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

[Gray Lensman]

Don't forget that DeFascist has also pledged to roll back or undo Trump's criminal justice reforms, which would undo one of the few positive things Benedict Donald did while in the White House.

[Adam Allen]

He worries about "slippery slopes" regarding immigration but not when white supremacists are shooting up black churches or Muslim mosques.

Truth be told it can't be understated how offensive this is to anyone who believes in civil rights and the value of human life.

His "concerns" make it completely clear where his sympathies lie and it is not with those who are the vicitims of discrimination and violence from "conservative" right-wing Americans -- rational debate won't sway the opinon of those making irrational agruments in response, especially when they disregard facts at their leisure.

It's only a "tall order" to convince a conservative vote against homophobia, racism, fascism and white nationalism because many of them support these behaviors.

Trump, Pence, and DeSantis have all proven this to be true -- if it wasn't then they wouldn't be the frontrunners of the party.

True. Of two people in a real-life situation that unfortunately results with one of them dead, and another with legal charges against him, Mets has been clear that all of his sympathies lie only with the poor innocent soul who somehow ended up in legal trouble.

Yeah, because the one who died was: black, homeless, mentally ill*. And the other guy was just a nice average white guy. Ex-military, even.

You're right, it is not "nasty" to reflect facts. "Conservative" in this context apparently means, "I got mine, and if you happen to not be white/cis/male/straight/mental-health-diagnosis-free/Christian or anything else that might literally get you killed ... well, tough ****, pretty much."

I mean, it is what it is, but I think searching for any kind of actual empathy for any marginalized group from any "conservative" is a wasted effort. That's explicitly what all their policies and opinions oppose.

*Edit: And just to point out, however scary it is to have someone yelling and ranting and threatening? Has to be a fuckton scarier, being suddenly choked from behind. And all the people who got the less-scary version of that train ride lived to talk about it. So yeah, lack of value for human life, and it is offensive. Effing conservatives, man.

[aja_christopher]

I mean, it is what it is, but I think searching for any kind of actual empathy for any marginalized group from any "conservative" is a wasted effort. That's explicitly what all their policies and opinions oppose.

It's a Republican/conservative issue -- not a "personal" issue despite all efforts to frame it as such.

Many right-wing fascist dictatorships start out with exactly the same political philosophies and policies as Trump, Pence, and DeSantis.

It's not a coincidence that Trump was able to convince many Republicans -- both voters and elected officials -- that democracy was secondary to conservativism.



It's a slippery slope -- but apparently that doesn't matter to some so long as it slides in the direction they prefer.

[Dalak]

It's a Republican/conservative issue -- not a "personal" issue despite all efforts to frame it as such.

Many right-wing fascist dictatorships start out with exactly the same political philosophies and policies as Trump, Pence, and DeSantis.

It's not a coincidence that Trump was able to convince many Republicans -- both voters and elected officials -- that democracy was secondary to conservativism.



It's a slippery slope -- but apparently that doesn't matter to some so long as it slides in the direction they prefer.

It's been shown slipping, because for every one of the election truthers that failed in their attempt to get into place to affect it (Top-Down to local ballot watchers), at least one other succeeded. If Trump calls on these people to act, like he has shown he will with the ones on January 6th, does anyone seriously think they will suddenly grow scruples?
Are we supposed to ignore the people who've said the quiet part out loud and admitted that Voter ID laws, Restrictions on Mail-In-Ballots, and closing of DMV locations & Ballot Drop locations in key areas were specifically done to affect Minority/Democratic voters?

E: The 'purging' of mainly democratic voters from rolls in many states has been shown in this thread before, as has the recent thrust to raise the voting age in response to how the youth vote has turned in recent elections. The GoP has been systematically attacking the right and ability to vote since before I've been old enough to do so, and they are always doing it to combat the boogeyman of Fraud which only seems to come out in numbers voting for conservatives when discovered.

[Mister Mets]

You're misrepresenting my argument -- that you spend far more time criticizing "liberals" for what you feel they might do than you do Republicans for their actual harmful behaviors and policies against many of your fellow American citizens.

Why you do it is irrelevant as the result -- support for said bigotry and discrimination -- is the same.

The truth isn't "nasty" -- it's the truth as you've shown no concern for the rights of African-American or LGBT American citizens in your responses.

Again -- I'm not even condemning the choice so much as arguing that you can't ignore or misrepresent evidence at your whim and still claim to be objective.



Those are loaded questions the answers to which don't disprove what was argued prior.

On this thread, there's no shortage of standard left-wing arguments. So I don't see the need to make the same arguments as others.

I'll note objections to Republicans, as well as problems with policies and decisions by Democrats right now, just as plenty of people here express concern about what Republicans may do in the future (the whole Nazi argument.) It is also important for people making policy suggestions to consider the implications in the future. It's quite irresponsible to discourage those kinds of necessary discussions.

If you're criticizing me for not responding to something, you should say what the specific comments that are so good that you find it suspicious that someone's not responding.

And if I'm misrepresenting your argument, when I have said the wrong thing about "white supremacists shooting up black churches or Muslim mosques"?

These things have been pointed out in this thread. One can just use the "Search This Thread" function up top using the keyword "DeSantis" and find posts linking to credible news media about what he has said and done. From his don't say gay bill, to his laws targeting trans people and drag shows, his laws easing the banning of books, the laws he's passed to stifle the ability of the press or citizens to look into things about him or report on them, his retaliation against a corporation speaking out against his law targeting the gay community, how his law recruitment drive of officers other states don't want is attracting people who by right shouldn't still be cops, how he's willing to pardon violent insurrectionists, and quite a few more I'm surely forgetting, it's all been pointed out before in this thread, often multiple times, and you've seen those posts before. I don't know if you clicked the links or did more than skim through the quoted snippets, but you've seen the headlines of those articles posted about, so I know you're not in the dark about what he has done and said. You only have to go back over the last three or five pages to see posts linking to some source or another about the sins of DeSantis.

Ultimately it's up to you to decide whether these things are "bad enough" to disqualify him from your vote. And this is a democracy, so no one here will stop you from voting for him if you decide to. But please, if you do vote for DeSantis, don't continue to consider yourself a moderate anymore or refer to yourself as such. If one supports extremism, which is what voting for an extremist is really a support for extremism, then that makes one an extremist. I admit that I myself am not a moderate, I'm too left of center for that. And I'm okay with that. Likewise, you'll have to find a way to be ok with not being a moderate if you vote for someone as extreme as DeSantis. Because you can't vote for an extremist without supporting extremism, and you can't support extremism without being an extremist, and you can't be both an extremist and a moderate, that's not how it works.

I know that people here object to DeSantis, but looking that stuff up is going to include a lot of exaggeration, speculation and commentary. I'm looking for facts, not venting.

If someone makes a serious claim about why no one should vote for a politician, they should be able to back it up with three inarguable examples of where the politician crosses the line. I wonder if people don't want to reveal that much about themselves. It's easier to talk about things that are vague than the specifics.

I quoted the answers of the Study you and TheWeek brought up, you quoting TheWeek's article, and rightly pointed out they referred to a large chunk of people as "girls identifying as transgender" when they hadn't revealed how they were assigned at birth. You have misrepresented the article, your arguments, my arguments, and your level of reading comprehension for over a year to avoid admitting you were wrong. I'm fairly sure I've discussed subjects with unrepentant trolls who admitted they were wrong quicker than you.



When you claim others can't know what people secretly believe, then turn around defending your claim that you know what some people secretly believe, the T-Shirt fits. Then there's that time you claimed all the lefty posters trying to convince others to stop voting Republican were doing so out of a long-term secret desire to make republican candidates more extreme, which you then tried to rationalize by saying it was all subconscious after you were called out on it

You left out part of the quote from the article which completely changed the meaning. The phrase the article used wasn't "girls identifying as transgender" but "the number of students brought up as girls identifying as transgender."

Someone can be brought up as a girl without being a girl.

The T-shirt doesn't indicate what people secretly think. A major Democrat wore an item advocating for open borders, and he wasn't called out for it by anyone on his side.

I didn't say that "all the lefty posters trying to convince others to stop voting Republican were doing so out of a long-term secret desire to make republican candidates more extreme." That's a stretch, assuming you mean to be taken literally.

His policies are Trump’s, and he’s fully invested in Trumpism Minus Trump - as Trumpism has become the governing power and voting bloc of GOP at this time. The only real difference between him and Trump in substance is that he offers it be mildly less of a personal sideshow while still pursuing the same types of cruel but weakening policies Trump pursued.

DeSantis is in no way a moderate in actual policy and substance - he’s merely a moderate in presentation. Like Trump, he enacts persecution of others as the raison d’etre of his politics, uses a weak, regressive approach to international thought, treats sabotage of the education system as a major priority, and supports the most harmful and un-pragmatic aspects of current “conservative” thought regarding business and personal liberty.

His supporters are not “moderate” Republicans… and neither are you. They and you are more “quid pro quo” Republicans, willing to tacitly approve of and allow the same horrible and wasteful abuses of power that Trump does, just as long as a handful of policies that he and Trump both support get taken care of.

Like, I don’t usually read your stuff on this thread, because your posting style isn’t so much deceitful as it is painfully myopic and fantasist - you usually write things that basically go “If my personal selection of a small handful of hard right beliefs get policy support, isn’t it worth the cost of trading away every other policy to hard right ones as long as they’re quieter about it?” and an inability to analyze or empathize with facts that don’t comport with that fantasy, reflected in intellectually vacant and ethically dubious obfuscation and self-deception.

The problem with Trump was not the substance. It was the things that made him different from what a Jeb Bush administration would have been.

It's hard for people who would vote against any Republican to realize this, but Trump is in some ways closer to the center than most presidential candidates. He did not push for cuts to social security or Medicaid, and kept promising infrastructure spending.

He was elected to the White House with the second most moderate issue positions in the previous 40 years.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...-to-the-right/

As President, his policy positions were mostly generic Republican. Obviously if you'd vote against the typical Republican, you'd voter against him as well, but people who would vote for typical Republicans would need other reasons to oppose him, including corruption, sloppiness, shameless lies, etc.

[JackDaw]

"Ron DeSantis Says He Would Consider Presidential Pardons for Jan. 6 Rioters"
[I]
The Florida governor and Republican presidential candidate said he would be "aggressive" in issuing pardons and suggested he would consider one for former President Donald Trump if needed.

"Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who officially stepped into the presidential race this week, said Thursday that, if elected, he would consider pardoning people involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol — possibly including his rival for the GOP nomination, former President Donald Trump.

DeSantis has consistently polled second to Trump in national surveys and has sought to draw a contrast with the former president while being reluctant to attack him outright. In an appearance on "The Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Show," a conservative talk radio show, DeSantis said that on "Day One" of his presidency he would have his staff examine cases of Jan. 6 rioters, pro-life demonstrators and parents arrested over their actions at school board meetings, and would be "aggressive" in issuing pardons.

"We will use the pardon power — and I will do that at the front end," DeSantis said, claiming that the Justice Department and the FBI had been "weaponized" to unevenly punish people from "disfavored groups."

The acceptance of widespread use of pardons in US for overt political reasons always surprises me.

It used rarely in UK, and honestly in all the recent cases I can remember my gut reaction was that it was used in a sensible way to actually serve justice.

[aja_christopher]

Are we supposed to ignore the people who've said the quiet part out loud and admitted that Voter ID laws, Restrictions on Mail-In-Ballots, and closing of DMV locations & Ballot Drop locations in key areas were specifically done to affect Minority/Democratic voters?

"You shouldn't blame me for not taking the time to address facts" is not a even an attempt at a good counter-argument -- just more deflection.

No one here has had a problem answering questions except those who don't want to answer them -- hypocrisy regarding "loaded" queries aside.

We've seen the argument here that "liberals" should be condemned for even considering illegal and unethical behavior while Republicans and right-wing nationalists who are engaging in it are ignored as "not a serious problem" -- despite yet again the blatant hypocrisy involved it's clear that's exactly what is expected.

And if I'm misrepresenting your argument, when I have said the wrong thing about "white supremacists shooting up black churches or Muslim mosques"?

A loaded question that proves nothing as such a statement would in no way prove or disprove your support for white nationalist causes.

Or counteract your support for a party you know does the same.

[Iron Maiden]

Has anyone else noticed the flood of Anti- Joe Biden videos on YouTube from Forbes Magazine? That and a lot of Pro-Trump videos. I am not even doing searches for anything political. This is on my TV.

[godisawesome]

The problem with Trump was not the substance…

And thus nothing else you have to say on politics right now matters.

You can not claim patriotism as a motivator, because Trump’s substance was treasonous nationalism.

You cannot claim economic intelligence, unless you’re filthy rich and lazy, because that’s only who benefitted from Trump’s economic policies.

You cannot claim common sense, let alone wisdom, in international issues, for Trump is a stupid isolationist and Putin’s bitch.

You cannot claim ethics, for Trump’s ethics and those who supported him are rapacious, self-serving vices.

You cannot claim any kind of wisdom, in fact, because Trump is a Mussolini-like fool who reshaped his party on his own image, which is obvious to all but the self-serving who don’t care or the foolish and self-deceiving.

No one needs to prove anything to your for proof does not exist in your world.

Your feelings do not care about facts, let alone other people, or the nation.

[Dalak]

If someone makes a serious claim about why no one should vote for a politician, they should be able to back it up with three inarguable examples of where the politician crosses the line. I wonder if people don't want to reveal that much about themselves. It's easier to talk about things that are vague than the specifics.

Nothing is inarguable if you ignore the evidence provided yet constantly demand more evidence. The time you are spending replying you could be spending educating yourself to the subjects you are using to justify a 'moderate' vote for a clearly fascist bigot, instead of claiming you don't have the time for it..

You left out part of the quote from the article which completely changed the meaning. The phrase the article used wasn't "girls identifying as transgender" but "the number of students brought up as girls identifying as transgender."

Someone can be brought up as a girl without being a girl.

The answers I bolded didn't indicate biology or how they were brought up, they included those brought up as boys & not listed, and were very clear in regards to declared gender. TheWeek still inflated the numbers, titled them girls in defiance of your continued gaslighting, and Shrier didn't even pretend she meant anything else when she titled her book.

E: On a whim I checked, and you lied about my leaving "brought up" out of the quote just now on top of it all.

The T-shirt doesn't indicate what people secretly think. A major Democrat wore an item advocating for open borders, and he wasn't called out for it by anyone on his side.

And you assume how they secretly feel from what they won't say, something you condemn posters on this forum for doing in regards to you. The double-standards never end.

I didn't say that "all the lefty posters trying to convince others to stop voting Republican were doing so out of a long-term secret desire to make republican candidates more extreme." That's a stretch, assuming you mean to be taken literally.

The link provided all context needed, and it it provides links to the past posts in the chain too. There's a phrase used in Magic the Gathering circles: Reading the card explains the card.

As President, his policy positions were mostly generic Republican. Obviously if you'd vote against the typical Republican, you'd voter against him as well, but people who would vote for typical Republicans would need other reasons to oppose him, including corruption, sloppiness, shameless lies, etc.

Things people including John Oliver have pointed out, which you refuse to view while complaining that we aren't providing evidence.

"You shouldn't blame me for not taking the time to address facts" is not a even an attempt at a good counter-argument -- just more deflection.

No one here has had a problem answering questions except those who don't want to answer them -- hypocrisy regarding "loaded" queries aside.

We've seen the argument here that "liberals" should be condemned for even considering illegal and unethical behavior while Republicans and right-wing nationalists who are engaging in it are ignored -- barring yet again the blatant hypocrisy involved it's clear that's exactly what is expected.

A loaded question that proves nothing as such a statement would in no way prove or disprove your support for white nationalist causes.

Or counteract your support for a party you know does the same.

These things aren't really up for debate as posts for the last couple of days show.

And thus nothing else you have to say on politics right now matters.

You can not claim patriotism as a motivator, because Trump’s substance was treasonous nationalism.

You cannot claim economic intelligence, unless you’re filthy rich and lazy, because that’s only who benefitted from Trump’s economic policies.

You cannot claim common sense, let alone wisdom, in international issues, for Trump is a stupid isolationist and Putin’s bitch.

You cannot claim ethics, for Trump’s ethics and those who supported him are rapacious, self-serving vices.

You cannot claim any kind of wisdom, in fact, because Trump is a Mussolini-like fool who reshaped his party on his own image, which is obvious to all but the self-serving who don’t care or the foolish and self-deceiving.

No one needs to prove anything to your for proof does not exist in your world.

Your feelings do not care about facts, let alone other people, or the nation.

Damn, I missed this when typing the above. Bravo!

[aja_christopher]

Nothing is inarguable if you ignore the evidence provided yet constantly demand more evidence. The time you are spending replying you could be spending educating yourself to the subjects you are using to justify a 'moderate' vote for a clearly fascist bigot, instead of claiming you don't have the time for it.

But then said time couldn't be used to criticize those who are holding Republicans accountable for their actions.

[The Negative Zone]

There's just one problem with this indifference...

The right calls the left "groomers" and "pedophiles" and it's a lie.
The left calls the right white nationalists because that's what they are now, and if you support them, you support white nationalism.

I wouldn't say you're being cynical so much as that you might have enough privilege to not care about the lives of the people the right would oppress or even extinguish. I would suggest trying actual empathy for human life. Which, in spite of one party claiming to be "pro-life", they sure have a lot of policies that seem eager to let people die and do nothing about it. Even if we take the white-nationalism out of the equation (which we shouldn't).

I agree that both sides aren't the same, the right clearly has more power than the left. So I don't support extreme policies or extreme people that go against my beliefs so I don't vote. I have more of a mixture of right and left beliefs. But I do have plenty "wrong" beliefs because of my religion. I don't want to hurt anyone for my religious beliefs, but I wouldn't want people to hurt themselves either. I believe you guys are truly doing what you think is right, even if I disagree a lot. Yet, you're already suggesting I need to have empathy, like I'm sort of sociopath.

I guess with how often terms like nazi and white supremacist is thrown around, I only see it as a matter of time before someone like me is on the chopping block and it's okay to commit violence against me for having the wrong beliefs. I could re-word this entire post and make it applicable when talking to some right-wing people. Terms like pedophile and nazi are technically dehumanizing terms determined to make out targets as anything but human, so really as long as that keeps happening, the only way I can see things ending up is with violence being more and more acceptable, which technically affects anyone.

[aja_christopher]

I believe you guys are truly doing what you think is right, even if I disagree a lot. Yet, you're already suggesting I need to have empathy, like I'm sort of sociopath.

I guess with how often terms like nazi and white supremacist is thrown around, I only see it as a matter of time before someone like me is on the chopping block and it's okay to commit violence against me for having the wrong beliefs.

As a religious person there should be more concern over white supremacists shooting up black churches than possibly being "persecuted" for your beliefs.

If you are ignoring the fact that many right-wing politicians -- like Trump, Pence and DeSantis -- are promoting and signing into law bills that are already putting people's rights "on the chopping block" then that is indeed sociopathic behavior in that you are showing far more concern for percieved danger to your own person than actual real danger, both physical and psychological, to others.

Regardless, church and state are meant to be seperate for a reason -- no religious group should have more politcal control than any other in our democracy.

What is being argued is that said beliefs should not be used as an excuse to deprive others of their rights -- not that violence is acceptable.



And if that is the case then "conservatives" should call it out even if -- and especially when -- it comes from within their own circles.

-----

"When a Target distributor reached out to Erik Carnell last year about possibly placing his brand, Abprallen, in Target stores, he was thrilled.

It was “the biggest opportunity of my career,” Carnell told CNN. “I was ecstatic at the thought of being able to share my stuff with an entirely new market.” The London-based Abprallen, described on its Instagram page as “art and accessories for the proud, loud, and colourful,” would go from a small startup to a brand available at a major US retailer.

In the following months, Carnell pitched Target and came up with designs that would be appropriate for the big box store, he said. Ultimately, Target started selling three Abprallen items for adults: A sweatshirt, a tote bag and a messenger bag, each emblazoned with a different phrase.

But then things fell apart. About a week and a half ago, Carnell said, he started receiving hundreds of hateful messages including death threats, some of them incorrectly saying the collection was being marketed to children, as some people lashed out at Target over its Pride offerings.

By Wednesday, Target had pulled Abprallen items from its US stores and online market, Reuters reported...."

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/27/busin...len/index.html

[Dalak]

I agree that both sides aren't the same, the right clearly has more power than the left. So I don't support extreme policies or extreme people that go against my beliefs so I don't vote. I have more of a mixture of right and left beliefs. But I do have plenty "wrong" beliefs because of my religion. I don't want to hurt anyone for my religious beliefs, but I wouldn't want people to hurt themselves either. I believe you guys are truly doing what you think is right, even if I disagree a lot. Yet, you're already suggesting I need to have empathy, like I'm sort of sociopath.

I guess with how often terms like nazi and white supremacist is thrown around, I only see it as a matter of time before someone like me is on the chopping block and it's okay to commit violence against me for having the wrong beliefs. I could re-word this entire post and make it applicable when talking to some right-wing people. Terms like pedophile and nazi are technically dehumanizing terms determined to make out targets as anything but human, so really as long as that keeps happening, the only way I can see things ending up is with violence being more and more acceptable, which technically affects anyone.

When those who have survived the Holocaust are warning about how things are looking right now, I tend to think that accusations of facism are legitimate. Despite having a few friends who have burned out on Politics, I believe that caring about what's being done to dehumanize people who look different than I do, or who love & live differently than I do isn't something I can ignore. I believe that voting can influence things, and I've repeatedly stated that I believe that if half of the people in this country who don't vote decided to do so, the political map of this country would flip in very unexpected ways. I'm not sure which policies/people you consider extreme on the left, but I hope you consider not only the rise of far-right violence in the last 10-15 years, but the open embrace of it by the political rank & file along with the leadership of the GoP. If you are against violence, I believe there is no valid comparison between "Punch a Nazi", "Antifa" or "Black Lives Matter" and how many mass killings the embrace of the Great Replacement Theory by elected GoP and Pundits has led to and how unrepentant conservatives are when this fact is pointed out. That is before we get into the hate & violence against Muslims, LGBT, Teachers, Doctors (Abortion/Transgender Support/Vaccines & Masks), and corporations who object or offer products celebrating some of these people (Target/Disney).

Voting itself isn't that much of an inconvenience unless you live in an area that the GoP has deemed too liberal and live in a red state, and it really is the bare minimum one can do and say they they are trying to do something about the state of the world without really doing anything. If I truly can't convince you to vote against violence by voting against the party who is running on embracing not only violence but hate and bigotry at all levels of government . . then I won't continue to try. But I won't believe that a fear of Democrats en-mass embracing violence is a legitimate one without some serious evidence.

[aja_christopher]

If I truly can't convince you to vote against violence by voting against the party who is running on embracing not only violence but hate and bigotry at all levels of government . . then I won't continue to try. But I won't believe that a fear of Democrats en-mass embracing violence is a legitimate one without some serious evidence.

Given their history -- and Trump being only a symptom -- the burden of proof is on Republicans to prove they are not a white nationalist party.

The fact that many conservatives won't even attempt to address the evidence presented says all that one needs to know about their level of acceptance.

Likewise, trying to claim that your party is not the party of Trump when it overwhelmingly supports Trump is Simone Biles level mental gymnastics.

It's like watching someone constantly argue with their own politics in real time.

The acceptance of widespread use of pardons in US for overt political reasons always surprises me.

It used rarely in UK, and honestly in all the recent cases I can remember my gut reaction was that it was used in a sensible way to actually serve justice.

The lack of scrutiny regarding American politics always surprises me given the fact that the Iraq War should have been a wake up call about the Republican party.

Based on experience, it's possibly because the British are a bit more concerned about propriety that many American politicians.

Trump being the perfect example of why that often isn't the case with Republican politicians and their voters.