump countless times but he's made them his bitch.
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
In before he becomes their next presidential nominee >.>
Many Republicans just don't care about hypocrisy or being Nazis or publicly-being-anti-trans-while-privately-enjoying-trans-porn. The things that matter most to them are undoing progress and undermining Democratic (and democratic) values.
I understand your view.
I do not understand the Republican view because I don't believe any of them would agree that your last sentence is there reason. I was hoping one of them could answer because this is a hard one to believe it is some deep state conspiracy against a solid Christian, with solid morals. It is pretty clear who this man is and what is he about.
The answer might end up being a round about way of saying what you said in the sort of he's better than the other guy thing. But I'm hoping for something more insightful and interesting. Or perhaps even, this is not someone who holds my/our values and we need to get rid of him right away.
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
Because in America a party doesn't get to chose who runs in their name.
(The party has apparently been calling for him to step down, he refused. No idea if it was because of this or for other reasons)
Didn't the dems kick the guy who they found a bar of gold in his house? I get that maybe they can't get him off the ballot but they could certainly pull all support, which would more or less force him to retire. Heck I'm sure they could even offer him a pretty sweet golden parachute.
No, dems did not kick out their criminal senator, in fact he was reelected after a hung jury once before. However, he lost his primary this time. That's the difference here. Robinson already won the primary, he can't be removed that easily. He's also the sitting LG who won in 2020 while the GOP candidate for governor lost. Pretty normal for an LG to win a primary foe thr top spot, running for governor is basically the only thing some of these LGs do anyways. He may have had controversy in the last few years, but he did win while the other guy lost, normally voters take that into consideration.
Do you think the Republican Party should still support him? If you lived there would you still vote for him? And is this because the Dems are just that bad that having a guy who describes himself as a Nazi is better? Or do you not believe the report?
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
In before he becomes their next presidential nominee >.>
Many Republicans just don't care about hypocrisy or being Nazis or publicly-being-anti-trans-while-privately-enjoying-trans-porn. The things that matter most to them are undoing progress and undermining Democratic (and democratic) values.
I understand your view.
I do not understand the Republican view because I don't believe any of them would agree that your last sentence is there reason. I was hoping one of them could answer because this is a hard one to believe it is some deep state conspiracy against a solid Christian, with solid morals. It is pretty clear who this man is and what is he about.
The answer might end up being a round about way of saying what you said in the sort of he's better than the other guy thing. But I'm hoping for something more insightful and interesting. Or perhaps even, this is not someone who holds my/our values and we need to get rid of him right away.
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
Because in America a party doesn't get to chose who runs in their name.
(The party has apparently been calling for him to step down, he refused. No idea if it was because of this or for other reasons)
Didn't the dems kick the guy who they found a bar of gold in his house? I get that maybe they can't get him off the ballot but they could certainly pull all support, which would more or less force him to retire. Heck I'm sure they could even offer him a pretty sweet golden parachute.
No, dems did not kick out their criminal senator, in fact he was reelected after a hung jury once before. However, he lost his primary this time. That's the difference here. Robinson already won the primary, he can't be removed that easily. He's also the sitting LG who won in 2020 while the GOP candidate for governor lost. Pretty normal for an LG to win a primary foe thr top spot, running for governor is basically the only thing some of these LGs do anyways. He may have had controversy in the last few years, but he did win while the other guy lost, normally voters take that into consideration.
This can all be true while “I’m a Nazi” perhaps warrants a unique approach. If Trump tried to rape someone on live TV while yelling racial slurs, live broadcasted, of course the Republican Party would force him to be replaced. It’s not that rules or whatever existing on some book somewhere means some invisible wall will prevent changes. It’s all just humans making decisions.
I strongly disagree with you here. They would insist that the rape was fake and then laugh that Dems are getting triggered by "fake" rape. Trump has already raped people and said/did racist things, and he still has an overwhelming majority of Republican support. The "Nazi" thing also isn't anything new, considering JD Vance thought Trump was Hitler. Maybe Mark Robinson gets kicked out of the party, but it wouldn't be because Republicans suddenly care about anything they've already given Trump a pass on.
Given that "Maybe that's what this country needs" was the reaction to 'Dictator day one', I won't be too surprised if a self-proclaimed nazi gets a similar reaction.
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
In before he becomes their next presidential nominee >.>
Many Republicans just don't care about hypocrisy or being Nazis or publicly-being-anti-trans-while-privately-enjoying-trans-porn. The things that matter most to them are undoing progress and undermining Democratic (and democratic) values.
I understand your view.
I do not understand the Republican view because I don't believe any of them would agree that your last sentence is there reason. I was hoping one of them could answer because this is a hard one to believe it is some deep state conspiracy against a solid Christian, with solid morals. It is pretty clear who this man is and what is he about.
The answer might end up being a round about way of saying what you said in the sort of he's better than the other guy thing. But I'm hoping for something more insightful and interesting. Or perhaps even, this is not someone who holds my/our values and we need to get rid of him right away.
Man another conservative who likes transgender porn. Oh, and he called himself a black Nazi. Honestly, who could've seen this coming? mildshock.jpg
This is extremely disturbing stuff and super thoroughly researched and presented. How do you not replace this guy as the Republicans? Can anyone explain why you would not cut bait?
Because in America a party doesn't get to chose who runs in their name.
(The party has apparently been calling for him to step down, he refused. No idea if it was because of this or for other reasons)
Didn't the dems kick the guy who they found a bar of gold in his house? I get that maybe they can't get him off the ballot but they could certainly pull all support, which would more or less force him to retire. Heck I'm sure they could even offer him a pretty sweet golden parachute.
No, dems did not kick out their criminal senator, in fact he was reelected after a hung jury once before. However, he lost his primary this time. That's the difference here. Robinson already won the primary, he can't be removed that easily. He's also the sitting LG who won in 2020 while the GOP candidate for governor lost. Pretty normal for an LG to win a primary foe thr top spot, running for governor is basically the only thing some of these LGs do anyways. He may have had controversy in the last few years, but he did win while the other guy lost, normally voters take that into consideration.
This can all be true while “I’m a Nazi” perhaps warrants a unique approach. If Trump tried to rape someone on live TV while yelling racial slurs, live broadcasted, of course the Republican Party would force him to be replaced. It’s not that rules or whatever existing on some book somewhere means some invisible wall will prevent changes. It’s all just humans making decisions.
I don't know what the rules are, but it's very hard for a party to remove a nominee without that nominees consent. That last sentence is very handwavy, it's more likely he simply loses the race. I don't think the party apparatus liked him anyways, it's not like they want to keep him around.
As to what they should do, idk. Each voter make their own choice to even believe the story or not. Same thing I said about that guy in Alabama (who it will be noted, did lose on a super red, very inelastic state).
Just mealy mouthed paragraphs about a literal piece of garbage. We’ve got a guy whose political opinions are worse than Uncle Ruckus, whose personal life is antithetical to everything the Republican Party claims to stand for (lol he used his email on Ashley Madison). And the best we can do is say “idk the party never liked him/knew him”.
It’s pretty obvious what Republicans should have done before and now. But ultimately they actually don’t care about these issues. The best JD Vance can do is run from reporters when asked because the entire conservative movement is so groyper coded. There’s backing your man and there’s backing Uncle Ruckus.
Not that this will make it through to you, but it's the foundation of these reports that will be called into question. I generally distrust the party apparatus, also. Republicans are so used to rediculous, double sided media garbage that it's become instinctual to distrust them. Dems, being on the other side of the media power imbalance, have a different set of problems that they deal with in a different way. Though ultimately they are on the same side so they naturally turn every GOP story into a 5 alarm fire while downplaying a dem one right up until the moment they think it will give a victory to the GOP (or another Democrat). But that's a separate thing.
On September 19 2024 05:53 GreenHorizons wrote: While I generally agree with Simberto about the billionaires, Democrats won't substantively do that because plenty of the billionaires donate just as much to Democrats, Trump being a poignant example of that for most of his despicable life. It's an ostensibly rational thing to do as a billionaire.
Democrats already decided what they will "talk about" in this context and it was supposed to be bodily autonomy. That flopped because (among other reasons) even a cursory examination of their rhetoric exposed it as cynically hollow at best.
Democrats intended to spend the week talking about Amber Thurman and presumably some of them are, it's just not what the national Conversation is focused on because Democrats can't help themselves and Republicans are better at controlling it (in part because of bipartisan efforts to insist those two are and will always be people's only choices)
I think Massachusetts could be pointed to as an example here. They made a very small change. Way less than what I consider a moral imperative. And they still raked in a huge amount of money.
Similar to how a lot of our current tax structure issues are from a slow and steady erosion of reasonable taxation, I think it’s reasonable to recognize pulling it back an inch is still an enormous gain. If Oregon suddenly had another billion dollars, it would help a ton of people.
This isn’t just incrementalism. The cultural impact of “we raised taxes on rich people and it was a good thing long term” is really important. It makes a big difference. The working class will keep losing the culture war being pushed by the ruling class until we have something to point at as evidence or recent, direct, targeted taxation.
Edit: to more clearly specify my point: Cletus isn’t on the fence right now. Cletus firmly believes it is better to give billionaires a tax break. We need to win over Cletus. We need to show him his life can be better by taxing the rich. The working class has already been successfully divided and we’ll never get to a good place if we don’t win over Cletus first. Cletus will fight against his own wellbeing to the death until we change his mind.
I believe the US has passed a point of no return and it's just taking the population a while to come to grips with what that actually means.
Basically there's plenty of space for Democrats (social and otherwise) to occupy between being as bad as Republicans and actually fixing things (even to their standards, let alone objectively fixing things). They have no intention of leaving that space and their supporters have no intention of forcing them to, so they won't. Short of something extremely drastic happening outside of their control, the course is set to a destination none of us (even the people supporting the parties) actually wants.
What you're suggesting isn't new, people have been telling Democrats that for decades. One of the key roadblocks is that the US is a capitalist system and capitalists run capitalist systems, not politicians or the masses. What people most commonly know as "regulatory capture" isn't a bug, it's a feature and an inevitability of capitalist systems.
I agree in every single way. But here is the issue: Cletus is a proud capitalist. He identifies with capitalism because he has been victimized to such an extreme that all he has is his admiration of billionaires to keep him from killing himself. He is ride or die capitalism. He loves it. We need to help change his mind.
What I am saying is that Cletus will swat your hand away when you try to give him a better life through an alternative economic/political system. He will fight against it. Cletus is like 40% of voters. Until he is on board, its dead. We need to find ways to show him his life can be better.
Also, generations of inbreeding have completely eliminated his inner monologue. He's literally not capable of modeling future events in his head. He can only experience the canned hamburger he is eating at a given moment. The only way to change his mind is for him to experience the sensation of purchasing more canned hamburgers with the same paycheck.
Or, alternatively, drag his bumpkin ass along with the rest of American society or leave him to rot. Being beholden to the minority needs to fucking stop and we need to progress forward at any and all costs. If you can't evolve, then you choose to die. Simple 1's and 0's.
That works if it is a small minority. But in the US, it is a large minority. They managed to get a president elected only a few years back, and have had the majority in a lot of courts since then. You can ignore 10% of the population (as long as they are not too violent), but you cannot really ignore 40%.
And regarding your last point, murdering 40% of the population generally doesn't make people believe that you are the good guys. It is also pretty ambitious, i think Stalin, Hitler and Mao all set their goals far lower. Even the Khmer Rouge only managed 25%.
Don't take the word die literally. It's just meant to illustrate that if they fight or refuse to evolve with society, then we leave them to live how they want and they no longer have access to the rest of what society has established and built. They don't want healthcare to be affordable and universal? Then they can't access what the rest has access to. Intentionally and consciously voting against their own interests and hindering that of others shouldn't be tolerated. It's some kind of sick perversion to gleefully put lives in danger because of some conspiracy or willfully engrained ignorance of the world at large. This isn't a game. This is real life. And should carry real consequences for continually doing things of this nature. Dems have a very long way to go in order to get their morals where they say they are, but at least they're not voting against IVF because "reasons" or other life-saving/bettering policies. It's all nonsense.
I don't see an actual policy in this that isn't problematic. It's speaking to a problem with knowledge and education (Cletus is ignorant and stupid) and talking of solving it with... exclusion? denial to services? seems like a good path to big brother.
Those kinds of things are bad even if you could somehow singularly target Cletuses. I don't think you could.
Also, from reading oBlade or introvert, the issue doesn't seem like they're inbred and moronic. oBlade's core frustration with the dog-eating thing is that the government granted migrants asylum and then gave them a place to live. Racist rhetoric aside it seems somewhat sensible to oppose that. Less government control and intervention is seen as a good thing, voting for the incompetent potato has logic to it.
In short, I don't think it's useful to follow this 'Republican voters are cletuses and we should remove them from the country" line.
The more news you consume, are you sure that this is a far fetched idea? We're reading about a black Cletus being a Nazi. Are you sure you want to leave them as voting members of society that only intends to hold us back?
Enough with the baby handling. There's nothing for these people but to drag them into the future or leave them in the past, allowing themselves to figure it out for themselves. I'm not worried about another insurrection or whatever, as I hope the next Pres has the balls/ovaries to call in the appropriate response and shut that shit down expeditiously.
On September 20 2024 09:43 Introvert wrote: Not that this will make it through to you, but it's the foundation of these reports that will be called into question. I generally distrust the party apparatus, also. Republicans are so used to rediculous, double sided media garbage that it's become instinctual to distrust them. Dems, being on the other side of the media power imbalance, have a different set of problems that they deal with in a different way. Though ultimately they are on the same side so they naturally turn every GOP story into a 5 alarm fire while downplaying a dem one right up until the moment they think it will give a victory to the GOP (or another Democrat). But that's a separate thing.
So the Republicans are going to deny everything and declare it as Fake News, even though his usernames and email addresses have been verified?
EPT
