Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by SteveFoerster, Nov 15, 2020.
Seen it. Food for thought, no doubt.
I'm well behind when it comes to maturity in understanding politics and progress in defining my own- long story, that, but it has to do with my former religiosity. I find myself comfortable with considering myself a centrist and an independent, and all of the various political orientation quizzes confirm that I'm about at center as center can be. At least, for now. I'm a little lib, a little conservative and maybe more than a little libertarian.
In that context, what Bill Maher is saying here speaks to exactly why I don't identity with the left, with the Democratic party or with the term "liberal". I mean, it's not like having Donald Trump as the gosh darn effing President of the United States was something any of us should be proud of, but it's also not like the Democrat party was offering anything attractive as an alternative.
Donald Trump always was and always would have been a culture wars president. Not a foreign policy president, not an economic policy president, not an anything we should be caring about in a president president. (side note: what a travesty that human nature brings us to that, though it turns out to be unavoidable the more one understands human psychology). His election was a big F-U to the "woke", tyrannical identity politicians with the most absurd extremist views who have been taking over every institution and making people miserable all while posturing in the name of virtue.
If that's not the end all be all of the Democratic party, ok, but it's been a very long time since I've seen anything other than that coming from them. Or from the mainstream media. Or from social media. Or from the majority of higher education institutions. Or from public education. Or from tech giants. Or from Hollywood. Or from the music industry. Or from the major TV networks.
I'm just one little guy with one little opinion, but if the Democratic party really cares about my vote, they will one of these days give me something to grasp onto to sway me away from voting for third party candidates for the rest of my life, knowing I might never be able to celebrate a political win, just to be able to sleep at night knowing that I didn't intentionally make the world a worse place to live.
Brilliantly said, MC.
And as long as we have a thread about those on the left critiquing their own movement, here's Glenn Greenwald on liberals who don't believe in freedom of speech:
This is how Nancy respects the office of the President of the United States.
Humiliating the president when the world is watching.
When the President has no respect for reality. When lies are all that comes out of that man's mouth, it is hamulating when the world watches.
OK, I recognize the Dems need to work harder, I really do. I'm also not a fan of the jerkoffs competing who's the most wokestest by coming up with brain farts like "defund the police". However, I'm not running for anything; in fact, I will not be eligible to vote till in all likelihood 2026 at the earliest. So I can say how freaking insane this is.
Because the idea of a "culture war president" is "let's get back to identity politicians by... I dunno... oh, let's kick transsexual troops out of the forces - that'll show them! Iraqui army interpreters? let's deny them asylym - that'll show the liberal academics! let's reverse Medicare extension! give new contracts to hellhole private prisons!..." - you get the idea. Kicking real people to "trigger the libs", who in most part are privileged white people themselves and won't be directly affected. And why? Because the crowd it "TRUMP 2020 [email protected]#$% YOUR FEELINGS" t-shirts had THEIR feewings huwt.
Also, when was the last time Democrats nominated a woke progressive to the highest office? Clinton, Gore, Obama, Kerry, Clinton, and now Biden - all policy nerd centrists, most DESPISED by the woke cultists. In short, Dems bent over backwards to appease you sanctimonious "independents". But no, they should appease Tucker Carlsons of the world too.
From my observations, Democratic party was always home for people with different ideologies. Good or bad they appeared to have internal struggles, this is even seen as healthy democratic process until line is crossed and some start cheating, like back in 2016 when the DNC cheated the then-75-year-old Sanders out of the presidential nomination.
Cheating Sunders but not others?
All depends if there is supporting evidence, but some people have reason to be suspicious.
Nancy has many ways to protest, but this way that you are seem to defending is unacceptable, she did more harm to the office of the President and to the institution and
disgraced her office and all of Congress.
Bill, as long as its a Democrat they can't be wrong ?
Like attacking Trump supporters yesterday. There is a lot need's to be done to heal the nation.
I'm hopeful things will calm down.
Disliking the outcome is not a reason to be suspicious.
You can be as angry as you want that voters aren't smart enough to see it your way, but Congressional Democrats just got pummeled by the voters you disdain. Spanberger is a Democrat in a swing district, so if you care about winning elections, you might want to listen to her.
I don't think Nancy's action was towards the Office of the President of the U.S. It was more so towards the office holder, DJT, who has made that esteemed office a laughing stock around the world. Respect is earned and only Trump's cult-like members respect him.
She disgraced her office and all of Congress.
They resorted to cheating Sunders why they will not cheat others?
If people are complaining and submitting affidavits, at the minimum this can be checked.
If no evidence found then dismiss etc.
Johnnie Cochran, coined a phrase that would become an enduring motto in pop culture: "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit."
I think there is a reason to be suspicious, maybe its fading away as no evidence is presented.
While it's true that because of DNC rules that it was more difficult for an outsider like Sanders to win the Democratic nomination, ultimately he lost because not enough people voted for him.
Conversely, while it's true that because of the Electoral College it was more difficult for a candidate with greater urban appeal like Biden to win the presidency, ultimately he won because enough people voted for him.
The personal attack was unnecessary.
The rest of your post isn't worth responding to.
Whatever you say.
PS: "F. YOUR FEELINGS" is an actual Trump supporter t-shirt. I'm pretty sure you personally would not wear something like that, so obviously did not meant it personally. However, it does illustrate the wider sentiment, and it's still ridiculous.
More people need to say that, so thanks. So true.
You're aware how Trumpists complaining about lack of "decorum" look like right?
Again, at the moment I am even prohibited to donate to campaigns, so not sure why you address this to me.
This is "government of the people, by the people". Voters are sovereign. If you contribute to a win by an obviously garbage candidate, the resulting Administration's actions are in part on you. "It's Hillary's fault, she didn't pander to me enough" is not a valid excuse.
Its not about Trumpists, many miss that its about every American.
The Bernie types are talking about Denmark, Finland type of Socialism but do they know that these countries would not allow the elections systems and methods that are used in the USA, Sunders wouldn't like the elections there.
I think wile Finland or Denmark, and others are mentioned, its more like Venezuela type Socialism that they really want.
You bee the judge.
Separate names with a comma.