All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Tami]

For many people here, their main problem with Trump is that he's a Republican. Everything else is extra. My problems with Trump are the things that distinguish him from McCain and Romney, two people I voted for who I think would have made good Presidents.

I am Republican, so I would generally prefer President Biden face some limitations.

The policies and proposals that Joe Biden can only get through on a party line vote are unlikely to be the kind of stuff I'll agree with him on.

I do think there is a major opening for bipartisanship right now, as it's in everybody's best interests. The country will do better if Biden succeeds. It's obviously essential for the Democratic party, but it's not as threatening for Republicans when the Democratic President is unlikely to go for a second term. As a Senator, Biden has had a significant record of bipartisan accomplishment, and will understand how Washington works better than most Presidents have.

While I do probably have a higher opinion of Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham than most people here do, I'm also not impressed by their Democratic opponents. In the races where I support Democrats, the Republicans are uniquely terrible or the Democrats seem better than average. Jamie Harrison and Amy McGrath don't seem to be on the level of Doug Jones or Mark Kelly.

I have no problem, in theory, with Republicans. One of the best Governors NJ had was Chrostine Todd Whitman, a Republican. One of the worst was Chris Christie, also a Republican. Brendan Byrne was a good Democrat Governor, Jon Corzine was a so-so Democrat Governor.

It's not that teh Majority of voters dislike or hate Trump for being a republican, in truth some republicans who oppose him don't even consider him a Republican since he has done some very anti-Republican things while in Office. They oppos Trump because of the chaos he has caused, the ways he has screwed up and the problems he's made worse and the laws he has broken and so on ans so forth.

The only problem I had with McCain was his choice of Palin as his running mate when he could have chosen someone better.

[4saken1]

Since it was actually "This...", I'm not seeing where you have much of a point.

As for "How?...", it's incredibly simple.

It goes a little something like "My Responsibility To The Public That I Am Actually Supposed To Be Serving Means That You Are Going To Have To Take A Pass On This One, Kiddo."

Again, Hunter was a grown ass adult. Joe can advise him what to do, but otherwise has **** all control over what Hunter does.

[A Small Talent For War]

Nope, I’m taking NOTHING for granted, not with a desperate Trump willing to say and do anything short of murder to win the election, and not with a glaringly complicit Republican Party more than eager to help him if it’ll keep them in power. I’ve said this before and I’ll keep on saying it until polls close on November 3rd, Democrats should act like Biden is trailing and fight like hell to get him across the finish line. It’s the only way to be sure.

A very intelligent point of view. Anyone who does not want a second Trump administration should be thinking like an Olympic runner right now. The race doesn't end at the finish line; it ends ten yards past the finish line.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viYvT1KIGPo

[worstblogever]

Again, Hunter was a grown ass adult. Joe can advise him what to do, but otherwise has **** all control over what Hunter does.

Also, if we are holding the candidates responsible for the actions of their children... between Don Jr., Eric, and Ivanka there's a lot of alleged drug abuse and criminal activity over there that someone's conveniently overlooking to buy into tabloid accusations about Hunter. Hell, Don Jr. meeting with Russians at Trump Tower alone...

Whether you hold the kids accountable or not, Biden and the Biden family are the better choice.

[Mister Mets]

I think the Bidens should sue this guy because this is a serious actual criminal allegation a political figure is making. This is ridiculous libel.

If you watch the video he covers his bases, and is careful about concrete allegations. This kind of speculation is generally protected. Otherwise, a lot of people here would be in significant trouble.

You could certainly make the argument that a senator should be held to a higher standard than a poster on a message board.

My problem with Trump isn't that he's a Republican.

It's that he's a deranged, racist, proto-fascist, serial sexual predator and tax cheat who has lied to the people of this nation, betrayed our allies abroad, and utterly corrupted the institution of the American presidency (and then some).

My problem with Republicans is the stupid f***ers have let Trump do that with no pushback like the bunch of corrupt, spineless, racist cowards that I always knew they were.

Thought I'd delve into that so nobody gets to wave around some strawman about Democrats hating Trump "because he's a Republican". No, it's the above.

To be clear, when I say that for many people their problem with Trump is that he's a Republican, or their problem with me is that I don't vote straight-ticket for Democrats, I do think the party labels are significant and meaningful.

There can be some variety of views within the parties, but Republicans do tend to have particular policy preferences (they tend to be pro-life, they tend to encourage the nuclear family as the ideal, they tend to support access to alternatives to zoned public schools (charter schools, vouchers), they tend to be against restrictions on gun ownership, they tend to support reducing the welfare state, they tend to be against business regulations, they tend to support textualist/ originalist judges, etc.)

In your case, it does seem you were against Republicans well before Trump popped up, so I think you'd be pissed off at a standard Republican President who didn't have Trump's unique flaws.

[worstblogever]

If you watch the video he covers his bases, and is careful about concrete allegations. This kind of speculation is generally protected. Otherwise, a lot of people here would be in significant trouble.

You could certainly make the argument that a senator should be held to a higher standard than a poster on a message board.

To be clear, when I say that for many people their problem with Trump is that he's a Republican, or their problem with me is that I don't vote straight-ticket for Democrats, I do think the party labels are significant and meaningful.

There can be some variety of views within the parties, but Republicans do tend to have particular policy preferences (they tend to be pro-life, they tend to encourage the nuclear family as the ideal, they tend to support access to alternatives to zoned public schools (charter schools, vouchers), they tend to be against restrictions on gun ownership, they tend to support reducing the welfare state, they tend to be against business regulations, they tend to support textualist/ originalist judges, etc.)

In your case, it does seem you were against Republicans well before Trump popped up, so I think you'd be pissed off at a standard Republican President who didn't have Trump's unique flaws.

Well, given how the GOP have alienated themselves to the electorate, it is highly unlikely they'll br a Republican president legitimately elected in my lifetime who isn't Trump.

If any of them had shown a backbone the past four years, I'd have someone in your party to root for among them.

But they're all cowards. Obviously.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

On judges, I think there has been escalation on both sides and I've written about that before.

There hasn't been escalation on both sides.

Antonin Scalia was appointed unanimously. Republican nominees by H. W. Bush which were moderate like Souter were uncontroversial as was O'Connor. The Dems have given voice and appointed Republican nominated judges even when they had Senate majorities. So one side has given advise and consent to the other party, and it's the Democrats. The Republicans haven't repaid in kind.

Robert Bork, Nixon's own Bill Barr, was a ghoul of the first degree who was gunning to overturn Civil Rights altogether. The Democrats warned Reagan against nominating him, and Reagan crossed a line by legitimizing and nominating someone that extreme to the SCOTUS. The fact that you can't recognize or acknowledge that, and most Republicans who blather about that blocking a some line and so on, is the problem here. Bork should be someone to reject not embraced.

This is the major issue with Republicans, even moderate Republicans, the total lack of responsibility, accountability, and accepting blame.

[Iron Maiden]

The Dems need to start suing people. They can't let people make allegations like this and not prosecute them. It sets a bad social precedent.

Simply sue these fake news assholes for say $1trillion or some really exorbitant amount that will terrify the living daylights out of them.

Just getting the story out there is all they want to accomplish. Trump himself is up to over 20,000 lies and his followers still believe everything he says. People with common sense will hopefully see that this is just dirty tricks and pay no attention.

T

[numberthirty]

Sure The Democrats have to stop being as corrupt as the Republicans.



Or I guess you just want perfection from the Dems.

Here's the obvious problems with the way you are framing this...

- Not wanting the most corrupt version of things does not mean having to accept a less corrupt version of thing as something workable. It isn't.

- "Perfection..." is usually what folks haul out when they are trying to avoid actually discussing just how much a less corrupt Democratic Party could get done if they made an even slight move towards being better public servants. No one is saying "I Would Like Perfection..." That said, "I Would Like A More Upright Democratic Party That Is Doing More To Look Out For John/Jane Public..." is something that it is always odd to see people just run from discussing.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Here's the obvious problems with the way you are framing this...

- Not wanting the most corrupt version of things does not mean having to accept a less corrupt version of thing as something workable. It isn't.

- "Perfection..." is usually what folks haul out when they are trying to avoid actually discussing just how much a less corrupt Democratic Party could get done if they made an even slight move towards being better public servants. No one is saying "I Would Like Perfection..." That said, "I Would Like A More Upright Democratic Party That Is Doing More To Look Out For John/Jane Public..." is something that it is always odd to see people just run from discussing.

I will say that if Obama ran the cleanest administration in the last fifty years, cleaner than Clinton's significantly, than it's not unfair to point out that a certain high bar has been set for the party as a whole.

[Jack Dracula]

I can see the resemblance. Trump has the Anti-Life Equation





Of course Kirby saw this coming

Actually, Trump is more like the Hate-Monger.

[numberthirty]

So, that said...

Where is the logical argument for that the average voter should just be fine with a politician's kids being in a position to get a leg up based on that their parent holds political office.

They shouldn't.

Every single voter in America deserves better than that.

You should not have to bend a politicians arm into being a acceptable version of what they should be. No one had to strong arm Warren into saying "That Garbage Probably Would Not Fly In A "Warren..." Administration..."

Which is exactly what voters should want and be able to get out of their public servants. Without having to even ball up a fist to scare them into being that.

[numberthirty]

I will say that if Obama ran the cleanest administration in the last fifty years, cleaner than Clinton's significantly, than it's not unfair to point out that a certain high bar has been set for the party as a whole.

The party that just had members get caught up in that Congress had a "Hush Money..." benefit in place for paying off folks who had been sexually harassed with taxpayer money?

Yeah, they are clearing that bar by a mile.

Again, how is asking for just "Bare Minimum..." sort of "We're Better Than That Without Being Forced To Be..." conduct any sort of an issue?

[Jack Dracula]

So, that said...

Where is the logical argument for that the average voter should just be fine with a politician's kids being in a position to get a leg up based on that their parent holds political office.

They shouldn't.

Every single voter in America deserves better than that.

You should not have to bend a politicians arm into being a acceptable version of what they should be. No one had to strong arm Warren into saying "That Garbage Probably Would Not Fly In A "Warren..." Administration..."

Which is exactly what voters should want and be able to get out of their public servants. Without having to even ball up a fist to scare them into being that.

Your argument is based on what you believe to be Hunter Bidens' supposed lack of qualifications for a job and what Warren said while competing against Biden for the nomination.

Warren has come out in support of Biden since his nomination, so where does that leave your argument?

[godisawesome]

My problem with Trump isn't that he's a Republican.

It's that he's a deranged, racist, proto-fascist, serial sexual predator and tax cheat who has lied to the people of this nation, betrayed our allies abroad, and utterly corrupted the institution of the American presidency (and then some).

My problem with Republicans is the stupid f***ers have let Trump do that with no pushback like the bunch of corrupt, spineless, racist cowards that I always knew they were.

Thought I'd delve into that so nobody gets to wave around some strawman about Democrats hating Trump "because he's a Republican". No, it's the above.

For me, personally, as a former Never-Trumper Republican who now likely qualifies as a moderate Democrat, it’s not so much just Trump or just the Rpeublican Party; it’s the way both have come together to exacerbate and poison that side of politics.

While Trump definitely provided someone direction and force to the GOP to create Trumpism, it would be a mistake to think he hadn’t also seized onto a movement that had been growing to control the GOP beforehand, or that the movement exercise some answering control over him as well.

Fascism requires more than just a single demagogue - it requires collaborators, willing followers, and the growth of the more grotesque parts of the human mind among the populace.

Getting rid of Trump will damage his personal cult of perosloty, and lead the fascistic section of the GOP looking for a new partner... but it’s not going to immediately defuse a situation whereby factions of the GOP that once represented traditionalists, capitalists, and Christ Followers have allowed the slaves to fully transform into vicious bigots, kleptocrats, and “Christian Pharisees.”

There was already a part of the GOP more likely to punish others for being different instead of use what worked on the past for security in the present, already a part more likely to be lazy and greedy in the current economic quarter than plan ahead towards long term profit and to value comparative wealth over “the rabble” instead of actual wealth for all, and already “believers” far more likely to crucify Christ for valuing people over culture and comfort rather than show the fruits of the spirit towards strangers.

Fox News was already poisonous before Trump came to power.

There’s a reason why John McCain’s defining actions in his last years, preventing McConnel’s Repeal and Replace maneuver on Obamacare and having Obama give his eulogy, have greater impact than just as “Never-Trumper” moves - both are just as rooted in acknowledging the way the GOP was wrong in defining itself as just Anti-Obama in the decade before his death... even as McCain himself was a part of that movement.