US Politics, March 2024: The house of illuminati will NOT be holding any other event in the foreseeable future.

Runners-up: "returning to the bomb-throwing days of his youth" and "you can crawl slowly, or you can crawl quickly" from https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/01/mchenry-johnson-house-gop-00144277

"¯\_(ツ)_/¯ $500,000,000,000?"

coming back to this early February article

https://www.axios.com/2024/02/02/biden-obsession-morning-joe-msnbc-media

I've been reading about television news programs and presidential viewing habits forever. iirc, LBJ insisted on having multiple tvs turned on simultaneously, one for each of the three network newscasts, because they all occupied the same time slot and VCRs weren't invented. Biden isn't "obsessed" with morning joe, he's trying to gauge how well he's getting his message out and using that show to take his measurements. Every president does something similar. They also have aides who do clippings of NYT and WaPo stories which get analyzed for the same purpose. It's SOP.

The Axios story doesn't mention that Obama loved David Brooks. Which explains a lot.

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Missouri, looking good:

McClanahan sued for defamation, arguing, as the Riverfront Times put it, “that what appeared to be a cross-burning was a mere ‘Christian Identity Cross lighting ceremony’”.

“While he acknowledged he was a ‘honorary’ member of the local Ku Klux Klan,” the site added, McClanahan “said he’d never been a full-fledged member”.

Maybe pedantic but wasn't the House of Illuminati UK news?

yes, but the horror belongs to the world

We've got enough bad stuff over here. We don't need your off-brand Wonka clusterfucks.

Biden isn't "obsessed" with morning joe, he's trying to gauge how well he's getting his message out and using that show to take his measurements

He's also asking his staff about things said on the show, and having folks who appear on the the show talk to his staff. So he's gauging what to do in part by how the former Republican who hosts the show views things. He's just gauging how his message goes out to these former Republicans whose idea of bipartisanship is when Biden bends over backwards on immigration border policy to try to give Republicans what they want.

yes. he is, at that. we might want to ask him about that. my point was that calling it an "obsession" was just click-baity, uh, let's say "malarkey". joe would approve.

xp Is he counting on people not knowing about what Christian Identity is?

It wasn’t a concentration camp, it was a dedicated work facility.

Mindfulness camp

A classic for the "no matter how bad you think it is, it's worse" file: Rolling Stone investigates the insane amount of prescription drugs White House staffers were taking under Trump.

Also, a good debunking of a bullshit poll.

so this week is pretty key to watch, forgive me for reposting this entire Heather Cox Richardson post but truly we are living in historic times

This week seems likely to be packed with news.

Today, Vice President Kamala Harris spoke about the crisis in the Middle East with strong words for both Hamas and Israel, calling for a ceasefire of at least six weeks, the return of hostages, and increased aid to the Palestinians. Such a deal is on the table. According to the U.S., Israel has agreed to it, and negotiators are waiting for a response from Hamas leaders.

Benny Gantz, a centrist officer in Israel’s war cabinet, is in Washington, D.C., where he will meet tomorrow with Vice President Harris and national security advisor Jake Sullivan, and on Tuesday with Secretary of State Antony Blinken. He did not have authorization from hard-right prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu for the visit. As growing numbers of Israelis are voicing dislike of Netanyahu, polls show that Gantz could command enough support to become prime minister if a new vote were held immediately.

This evening the U.S. Supreme Court indicated it will issue an opinion tomorrow. Marc Elias of Democracy Docket commented that it is “[v]ery likely the case involving Donald Trump's disqualification under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.”

Also today, former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley won her first primary, winning 62.9% of the Republican vote in Washington, D.C. Trump won 33.2%. This victory makes Haley the first woman in history to win a Republican primary. It also illustrates that Trump’s support is terribly soft. Over the weekend, Haley picked up the endorsements of Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Susan Collins (R-ME).

Headed into the week, Tuesday, March 5, is so-called Super Tuesday, when voters in fifteen states and one territory will vote for their choice for president. Those states are Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, and Virginia. In American Samoa, Democrats will vote on Tuesday, Republicans on Friday.

It seems likely that Super Tuesday will shift so many delegates into Trump’s column that he will have virtually locked up the Republican nomination.

But that timing poses a real problem for the Republican Party. Trump has to post a bond to cover the $83.3 million he owes writer E. Jean Carroll no later than Friday, March 8. His lawyers have been trying to get out of this requirement, asking for a “substantially reduced bond.” This suggests that he might have trouble covering the amount. And after he comes up with this sum, he still has the $454 million to pay in the civil fraud case against him in New York.

March 8 is also the day that Republican National Committee chair Ronna McDaniel steps down. The only people running to replace her are Trump loyalist Michael Whatley and Trump’s daughter-in-law Lara Trump, who hope to be co-chairs. Trump’s senior campaign adviser Chris LaCivita is running to be the RNC’s chief operating officer.

So Trump could clinch the nomination and control of the RNC just as it becomes crystal clear he has devastating financial and legal problems.

Also this week, far-right Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán is scheduled to meet with Trump at the Trump Organization’s property at Mar-a-Lago.

And Congress still must pass several appropriations bills. Meanwhile, House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) has suggested Democrats will protect House speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) from a vote to oust him if he will bring up for a vote the national security supplemental bill that provides aid to Ukraine.

Thursday, President Biden will deliver the State of the Union address.

I’m already tired just thinking of it all, but this week might well provide some new clarity on a number of major issues.

"Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Susan Collins (R-ME)."

btw why are these fascist traitors not dead yet

It also illustrates that Trump’s support is terribly soft.

Huh

yeah I don't know that the votes of 2,000 Republicans living in DC say much about Trump's support nationally

From unperson's link:

The most likely circumstance is that we are not far off from where we were in 2020, which means it will come down to a handful of swing states and a few hundred thousand votes across them, and that this will be close and hard fought.

Yes. This is the obvious situation, and it's why I'm not personally spending a lot of time on polls no matter whether they make me feel good or bad. No poll is going to either save or condemn us, it's going to be very close and we won't know the results until we know the results. Not that nothing can change things one way or another over the next eight months, but so much of how people feel about both of these guys is baked in already.

When the NYT/Sienna poll shows me at 12%, you better believe it is flawed.

Only 5% even know who I am.

— Dean Phillips (@deanbphillips) March 3, 2024

I know exactly two DC Republicans. They are really tetchy, even nervous about admitting their shameful secret. I can't really imagine how they feel or how they would vote. I guess maybe if I moved to Alabama or some such.

i feel like heather cox richardson writes like 700000 word essays all the time which always make it seem like stuff will be more important than it ever turns out to be, because the world is stupider than she understands.

"The World Is Stupider Than You Understand" would make a great name for an album.

Honestly this is just a normal week - shit is wack all the time now

“I’m already tired just thinking of it”

Same, Heather, same! And I have been for ages

https://apnews.com/article/north-carolina-donald-trump-endorsement-governor-cf9092cc8c10d0f2106aacedc63fd8af

At a rally Saturday in Greensboro, Trump compared Robinson, who is Black, to the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., the famed civil rights leader. Trump referred to Robinson as “Martin Luther King on steroids.”

Trump said Robinson wasn’t sure how to respond when Trump compared him to the legendary civil rights leader, telling him: “I think you’re better than Martin Luther King. I think you are Martin Luther King times two.”

mlk on steroids people

Mlk was low energy

https://fastsdxl.ai/share/g9xmtbrzdv2p

Imagine what King might have accomplished if he could've just powerlifted and chokeslammed his detractors

Every day and in every way for the past eight years (minimum), the world has revealed itself to be stupider than I could have ever understood it to be

My nephew tells me, he and all his first time voting college freshman friends, most of whom come from liberal east coast suburbs, are planning to vote for RFK jr. because Biden is supports war criminals.

Lol

Supreme Court unanimous in allowed Trump back on the ballot

No surprise, but disappointing.

XP do they know RFK jr. is also pro-Israel?

XP do they know RFK jr. is also pro-Israel?

It's not about knowing things. It's about feeling things, maaaaannnnn. You vote with your heart. If you weren't so old and jaded, you could see.

unfortunately a large number of people i know have decided to not vote at all, as a protest against the democratic party supporting genocide

(i did ask if they planned to vote for things on the ballot besides president, which seemed to be a surprise and did lead some people to agree that ok, they would go vote, but not for president)

but a lot will happen between now and november, and i expect the guy whose arrogant incompetence directly led to the death of hundreds of thousands in this country (covid) to keep doing horrible things and motivating young people to get out there and vote against him

Those people who are anti Biden because of foreign policy matters, where do they generally stand on Ukraine?

The great thing about people who "protest" by not voting against the most odious criminal the US political system has ever shat out is that they will remain pure of heart, so you can't possibly hold anything horrible that might happen after the election against them, because they only did what they did out of the purity and goodness that glows within them like E.T.'s heart-light. If you can't see the glow, it's just because you're as corrupt as the system itself, and they feel sad for you.

It’s amazing the lengths to which you will go to blame voters who are voting their consciences and not politicians, who aren’t representing their constituents’ interests or desires.

Considering that we know just how bad it might (will) get under Trump, I tend to agree with unperson. Imho, knowing that you voted your conscience will be of scant comfort or utility under a fascist regime.

whenever i wanna really satisfy my conscience i consider self immolation, that way other people don't have to suffer an obvious bad consequence for sake of my conscience. so far i settle for voting though.

shitty post

Keep pets and children away from your self-immolation.

FPed Hunter for that

i like you but i welcome that.

It’s amazing the lengths to which you will go to blame voters who are voting their consciences and not politicians, who aren’t representing their constituents’ interests or desires.

Dude, I say this with all the kindness I can muster: fuck your conscience. Voting is not praying. It is a utilitarian calculation based on maximum localized benefit. Joe Biden has done some things I don't like. He has also been a vastly better president than any other in my lifetime. Allowing the worst president in modern American history a second term, for any reason, is fucking inexcusable.

I'm not your dude. Go fuck yourself.

That so many here and in the media scape blame voters for not supporting politicians who aren't representing their interests instead of the politicians who aren't representing their constituents' interests is really telling.

Which interests, though?

All Constituents Matter

in South Florida the only party that endorses gay marriages, supports trans care and counseling, has called for executive action and legislation to give women total abortion access is the Democratic Party -- that at least gives lip service to the potential of the Fourteenth Amendment -- is the Democratic Party, therefore it represents this constituent's interests. Its position on Israel continues to be shitty and grievous, but I care more about the issues I mentioned in the previous sentence.

I cannot conceive of not voting against a criminal would-be dictator. To me, that is also a question of conscience. But, ymmv.

idk I seem to remember a lot of people insisting that if progressives banded together to deny Hillary the presidency then we'd get a true progressive next time. and our reward was Joe Biden. I mean there are ways to bring about real progressive change in this country, it's happened before, but it doesn't start from the top down. everyone's free to do what they want but yea it drives me nuts when people really passionate about say climate stuff abstain from voting because one guy isn't doing enough, when the other is openly hostile to the idea of renewable energy and literally pulled us out of the accord which most scientists feel is our last chance to save the planet. I get that both choices 'suck' but that's just living under capitalism. I guess if Trump wins at least you might not have to worry about having to make such difficult choices in the future!

The reward was a Supreme Court packed with right-wing religious fanatics with lifetime tenure.

I mean look at this the other way, why 'punish' the left for not being progressive enough rather than the right for being a party of lunatics and idiots who prop up criminals and Nazis? at the end of the day both parties get a say, both will be in and out of power, why insist the Overton window keeps shifting to the right?

here's the other sad fact: the majority of the country isn't progressive.

xp Being a party of lunatics and idiots appears to be working for them atm.

most of the country is somewhere in the middle, tilting toward the left, but not super left. the way to address this is at the grassroots and social level, not sitting out an election where a fucking dictator has a non zero chance of winning.

xp Being a party of lunatics and idiots appears to be working for them atm.

― immodesty blaise (jimbeaux), Monday, March 4, 2024 11:14 AM (one minute ago) bookmarkflaglink

I mean not really, they've underperformed in every election since Trump won. had 'traditional' factors applied the GOP probably could've turned this into a full-on fascist nation by now

Sure, but they control the House and (more importantly) the Supreme Court. They also appear to get to set the terms of the narrative.

In a sane world, they would have been consigned to the dustbin of history.

Trump and the GOP have lost pr underperformed in every election since 2016. They may likely lose the House in November (and us the Senate).

With the internet there are ni dustbins.

*no

Jesus fucking Christ pic.twitter.com/bkBjPD2DYZ

— ettingermentum🥥🌴 (@ettingermentum) March 4, 2024

Voting is not praying. It is a utilitarian calculation based on maximum localized benefit.

otm imo.

I think people of any/all ideological stripes can be far too precious about their votes, like it's some holy act. It's just a tool to use in a deeply flawed system. It can signify in your mind whatever you want it to, from full endorsement of a person and their platform to "Well, they're 22 percent better than the other guy," to just "Fuck THAT guy." But in practical terms, all that matters is the numbers that result. Intentions in either voting or not voting are entirely beside the point and are not registered anywhere.

sp

taking sides: thinking larry summers is a great guy to call for advice, or heavily respecting david brooks

*xp

Trump and the GOP have lost pr underperformed in every election since 2016. They may likely lose the House in November (and us the Senate).

Alfred, for a Britisher following along across the atlantic, which is more useful to have - the house or the senate?

LADY BRACKNELL. [Sternly.] Both, if necessary

In all seriousness, you need both.

Did Obama have both at one point?

for his first two years in office

and to be clear a veto-proof majority in the Senate for months

biggest squandered opportunity of my lifetime

the way to address this is at the grassroots and social level

Just a note that as I've mentioned before on here, I do volunteer work for unhoused advocacy/food rights orgs, environmental orgs, as well as prison abolition orgs. I vote on local and state matters, every election. I live in what is recently the bluest congressional district in the entire United States, and one which has regularly been in the top 10 in that regard.

None of these things will change the fact that our tax dollars are funding a genocide that is on full view for the entire world to see, and that the one person in our government who could do anything about it keeps bypassing congressional approval to send more armaments to kill Palestinian civilians. If Joe Biden stopped this— and he could!— then I would vote for him. I was planning on doing so, albeit unhappily because voting for president is always an unhappy exercise, before the current conflict.

You disapprove of this stance? Fine. But I am not the one who can change what is happening— that's on Joe Biden.

and to be clear a veto-proof majority in the Senate for months

filibuster-proof (for 178 days)

does the genocide stop once the GOP retakes control?

zients is a disaster

Wish Ron Klain was still the president

You disapprove of this stance? Fine. But I am not the one who can change what is happening— that's on Joe Biden.

This is fair, and probably many of us have individual red-line issues that by themselves can make it hard to pull that lever.

The one thing that I think is important is to put all this stuff in political rather than strictly moral context. Let's say Biden acted on Gaza in a way that you personally could support and thereby win your vote. What if — and I'm not asserting this, just making it a hypothetical — whatever action is necessary to get your vote and the votes of others like you was simultaneously politically harmful to him in such a way that he would lose more votes than he gains? And therefore also potentially the election? Worth it?

This is the problem I think with investing too much moral hope or passion at the presidential level. You've got two candidates vying to represent the whole country. I accept that there are some things that would make me really like a candidate that could also make them unelectable. Do I want them to do them anyway? Not necessarily! I care more about The Bad Guys having less power to affect my life and the lives of those around me than I do about moral/principled stands by losing candidates.

But obv ymmv

(And by calling one side The Bad Guys, I don't mean to imply that the other side is The Good Guys. I will settle for The Less Bad Guys.)

The one thing that I think is important is to put all this stuff in political rather than strictly moral context. Let's say Biden acted on Gaza in a way that you personally could support and thereby win your vote. What if — and I'm not asserting this, just making it a hypothetical — whatever action is necessary to get your vote and the votes of others like you was simultaneously politically harmful to him in such a way that he would lose more votes than he gains? And therefore also potentially the election? Worth it?

Yes, but I don't think this is what would happen— just as people will vote for him while he's aiding and abetting genocide, they will vote for him when he isn't doing so, and he will probably *gain* a number of voters, too.

question for those who disapprove of biden's ongoing, blind support of genocide, but are voting for him because not voting for biden is essentially a vote for trump (note -- i may fall into this camp):

how should everyday people like you or me exert pressure on biden and nearly all democratic senators to stop supporting genocide? is there anything more persuasive than "we won't vote for you"? what is the correct way to try to stop support for genocide while still voting for the person who enables it?

because unless i'm mistaken, democrats are counting on people like us to vote for them despite their support for genocide, which i believe means we have zero leverage in their thinking on it

Local action, local candidates. If you're in a safely blue district, organize for or at least vote for the most progressive candidates you can find for state legislature and Congress. That's where you're more likely to get those voices willing and able to speak up.

well the assumption there is that if the Dems start *losing* elections, they'll start changing their positions on these sorts of issues...which we clearly can see has never really happened

If candidates aren't losing elections on issues, then not enough people care about those issues, so that's where the work has to start.

So much of electoral politics is the end point of social/political movements. It's only very recently that, say, base-level LGBTQ rights have become a pretty standard expected position for Democratic candidates. That wasn't true even 10 years ago. That's not because we got a bunch of new bold Democrats, it's because the culture changed.

well the assumption there is that if the Dems start *losing* elections, they'll start changing their positions on these sorts of issues

i'm not sure that is the assumption - ideally democratic politicians would listen to their constituents in real time, feel the pressure of declining support among their base (and maybe a tinge of complicity in a morally bankrupt conflict) and change their positions *before* they lose elections

I guess part of it for me is also... I just don't see how US backing of the genocide would lessen under Trump. Lots of other things would definitely get worse and it's not like Trump would just magically turn on Netanyahu if he wins.

i am definitely not a person who...wants the word? chatgpt, help me computer god. "revolutionary extremist?" lol? anyway, i am not a person who actively hopes for the defeat of the lone major political party in the u.s. that is not made up of white evangelical fascists, in order to accelerate the dawn of the new future society which is going to be so much better. i am waaaaaay too pessimistic for that. this shitty society we're in right now is likely to be the best that we or any of the next several generations have.

so no, i'm not actually asking about the utility of people withholding their vote in order to make the democrats lose and teach them a lesson, i'm talking about a more democratic idea of political leaders listening to people and their own conscience at the same time

On Israel in particular, what we're seeing now from squishy libs is exactly what AIPAC and others have been building for years, decades. There is barely an elected official of either party at just about any level who hasn't been offered a trip to Israel, this has been cultivated and invested in over a long period of time, specifically so American politicians will mostly think favorably of Israel and not ask too many questions about it.

So we're not just up against Joe Biden's personal view or wishes (whatever those may be), we're up against an entrenched and constantly reinforced idea that in American politics, a certain level of default support for Israel is just automatic — not just for moral reasons, but because it's good politics. The Democratic establishment surely believes that at this point as much as the Republican establishment, and so far they don't have any reason not to.

There's also money:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/10/congress-member-pro-israel-donations-military-support

And on Biden's lifelong commitment to the Zionist project:
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/i-am-zionist-how-joe-bidens-lifelong-bond-with-israel-shapes-war-policy-2023-10-21/#:~:text=Entering%20national%20politics%20in%201973,vice%20president%20and%20finally%20president.

well again, that happening would have to start with the humiliating defeat of the Republican party, since they're the party who has effectively said "fuck it" wholesale to pretty much all political issues and made the entire party platform just "Make America Great Again". this is the party that ran Dr. Oz and an obviously brain-damaged Herschel Walker, this is the party who has thrown all their support behind a reality show star who committed nearly 100 felonies in broad daylight (and is also a confirmed sexpest), this is the party that basically passes zero bills when they do have power, and in fact will torpedo stuff solely so they can campaign on it later. if any meaningful change is gonna happen it needs to start by getting these unserious assholes out of office for good.

xp tipsy

otm - also, although democratic voters have shifted a bit away from supporting israel, support for the palestinians is still pretty much a wash with israel. and the majority of democratic voters still "don't take a side"

https://i.imgur.com/7WnbJ3l.png

https://i.imgur.com/lJyqpMO.png

(oh jeez, those charts only go up to pre-Oct 7. i was reading this article from just the other day so i assumed it was with updated polling post-Oct 7)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/02/29/palestine-democrat-support-election-voters-israel/

(anyway please ignore)

The polls have definitely shown some shifts because of the atrocities in Gaza — I believe that same Chicago Council polled showed a total of 53 percent of respondents said that U.S. military aid to Israel should not be used against Palestinians.

So one way to look at what's going on is that the outcry both here and abroad IS making a difference. I think you wouldn't have had Harris' statement yesterday without it. I think a lot of Americans have misgivings. But also, my guess is that even for that 53%, this is not a single-issue vote/won't vote thing. For nervous Dems in close races, there's still going to be a strong perception that there's a lot more risk in November of being perceived as "antisemitic" (which everyone's against) than "pro-genocide" (which many people don't think is really what's going on).

There's a very good profile of Biden in the latest New Yorker.

how should everyday people like you or me exert pressure on biden and nearly all democratic senators to stop supporting genocide? is there anything more persuasive than "we won't vote for you"? what is the correct way to try to stop support for genocide while still voting for the person who enables it?

― z_tbd, Monday, March 4, 2024 1:08 PM

I work locally to get as many progressive candidates as possible. Some of the candidates give me heartburn. But my friends in Orlando were proud they got a candidate as far-left-for-Florida as Maxwell Frost. Someone like him would be ideal in Miami-Dade; unfortunately, our club includes Everyone Not a Fascist, which means we have members who support the genocide against Palestinians. It also means I head from a moron who thinks Biden's so weak on Israel i.e. kissing Bibi's ass, that she's thinking voting for...Nikki Haley.

We got into a shouting match last month. We're not talking. This is to give you an idea about herding these cats.

My nephew tells me, he and all his first time voting college freshman friends, most of whom come from liberal east coast suburbs, are planning to vote for RFK jr. because Biden is supports war criminals.

are these dummies under the impression RFK Jr would have some kind of different policy re: israel? Dude loves Israel.

Ds love Kennedys

John and Bobby, anyway.

Ted was liked until he turned his car into a swimming pool and killed a woman

Ds don't love RFJ Jr, only weirdo dimwits do

haha RJF. RKP. RMA. whatever

RFP

Ted was liked until he turned his car into a swimming pool and killed a woman

He was sort of the Jim Belushi of the Kennedys.

And RFK Jr was the Hunter Biden of the Kennedys
Had competition though.

RFK Jr. is the Sydney Sweeney of Arrakis #onethread

Amazingly, the New York Times profiled actual Biden supporters. (Gift link.)

We have a few guys as young as the guy with the Biden cutout but without the cutout.

I feel like this should be put on a T-shirt and sold by the Biden campaign. I think a lot of people feel this way, or are at least in the like category.(And yes, sure, I know plenty of people disagree.)

“He loves Mr. Biden. “And I feel like I’m the only one,” he said, arguing that the news media had overwhelmingly focused on Mr. Biden’s tepid support. “Does anybody care that I exist?””

“Does anybody care that I exist?””

Bob Geldof's long-awaited charity follow up

T-shirt in gigantic Impact font:

BIDEN
RULES
FUIUD

lol idk I'm gonna vote for the war criminal ofc but that's too far for me

https://i.imgur.com/zkgCFxy.gif

There's a candidate on my CA Dem primary ballot named "PRESIDENT R BODDIE"

His name appears right about Joseph R Biden Jr. Ballot shenanigans?

Lol

No, he's a real person, a weirdo from Alaska

https://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/candidates/president/president-dem-cand-statements.htm#:~:text=President%20R.%20Boddie%20%7C%20DEMOCRATIC,as%20a%20write%2Din%20contender.

Totally on board the Dawson train

I don't know about that one guy who wants to "close the US borders until the laws are written properly". Doesn't seem to me like a well thought out idea.

Trump talks about shutting the borders all the time, but where will we get affordable avocados?

Not to mention the hundred thousand ordinary people who legally cross US borders every day, by car, plane, train, on foot, or on bikes.

if you want to send biden a message, go vote in the primary for Williamson, uncommitted, or your own write in, depending on your state's rules.

And definitely vote in the prez primary - as a veteran of multiple campaigns, I've seen how when the most progressive voices sit out a primary, local candidates with limited resources won't seek out these non-voters in future primaries until after they've went through everyone within the 'always votes' demo (if they even have enough vols to do so). I guess that makes sense - it's like when you are moving from one apartment to another, who do you depend upon to help - people who answer your calls and texts or someone who doesn't?

Sigh, OK fine. I was honestly not going to vote in my primary because I have no competitive races (and am willing to vote for Biden in November but not excited enough to go vote for him on a blank primary ballot). But you're right, it's important to be on the record as a voter.

But it stinks that the candidates aren't hearing the views and ideas of those who sat out the last election. If you ever want to actually impact what a candidate will view as an important issue, vote in a primary, or even better yet, attend a caucus. Then you are definitely getting some calls and outreach from hopefuls.

Sigh, OK fine. I was honestly not going to vote in my primary because I have no competitive races (and am willing to vote for Biden in November but not excited enough to go vote for him on a blank primary ballot). But you're right, it's important to be on the record as a voter.

― a man often referred to in the news media as the Duke of Saxony (tipsy mothra), Monday, March 4, 2024 7:22 PM (twenty-five seconds ago)

Appreciate that, thanks!

I'm coordinating the data for a candidate for Board of Supervisors in California, and because she has so many volunteers, I was actually able to expand the universe of our outreach to not just all of the Democrats, but to registered Greens, Peace and Freedom, and Working Families party voters. Which means the most progressive voters in the district are literally getting courted, and we've even had the candidate herself at their door and thus, will get to discuss the issues that matter most to them. Too bad this isn't the case everywhere!

Going to bring my ballot down right now, ahead of Super Tuesday

I did not do a protest vote with Biden... I understand the sentiment, but I think it's equally important that he unequivocally sweeps the nom

Amazingly, the New York Times profiled actual Biden supporters.

they have to run one of these every day until the election, to equal the number of "can you believe these rubes still love Trump" pieces

they have to run one of these every day until the election, to equal the number of "can you believe these rubes still love Trump" pieces

You're mischaracterizing what are actually "behold these noble, salt of the earth real Americans who await the return of their leader — we soft-handed city folk are their moral inferiors" pieces.

yes, in general they don't present the Trump articles in that kind of disparaging way at all, and meantime the Biden articles all tow the line of "Majority of Biden’s 2020 Voters Now Say He’s Too Old to Be Effective". the NYT must be run by republicans at the highest levels is all I can think

Sorry, I only read articles about exurban voters who are in diners

I mean the Times has been a racist warmongering birdcage liner for upper class birds for years, with the occasional good investigative report and a killer puzzles and cooking section. I recently cancelled all of my subscriptions and the cooking hurt the most, I admit.

Ms. Russell and Ms. Staller are ardent, unreserved supporters of Mr. Biden — part of a small but dedicated group of Democratic voters who think that he is not merely the party’s only option against Donald J. Trump but, in fact, a great, transformative president who clearly deserves another four years in office.

the article makes statements about proportions of voter opinion ("small but dedicated") while citing zero polling data. even the weirdos at Rasmussen have over 20% of respondents strongly approving of Biden's job performance, which would equal tens of millions of Americans

https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/biden_administration/biden_approval_index_history

Gore Vidal always mocked the NYT as "The Gray Lady" and correctly saw it as hidebound and conservative at heart. The only time in my memory that the NYT went very far out on a limb to upset the establishment was when they published the Pentagon Papers in 1971. That delighted the anti-war faction of the public and won them a reputation for liberal views that was further enhanced by constant ragging on the NYT by Agnew. Very little since then has ever justified that reputation, but conservatives still love to rag on it as part of the liberal media. It's now a tradition among them.

And the Times, when they run their thinkpieces like “how many trans kids are too many” gives cover to right wingers who then hold it up and and say “even the far left New York Times thinks that trans people are gross”.

did they ever apologize for Judith Miller

They actually did, more or less — I was there when the Judy Miller stuff happened, in an office backwater. It was quite the debacle. I could tell you some things, like how her copy always came in at the last minute and only certain editors were allowed to see it ...

Anyway, this was the editors' note that ran on the front page, fwiw: https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/world/from-the-editors-the-times-and-iraq.html?unlocked_article_code=1.aU0.Xucu.AM4gV5FI6L9-&smid=url-share

That was also the year right after Jayson Blair. Not a great time for the Times.

not sure which thread to put this but might as well put it here

https://gizmodo.com/black-trump-supporters-are-being-ai-generated-1851305062

From Tipsy's link:

In most cases, what we reported was an accurate reflection of the state of our knowledge at the time, much of it painstakingly extracted from intelligence agencies that were themselves dependent on sketchy information.

This only works as an excuse if the reportage clearly stated that there was exactly one source for this information and its accuracy could not be independently verified by any other sources. If "the state of our knowledge at the time" was reported as factual, but it wasn't it's just another way to say "we failed in our job and ignored our own rules".

Yeah, there was no excuse for it. There were a lot of red flags there, or should have been. There was her apparent closeness with Sulzberger, whom she'd cultivated and would threaten editors with, or just go over their heads. I saw a couple of her stories while they were in the editing stages, they were ripped apart and rewritten — which was common but not generally to such an extent — but also all of that was being done at the last possible second because she would file late (the assumption was on purpose) to make it harder for editors to block her.

Did she believe it herself? I think she believed she had the inside track on a big story. Anyway, it had terrible consequences. I think Bush would have pushed to war with or without credulous establishment media, but it definitely helped him do it.

Some critics of our coverage during that time have focused blame on individual reporters. Our examination, however, indicates that the problem was more complicated. Editors at several levels who should have been challenging reporters and pressing for more skepticism were perhaps too intent on rushing scoops into the paper. Accounts of Iraqi defectors were not always weighed against their strong desire to have Saddam Hussein ousted. Articles based on dire claims about Iraq tended to get prominent display, while follow-up articles that called the original ones into question were sometimes buried. In some cases, there was no follow-up at all.

not a lot of desire to name names...

thx for all the insight in response to my half-assed question tipsy

It was an interesting place to be a fly on some walls. (To give a sense of our little editing shop's place in the Times universe, we were the department they threatened to assign Miller to if she wouldn't resign. We had fun for a couple of days imagining her swanning in, but of course she took the severance package.)

whoa that’s interesting thx tipsy

Apparently we are having a primary today. I suppose I will vote because I have pretty much always voted when given the opportunity (since 1989), but the result seems like a foregone conclusion. I don't want to try to do something strategic or symbolic.

As it was in 2012, 2004, 1996, etc.

Those people who are anti Biden because of foreign policy matters, where do they generally stand on Ukraine?

So those anti intervention in Ukraine people are okay with *that* particular group of people being bombed into submission and murdered en masse, or capitulating to an authoritarian invading force? The parallels to another particular regional problem seem pretty apparent to me.

I thought the Nazis in Ukraine thing was a Russian talking point?

I reject the parallelism myself, but if you think Ukraine and Palestine are analogous and favor US intervention, are you saying the US should send military aid to Hamas or to Russia?

I don't have any good answers and am about to head onto a plane, but I kinda think being anti interference anywhere is consistent with being anti interference everywhere. Of course, that may not always get any of us the results we want. Russia victorious on one front, Israel victorious on the other, however that looks and wherever that ends.

Ok I must have misunderstood your post, because I thought table's friends were taking that exact position: no US military aid to anyone regardless of their cause. I don't think anyone who supports Palestine expects the US to ever back the Palestinians militarily -- they just want the US to stop helping Israel destroy and imprison them.

I have been to Ukraine, and it is a beautiful place. Personally, I tend to think of it as evidence that borders are poor indicators of what actually constitutes a country, as the very foundation of who is and isn’t Ukrainian is always contested by various factions with competing versions of history, all of which have some element of truth to them.

It seems like most people who live in the current Ukraine think they are Ukrainian and do not want to be invaded by Russia.

I guess I'm saying that US/Biden intervention in Ukraine is maybe stopping/slowing a similar situation to what is currently happening in Gaza, and a Biden loss would likely make that Ukraine situation as bad as or worse than Gaza.

dunno but when much of the region was very very radically "cleansed" and repopulated only within the last 80 yrs. sometimes i wonder how many of the people there are even related to those people, so terrible was the massacre and removal.

and starvation

JiC, frankly you don't know what you're talking about.

https://www.newstatesman.com/world/europe/ukraine/2023/01/ukraine-stepan-bandera-nationalist

from that article, and supporting my final point above:

As Davidzon put it to me, throughout modern Ukrainian history “the understanding of Ukraine as an ethno-nation has always lost”.

The hope among some I spoke to was that as Ukraine writes a new national story for itself in almost real time, it will both find new heroes and form a more nuanced attitude to the old ones. “I do hope that as time goes by we will see the shadow in every historical figure,” Lutsevych said. “I don’t think it’s good for Ukraine to be so hooked on the idea of glorification.”

Not all agree. Bandera will continue to be venerated in Ukraine, Oleksiy Goncharenko, a Ukrainian MP, told me. “All those who are fighting for Ukrainian freedom will be our heroes. Some of them will have controversial backgrounds. But that will not change the fact that all fighters for Ukrainian freedom will be heroes for us.”

But this is the US politics thread, so perhaps we can take this over to the Ukraine thread if we want to continue.

I feel like everything being said about Ukraine here is equally true of the United States

sinema not running

🚨🚨 SINEMA won't run for re-election in 2024.

"I will leave the Senate at the end of this year."

This clear the way for a Gallego (D) versus Lake (R) race with no Sinema independent candidacy. https://t.co/l1YAgBSclf

— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) March 5, 2024

I was too good for you

now she can start the wine bar in tempe

being a real politician is a hard job that sinema never cared to work at

I read that people liked being on her staff because they never had to work past 5 pm

or before 5pm

wine o'clock

It is always wine o'clock

Turns out living for three years in an abandoned gas station doesn’t make you a more empathetic politician.

What a loss

NOT

(And neither is the boat guy from WVa)

voted! (uncommitted ballot)

Turnout here in NorCal is supposed to be historically low, ugh

I just got home from my local polling place and I was only the 18th person to vote in-person at that location.

That said, the ballot drop off boxes were filled to the brim.

dropped my ballot off today at the Norwegian Seaman's Church, there were five or six people in attendance, but nobody else was there

Heh heh you said seaman

And thus ends the most exciting primary season of our lifetimes (unless death or jail makes a late appearance)

Haley's (officially) out.

big win for biden in michigan last night. uncommitted might be in tough shape only getting less than a third of biden’s votes

And the slaughter continues apace.

So Schiff is likely the next CA senator. A bummer, but will enjoy seeing Taibbi melt down about it.

After Minnesota, where "uncommitted" picked up 19%, Biden's second-smallest margin of victory was in Oklahoma, where Dean Phillips and Marianne Williamson each pulled 9% (a greater proportion for Phillips than he got in his home state) and someone named Stephen Lyons got 5%. Still a 64+ margin, but I'm curious if there's a story there.

Not that many Dems in Oklahoma?

hearing that Trump is underperforming his polls, idk how much that matters given we know most Republicans will vote for him anyway, though it does seem a surprising number of Haley supporters are saying they won't vote Trump, and even if only 10% of them actually mean it that's probably a big problem for him in November

Also lots of Indigenous people in Oklahoma who are less likely to trust establishment politicians for pretty understandable reasons.

idk how much that matters given we know most Republicans will vote for him anyway

There are fewer Republican voters nationally than Democratic voters. Trump needs to hold onto everyone who voted for him in 2020 and bring in new people to win in 2024. There is just no fucking way that happens. Biden, ideally, needs to hold onto everyone who voted for him in 2020, but is frankly in a much stronger position to gain votes thanks to the Dobbs decision.

This is a pretty good (as in, politically astute and very solid from a marketing standpoint) statement from Biden re Haley dropping out:

It takes a lot of courage to run for President – that’s especially true in today’s Republican Party, where so few dare to speak the truth about Donald Trump. Nikki Haley was willing to speak the truth about Trump: about the chaos that always follows him, about his inability to see right from wrong, about his cowering before Vladimir Putin.

Donald Trump made it clear he doesn’t want Nikki Haley’s supporters. I want to be clear: There is a place for them in my campaign. I know there is a lot we won’t agree on. But on the fundamental issues of preserving American democracy, on standing up for the rule of law, on treating each other with decency and dignity and respect, on preserving NATO and standing up to America’s adversaries, I hope and believe we can find common ground.

We all know this is no ordinary election. And the stakes for America couldn’t be higher. I know that Democrats and Republicans and Independents disagree on many issues and hold strong convictions. That’s a good thing. That’s what America stands for. But I also know this: what unites Democrats and Republicans and Independents is a love for America.

The Lincoln Project just had a huge orgasm.

I mean, he's wrong about Republicans loving America, but this is Joseph Robinette Biden.

Recent polling from Quinnipiac University found that about half of Republicans and Republican-leaning voters who supported Haley would vote for Trump, while 37 percent would vote for Biden. Twelve percent said they would abstain, vote for someone else or hadn’t yet decided what to do.

Haley is a fucking monster just like the rest of the GOP, that statement might be good politics but jfc it’s abhorrent

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/QAo1Ingszws/sddefault.jpg

Biden needs votes
Biden needs votes
Biden needs votes

One key to not driving yrself completely crazy with presidential politics in particular is that when you hear a candidate who you may eventually feel obliged to vote for making rhetorical outreach to voter demographics that don't include you, just tune it out.

Unless they bring Henry Kissinger (or living equivalent) to the convention

can't imagine it'd smell any worse than usual

Why would Kissinger have wasted time at a crowded convention when he could have a gin and tonic and chill at Hillary's?

Kissinger complained that Biden never invited him to the White House, which is a plus for Biden in my book.

in 2016 I tried to use that kind of logic to convince some of my less-insane Republican friends and colleagues to vote Hillary - like, do you really think it'll be good for the Republican party if Trump wins? he's gonna force everyone to bend to his will (which changes by the hour), he's gonna put the dumbest people in charge of everything and make all his voters look like morons. he's not actually going to accomplish much because he's utterly incompetent but he might make a lot of serious mistakes which could constitute an existential crisis for the country. obviously you don't *want* Hillary in charge but come on...she's a moderate. Republicans can work with her.

well guess what, all that came to pass. Trump lucked into a bunch of conservative judges but ultimately him and the GOP have accomplished what exactly? how many bills have they actually passed since retaking the House? what have they produced for the American people outside of Hunter Biden hog pics? everyone who was hysterical about how Trump was going to try to overthrow the government were right! everyone who thought he was gonna screw our allies and cozy up to Nazis and fascists was 100% correct! do you really want to go through all this again? especially since you already have the Supreme Court for the next 40 years?

Trump lucked into a bunch of conservative judges but ultimately him and the GOP have accomplished what exactly?

The 2nd part of the sentence answers the first. Roe overturned, aiming at mifepristone and birth control next. Federal oversight and regulation gutted. They've accomplished a LOT (of misery).

a lot of people who vote GOP don't exactly want that though. support for overturning Roe was at like 28%. have they done anything which actually polled well?

Demonized immigrants, a bipartisan phenomenon.

one thing Trump did was slash corporate taxes: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/feb/29/trump-tax-cuts-us-companies

Booming post, frogbs.

Frogbs should really be part of the team making Biden’s National TV ads

Which, really, should be 30-60 seconds of insane DJT foolishness, ending with “do you seriously want four more years of this? I’m Joe Biden, and I approve this message”

(Well, some of the ads, maybe like 50%, and then the other half would be “here’s what I’m gonna do for you”)

Trump lowered taxes, sped up vaccine production and approved bump stock bans, the latter of which will likely get overturned by his supreme court. that's about it, iirc, besides judges and generally wasting everybody's time and money and energy and life force/spirit.

For some his 'insane foolishness' is a feature, not a bug... and to others it's 'well, that's just Trump, sure he's a little rough around the edges, but it's on brand'
I get so fucking sick of these apologists

I don't even know what a second term would look like. it's not like he's suddenly more astute or more competent, he would be even more erratic and unproductive than the first time around, plus he would be an instant lame duck. hell, I wouldn't be shocked, should he get elected again, if he were impeached again.

Well, there's this big Heritage plan to fire every career gov't employee and replace them with Trump flunkies - J.D. Vance says Trump should ignore the courts going forward
So, a soft coup of sorts

xp

He will use every second of his second term trying to get a third term.

willwould

*shudders*

somewhere a batch of random chicken mcnuggets gots to have e.Coli

he has Barron sample his food before he eats anything

Which, really, should be 30-60 seconds of insane DJT foolishness, ending with “do you seriously want four more years of this? I’m Joe Biden, and I approve this message”

― Marten Broadcloak, mild-mannered GOP congressman (Raymond Cummings), Wednesday, March 6, 2024 12:53 PM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

it sounds like this is the direction they're actually going to go in, which I think is smart. it needs to be drilled into people's heads that when you vote Trump, you're voting for a sex offender, a fraudster, an insurrectionist, and a man who was impeached twice and is currently being charged with 91 felonies, the vast majority of which were committed in broad daylight, for which his only defense is "the president should be above the law". I see Republican voters constantly shocked by how hated Trump and his ideas really are the instant they get into the real world and quite frankly I think that sort of shaming really does work...for some of them. enough to make it really difficult for Trump to win.

I'm pretty interested in what Nikki Haley is gonna do now - I mean I'm pretty sure she's gonna eventually just go "all that matters is defeating Biden" and endorse Trump in exchange for the promise of a cabinet position, but who knows. Trump is 78 years old, he's obviously in poor health, his mind is deteriorating, he has so much legal stuff hanging over his head and should he lose the election may actually go to prison. There's no succession plan here, no one to take over the party once he's gone, no real ideas or policy goals to champion (other than making everyone mad) and every GOP voter and donor knows that letting people like Kari Lake and MTG run the party would be an absolute disaster. I mean they're getting their asses kicked everywhere now, once Trump's gone it will only get worse. Someone has to position themselves as a non-insane and capable person who could actually win elections, since everyone else has either retired or is Ron DeSantis.

Haley's gonna start calling referring to all kinds of things as 'babies'.

It'd be funny if she used it the way Sammy Davis Jr. did.

she's gonna endorse Lyndon LaRouche as a write-in

Haley will do whatever she has to to position herself for 2028.

It doesn't matter and nobody cares, but Dean Phillips ended his campaign today too.

Who?

mike jones

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlRYftQTj9U

who is Mike Joooooooooones

Dean Phillips? From Luna and Galaxie 500?

My favorite Corn Pop band

Mike Jones would’ve had a better shot at the nomination to be really real

Back then voters didn’t want me, now I’m hot voters all on me

Haley will do whatever she has to to position herself for 2028.

To paraphrase Ben Bradlee, she gave what was like a non-endorsement endorsement this morning, leaving the door open for her to actually endorse later under some bogus pretense. (If she is angling for 2028, I don't know why she thinks she'd be in any better position then than now, even if Trump does lose.)

I don't know, if Trump somehow manages to not win again and reinforces his rep as the perennial loser, she may want to stay detached so she can say I told you so without the taint of opportunistic sycophancy

regardless of whether or not Trump loses, the republican base is not going to get any more moderate in 2028, and I don't think she's ever going to be president. Harris has a better chance than her, and deserves it more

I don't care much about Haley, but do wonder about her supporters

The only way Trump lets Haley into his cabinet is if he wants her nearby to torture her.

"She's not my type"

lol PK

she may want to stay detached so she can say I told you so without the taint of opportunistic sycophancy

That would definitely be her rationale for keeping some distance, but I don't see this party turning back either--if Trump loses, his supporters will just become more resentful and hateful, and I don't think that distance would be worth anything in 2028. And if she does endorse, can't see that helping her either. She's basically nowhwere. She should not endorse and try to land on CNN or something.

I don't care much about Haley, but do wonder about her supporters

― Andy the Grasshopper, Wednesday, March 6, 2024

Except for a few, her supporters are going to go to Trump is what I think

yeah but a few is all it takes

hopefully!

as unperson has repeatedly pointed out, dude lost last time and nothing he has done since then has gotten him a single new voter

meanwhile who even knows how many kids are registered to vote for the first time because of Taylor/tiktok, and they hate republicans

but I don't see this party turning back either

I mean.. it has to end eventually, yeah? Sen. Joe McCarthy had a good run until he didn't anymore

regardless of whether or not Trump loses, the republican base is not going to get any more moderate in 2028, and I don't think she's ever going to be president. Harris has a better chance than her, and deserves it more

haha <3

has a prosecutor ever been president before?

as unperson has repeatedly pointed out, dude lost last time and nothing he has done since then has gotten him a single new voter

― I painted my teeth (sleeve), Wednesday, March 6, 2024 8:28 PM (six minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

i think the concern is that unlike in 2020, in 2024 the republicans control the election-certifying house of representatives, plus there are even more ramped-up voter suppression efforts than ever?

yeah but that's countered with 91 criminal charges

xxxxp my friend chided me before the 2020 election, saying that Trump wouldn't get one more voter in 2020 after his disastrous presidency, but he got like 10,000,000 new voters over 2016, so I'm not counting on that

has a prosecutor ever been president before?

Thomas Dewey came pretty darn close, but lost by a mustache whisker

I'm not sure what was funny about that, table

but he got like 10,000,000 new voters over 2016

culture wars, the war on woke, furries using classroom litter boxes.. it could be worse this time around

as unperson has repeatedly pointed out, dude lost last time and nothing he has done since then has gotten him a single new voter

This will make me feel better when is no longer polling ahead of Biden

I'm not sure what was funny about that, table

I appreciate your graciousness table. I’m know I'm an old conventional liberal and you don't think like me, but thank you for not chiding me for being a Harris supporter

but he got like 10,000,000 new voters over 2016

Not being in office is Trump's biggest advantage this year. There are some people who are sick of him, but they're not actively mad at him for the way things are. They might just not vote, but they might also vote for him just because on one level an election with an incumbent is always a binary change/not change choice. Which is of course one reason that an octogenarian incumbent with low approval ratings shouldn't be in the race, because if the Dem was someone else then Trump would be the most known-and-unloved candidate. But here we sit.

I appreciate your graciousness table. I’m know I'm an old conventional liberal and you don't think like me, but thank you for not chiding me for being a Harris supporter

thanks. I'm always eager to read your posts even when I disagree with them. They are a vital part of the conversation on this message board. Your posts in the books threads always make me think I should broaden my horizons

and I like you a lot, too!

John Fetterman and Bob Casey can eat shit.

https://www.phillyvoice.com/fetterman-removes-william-way-funds-from-senate-bill/

Fetterman is a disaster

Fetterman is a reliable Democratic vote.

he's a below replacement level democratic vote in PA.

Pennsylvania is West Virginia's forehead and a couple dangly Democratic earrings. Not sure what kind of ideal Democratic Senator you think is gonna win there.

Pennsylvania is West Virginia's forehead and a couple dangly Democratic earrings. Not sure what kind of ideal Democratic Senator you think is gonna win there.

Seriously. Philadelphia is to Pennsylvania as Austin is to Texas.

https://thomaszimmer.substack.com/p/the-much-vaunted-guardrails-are-failing

I don't know that this necessarily needs to be shunted off to the containment thread, but it's been illuminating to see folks around me who don't seem to pay close attention to (or at least frequently talk openly about) politics expressing shock and despair that Trump is still likely to win. It's like folks have had this veil of denial or blinders on and, since Tuesday, are suddenly catching on that, "holy shit, this actually is happening again".

by "this" I mean more a sense of that he's actually going to have a legitimate shot at winning again, not necessarily that he will win.

it's basically been a 50/50 shot for a while now, but we're still a long way out from the election

It’s kind of, all of a sudden, “oh, right, national politics! That’s a thing that happens here…”

As has been noted, we don't have one election. We have 50something elections, which then get collated. Most of their outcomes are a foregone conclusion. New York is gonna New York; Wyoming is gonna Wyoming.

So once again We are essentially being ruled a coupla counties in Pennsylvania, Florida, etc.

xp - I think it's more just, "well surely something is going to happen before the general, he can't possibly just glide through unscathed again.. oh, huh, I guess he can".

All those beautiful indictments

Indictments coming up to me with tears in their eyes, saying "We're so sorry Joe Biden made us do this."

I'm in southeast PA right now. So far I haven't seen any political signs or bumper stickers at all anywhere, except for one roadside Kennedy sign somewhere. And half the people look like Fetterman.

Fetterman is a reliable Democratic vote.

so who do you support for the next PA Senate race that satisfies your requirements and can win the state

“who do you think is gonna blah blah blah be reasonable “

no.

"The choice was either to pull it or watch it get stripped out, attacked by Republicans, and ultimately killed," Fetterman said. "This is not the end of this fight and I am going to fight for William Way to secure their funding in the FY25 appropriations process."

I mean how true is this? Sure Fetterman is a disappointment (most senators are though), but everyone here is making it seem like he's doing this unilaterally and a Joe Manchin in sheep's clothing, which he's not from my view. He's not up for reelection this year so it doesn't seem like an action attempting to pander to centrists or the right, perhaps he's being pragmatic and picking his fights?

The Dems have given up on the gay vote afaic.

― butt dumb tight my boners got boners (the table is the table), Thursday, March 7, 2024 12:32 PM (one minute ago)

I'm confused by this statement - Dems have the most pro-LGBTQ+ platform and legislative record (especially considering the amount of time they've been in divided gov or the opposition) of any major political party on Earth. And we're about to have the first Trans congressional rep in Delaware with Sarah McBride. Are they perfect? No, but considering how self-identified conservatives outnumber self-identified liberals by ~9%, requiring Dems to win majorities of moderates, I consider that fairly impressive

xp
I guess my genuine q would be: what's the difference between pulling it and it being stripped out?

Perhaps it would be a better show of support to push for it knowing it will fail, and get Republicans to, once again, show off their prejudiced, hateful rhetoric in full view, but perhaps that is not the once winning strategy it used to be and that's the source of the pragmatism here? This subtly of "playing politics" I find very frustrating and distasteful (happens a lot here in California too, but with different issues and budget line items) but I also don't see why this should result in equating Fetterman to a Repub wolf in Dem clothing as others here paint him.

Fetterman is indeed unacceptable to those who prefer to stand in the voting booth and gaze enraptured at their own perfect political reflection in a hand mirror

medicare for all / social security = birth to the earth

xpost No when I stand in the voting booth I’m always in shorts and waving an Israeli flag over my head.

yeah come on let's not go too far. you can object to tables' scorched earth view without pretending Fetterman hasn't been disappointing as a public figure

more disappointing than Senator Oz?

What about Senator Connor Lamb?

I don’t think Oz is capable of disappointing me.

Well Lamb lost the primary so... he should have what, run third party and thrown the seat to Oz?

I guess I don't really understand this discussion

I mean these are dumb choices. Of course any dem is going to be better than any republican. Would a centrist hack like Lamb have been better than Fetterman? Possibly.

more disappointing than Senator Oz?

― the absence of bikes (f. hazel), Thursday, March 7, 2024 2:35 PM (eleven minutes ago)

Sorry, maybe this was a genuine, non-rhetorical question.

In which case: disappointing compared to what I thought I had learned about Fetterman and his politics (often through statements he made on social media or to the press) when he was running for office. I'd also say that I would be disappointed in any senator in any state who made a point of publicly counterprotesting an antiwar or anti-genocide protest -- that in my opinion goes beyond having views that differ from my own and into "this guy is scary" territory.

idk how anybody could react to Fetterman like he isn't a complete sellout. he sold his voters a bill of goods and is now flipping them the bird after an abrupt heel turn.

I disagree strongly with his support for Israel, but you can't say he didn't explicitly state he was pro-Israel during his Senate campaign because he did

idk how anybody could react to Fetterman like he isn't a complete sellout. he sold his voters a bill of goods and is now flipping them the bird after an abrupt heel turn.

What bill of goods did he sell? Did he take a position on Israel/Palestine during the campaign that he's now reversed himself on, that I'm not aware of? He was never anything but a working-class white Democrat, basically an east coast Jon Tester. Yes, he aligned himself with Sanders based on economic/class issues, and/but none of that has changed that I know of. People are making up a John Fetterman to fight with because they're mad about Gaza.

xp
yes, I meant to mention that part of the disappointment down to my not learning about his views in full. But that's why I included the bit about him counterprotesting. It's one thing for a Democrat to support Israel — that wouldn't surprise me — it's another to make a spectacle of yourself waving a flag at people protesting the deaths of civilians. I found that genuinely disturbing.

it ain't even just Israel. after calling himself a progressive for years, he then came out and said derisively that he wasn't a progressive, and started supporting anti-immigration measures he hadn't previously shown support for, even using the right-wing phrase du jour "there is a crisis at our borders"

rob otm

Perhaps it would be a better show of support to push for it knowing it will fail, and get Republicans to, once again, show off their prejudiced, hateful rhetoric in full view, but perhaps that is not the once winning strategy it used to be and that's the source of the pragmatism here?

I don’t know that this was ever a winning strategy in Congress. Footage of someone voting no is not as viscerally awful as footage of someone having fire hoses and dogs set upon them.

major side eye at Katie Porter popping off about the "rigged" election she lost

I think his spectacle and combativeness are what got him elected when someone like Lamb would have lost to the Trump-backed Oz, so is the same spectacle in the service of being militantly pro-Israel embarrassing? Yes. Can I really complain if I liked it just fine when it was pissing off Trump and upsetting Senate norms, and likely kept the Senate in Democratic control? I don't know.

And we're about to have the first Trans congressional rep

Danica Roem is a Virginia state senator, trans. Rachel Levine is a senior HHS official, trans.

Democrats are not perfect (as noted) but we're at least trying.

or maybe just maybe Fetterman's brain is fucked up from a major stroke and he is not the same person he was before.

hasn't he always been not a bad guy at all but still a child of affluence? didn't he only start really working in his early 30s, and in politics, at that? not casting aspersions! but no ally is entirely saintly

major side eye at Katie Porter popping off about the "rigged" election she lost

Yeah, this is gross and she needs to take another tact.

I am still flummoxed at why, in an era where every elected official is not only trained to avoid drawing attention to themselves on contentious issues, they've also got to witness how swing voters will end the careers of people with 'main-character syndrome', why in the fuck Fetterman would go all-in on projecting his weird pro-Likud/anti-Palestine views to the point where it's now his identity, while also eerily echoing Bush-era reactions to anti-war sentiment. He's had some great votes and pushed some solid legislation during his brief Senate tenure (and I appreciate that he's backing Andy Kim in NJ), but why taint your good work by something so sour and dickish? How is he better off politically?

If you were to poll 1,000 moderate, apolitical swing voters (as in, the people who unknowingly hold the future of our democracy in their hands), asking them "which of these choices do you prefer: making any military support of Israel's battle with Hamas conditional on PM Netanyahu putting a stop to the invasion of Gaza and pulling back the settlements that antagonize neighbors; or giving him what he wants, regardless of what he does to Gaza/West Bank/Golan Heights?", is the second option really so much more popular than the first to where it would justify (in a political, not moral sense) Fetterman's antics? There's no way that's the case.

perhaps he's just fervently pro-israel for some deep seated, non-politically calculated reason; I don't know what that reason would be and I would hope it is not a bigoted reason.

I forgot to add, why do so many elected officials like Fetterman equate being pro-Israel with meaning that you had to be pro-Likud? Can't you be pro-Israel and pro-2-states while also opposing Bibi's shitty party and their fuckery? What's the benefit?

I guess it depends on if you think his behavior is a schtick and behind the scenes he is actually making those kinds of calculations, or if he really is as he seems to be, and therefore is not actually making calculated choices in that way at all... he might just have his beliefs and figure since he got elected he should act on them without really looking for external validation

Is he in the process of being divorced or did I imagine that?

his wife took a social media break and this turned into a rumor that they split up over his Israel position but I think it was a progressive fever dream.

his wife is more popular than he is though, maybe she should run

His wife said she was taking a break
But Fetterman said she was being harassed online by “the kind of people who protest outside my house every friday.”

Biden watches Morning Joe tv show per links earlier, but apparently his Chief of Staff won't let him meet with the Democratic Hispanic Caucus regarding border issues and see what they think

https://punchbowl.news/article/chc-white-house-tensions-flare-border-policy/

I was hoping for more Carhartt Dems, now I ain't so sure

I was hoping for more Carhartt Dems, now I ain't so sure

Everybody loves the working class until they actually talk to a working class person.

and there's nobody more genuinely working class than Senator John Fetterman

Jill Biden is going to have 20 guests at the State of the Union speech tonight

Among the guests are a woman from Alabama whose in vitro fertilization treatments were stopped after a state court decision, and another from Texas who was denied an abortion in the state despite what her doctors said would be health complications from the pregnancy. Their presence signals Mr. Biden’s emphasis on an issue that has lifted Democrats in recent elections as he faces a rematch with former President Donald J. Trump, whom he trails in many polls.

They are among a number of guests intended to touch on health policy, including Maria Shriver, the journalist who has become a women’s health advocate.

Also on the list are the head of the United Automobile Workers and a number of union members, as the president seeks to burnish his labor bona fides. Other guests, including a mayor, a police officer and the prime minister of Sweden, represent a range of issues, from student debt forgiveness to infrastructure to jobs programs.

Everybody loves the working class until they actually talk to a working class person.

there's a reason a lot of working class people voted for Trump in the rust belt

I should have added "white" to "working class" there

Everybody loves the working class until they actually talk to a working class person.

And we wonder why the party is losing them.. actually, no we don't

here we go

Santos is going to steal steal so many coats tonight...

he still has his lanyard?

god, all of this is painful

biden saying "illegals" over and over while greene shouts over him with some unknowable bullshit, johnson shakes his head no, and harris smiles blankly

he's been on fire for the most part, though

yeah, mostly sounds good to me.

Everybody loves the working class until they actually talk to a working class person.

Fetterman’s dad was a partner in an insurance firm and he has a finance MBA.

His Israel Warrior schtick does make feel about like I’ve felt after every conversation I’ve had with a white guy with a MBA, though.

One member, GOP Rep. Max Miller, who left early, said he left because: “This is beneath a president. It’s a full blown campaign speech.”

Lol irony

Rep. Miller, I have some shocking news for you.

My wife is for some reason watching the GOP rebuttal in the living room. I’m in the bedroom and all I can hear is “rising star” Katie Britt sounding like she’s in the verge of breaking into tears.

Katie Britt alternating between crying and doing a creepy serial killer smile while doing a whisper rant about the border and how Biden is personally inviting in illegals to kill women. The NBC network reporters just repeated cliches about her being young without factchecking her or even commenting on her weird drama school, Saturday Night Live evangelical approach

Saturday Night Live evangelical approach

She was chosen for this role by Speaker Johnson.

True, while she’s easy to laugh at, she like Speaker Johnson is scary .

She is also a lawyer, former CEO married to a lobbyist who used to be a football player, while pretending to be just a Mom concerned about her kids in their Alabama home

Biden’s speech was energetic and I liked what he said about unions, capping insulin prices , and taxing billionaires ( although listening to him endorse right wing immigration policy is painful, and it may not get him votes anyway)

https://www.threads.net/@potus/post/C4N7iwjtrBT/

Right-wing freaks have completely lost the ability to communicate with normal people (people who aren't marinating in the right-wing parade of grievances all day every day). They have an endless list of arcane references that no one else even recognizes or understands, and when they start jabbering, they sound like they come from a parallel Earth.

you guys are making me want to watch this now

"my two school-age children, my daughter Bennett and my son Ridgeway..."

holy crap @ Kavanaugh's expression after Biden blasted them.

Enough is enough 🎭🎥📽️🎞️ pic.twitter.com/sWZHh1tCq4

— umichvoter 🏳️‍🌈 (@umichvoter) March 8, 2024

Who do they think will relate to this who isn't already in the tank for them?

"my two school-age children, uday and qusay…”

they’ll turn out fine, lady

here you go https://t.co/WIAkWIL8mO pic.twitter.com/7iNEjQT26g

— Emissary of Night 🔆🍉 (@EmissaryOfNight) March 8, 2024

why does she keep smiling?

why does she keep smiling?

Because her pastor told her a woman must always smile.

Does that Republican response end with the lights just shutting off, and her calling out, into the darkness, can I please get my dinner?

Well that looked absolutely batshit.

[Biden to propose new $5,000 tax credit for first-time home buyers

Republicans will probably kill this

[Biden to propose new $5,000 tax credit for first-time home buyers

Republicans will probably kill this

I am 100% in favor of the GOP foregrounding christofascists who seem like they've never interacted with another human being. Don't just leave that shit bubbling under the surface, y'all, let the normals of the world see how truly fucking weird and warped you are.

Jesus is the rock and he rolls my blues away, bopashoobop iirc

I am 100% in favor of the GOP foregrounding christofascists who seem like they've never interacted with another human being. Don't just leave that shit bubbling under the surface, y'all, let the normals of the world see how truly fucking weird and warped you are.

That fucker with the eye patch was on CNN (I think) talking about "abortions of convenience," and some other fucker was tweeting about being against replacing lead pipes. Keep it coming, keep it coming, all the way to November.

Some of the current class of loonies consider the fucker with the eye patch a Rino.

yeah Eye Patch guy is not liked by MAGA that's why he gets to go on CNN

I mean that is why they had such a disappointing 2022, turns out running a talking concussion for Senate and airing 90-second ads of you shooting stuff in a field doesn't actually get you a lot of votes

anyway I saw like 10 minutes of the SOTU. Biden sounded good. I hope he keeps that energy up. unfortunately after so much talk I think he really is gonna have to start getting more Doritos in the bag.

I look forward to Snickers slapping "Now with 10% more Snickers inside!" on their wrappers.

I think the campaign has begun...

New ad just dropped 🔥 pic.twitter.com/vXJy19jZvc

— Biden-Harris HQ (@BidenHQ) March 8, 2024

this was published before her rebuttal but lol:

Ms. Britt, who at 42 is the youngest Republican woman ever elected to the Senate, is on Donald J. Trump’s short list of potential running mates, according to two people with direct knowledge of the list.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/07/us/politics/katie-britt-talking-points-influencers.html

Not a bad ad to get things going

omg, she's an actual Alabama senator? I figured she was a state senator or something.

that is a very good ad, though I think bits of it are dubbed over...during the actual SOTU he said "crimate crisis"

Sounded like 'crimate crisis' in the ad, as well.

Al Michaels once said a player was 'unmolested' on a broadcast, I'll let it slide.

brains leaking out their ears because biden shouted and it spooked them

Biden wants to replace lead pipes. He failed to mention that the unfunded mandate sets an almost impossible timeline, will cost billions, infringe on the rights of the States and their residents – all for benefits that may be entirely speculative. #sotu https://t.co/CD6zaEHK9M

— Kris W. Kobach (@KrisKobach1787) March 8, 2024

states' rights to drink lead

GOP: bring back leaded gasoline!

remember when people were eating horse paste

Republicans have been insane longer than I've been alive but there was at one point in time still some semblance of rational thought behind the things that conservatives picketed for/protested against, even if I still wholeheartedly rejected their thesis statement.

now it just boils down to "hey look I wouldn't personally drink gasoline but fuck the government taking steps to prevent people doing this - if people want to drink gasoline, that's their God-given right. also what evidence is there that gasoline drinking is bad for you. in fact...you know what ,I changed my mind, I'm going to drink a little each morning. actually you know what, it's going to be my primary beverage now, since it's triggering you so much. btw, please donate if you can to my Gofundme, I've had a lot more visits to the hospital for some reason."

like at least when I found a completed petition at church to ban several crime dramas from TV, I got why they were doing that, even as I picked up the petitions and surreptitiously threw them into the shredder

Republicans have been insane longer than I've been alive but there was at one point in time still some semblance of rational thought behind the things that conservatives picketed for/protested against, even if I still wholeheartedly rejected their thesis statement.

I know you're right, yet I was old enough to remember Newt Gingrich's Contract On America and just old enough to remember Reagan-Bush's economic policy, support of Freedom Fighters, and the nomination of Clarence Thomas.

I mean yeah, Reagan did also say most pollution came from trees so....I guess this is an Overton window thing

some other fucker was tweeting about being against replacing lead pipes

Seriously, who is against this?

(Racist assholes who have drunk too much lead-contaminated water, most likely.)

support of Freedom Fighters

Including, but not limited to, putting coke on the streets of Los Angeles and other cities.

I was in college for the Reagan years, I thought that was as bad as it could get. Ah, sweet summer of youth.

i.e. Republicans

xp

I saw the Kobach tweet after I posted that. Kris Kobach is the consummate grifter. I'm not sure he believes in anything except making sure he keeps getting steak dinners.

I don't know if I want to take Kris Kobach's advice on water pipes:

On June 23, 2001, Kobach married Heather Mannschreck, a former environmental systems engineer who now has a part-time photography business in addition to homeschooling their five daughters. Kobach, his wife, and their children live on their farm near Lecompton, north of Lawrence, Kansas. Their residence is in a building, the permits for which Kobach originally received lower taxation and permitting fees due to agricultural exemptions, rather than residential use. Kobach said he intends to build a residential home on the property. When building it, Kobach "closed in" the plumbing and electric work so it was not possible for the building inspector to examine it without tearing up the floor and removing walls that covered wiring. There was no septic system or water source. Despite those difficulties, he was granted permit waivers by the county administration, precipitating public controversy.

I am utterly confident that Kris Kobach's children do not drink lead-contaminated water.

They do, however, have their brains filled with religious venom.

can we assume that Britt's weird video is a prebuttal? I can't imagine that was recorded after Biden's speech

Even if it was recorded afterwards, they’re always written before anyone hears the SOTU, which is why they’re always terrible and are only interesting in terms of checking out whatever freak got picked for this awful assignment.

"Alright, which one of you is completely unprepared to be in front of a camera, borderline terrified? You? You're up!"

needs to be a rising star, like bobby jindal

lol

Charlie Kirk, founder of the far-right Turning Point USA youth group, said: “I’m sure Katie Britt is a sweet mom and person, but this speech is not what we need. Joe Biden just declared war on the American right and Katie Britt is talking like she’s hosting a cooking show, whispering about how Democrats ‘dont get it’.”

meanwhile, the War on Woke continues unabated:

The Florida legislature passed a bill on Friday that prevents any city, county, or municipality in the state from adopting legislation aimed to protect outdoor workers from extreme heat, prompting many to call out lawmakers for being “cruel” to the “most vulnerable workers”.

Charlie Kirk understands that youths are notoriously susceptible to calls to 'go to war'.

xpost A Right to Dehydrate State

Last I heard about Charlie Kirk was his campaign to convince people that MLK was actually bad.

which actually displays some refreshing honesty about the feelings of right-wingers towards him rather than quoting the one sentence.

xxxp I guess "Workers Rights" = Woke now

right-wingers won't cop to it, but they have been spending enormous amounts of effort to convince people that Jesus was actually bad

The cruelty is the point, I reckon.

Joe Biden just declared war on the American right

If only, Charlie.

xxxp I guess "Workers Rights" = Woke now

Where Woke - and workers - go to die

ok watching Katie Britt's SOTU response and holy hell it is weird

I just saw somebody refer to her as Betty Cracker.

its not just the weird ASMR whispering it's the fact that she is tying to emphasize every word

she’s extremely evangelical youth pastor, the sudden switches between fake exuberance over how wonderful things can be to fake barely contained righteous anger over how the wonderful things have been taken away but will return again soon under divine leadership

It’s very artificial and off putting, manipulative and downright creepy to most people, but also about 25% of Americans like it

I hope trump picks her for VP... the weirder, the better

Trump picks her, there so going to be an ensuing Sexual Harassment suit if they lose.

'Come here and sit on my lap... Pence did it all the time!'

Rolling Stone said even Trump campaign members were calling them to denounce the SOTU response. I doubt she’s gonna be the pick.

https://www.al.com/news/2024/03/whitmire-is-katie-britt-for-real.html

XP yeah, she didn't even mention him, did she? It was all about Big Bad Biden. I was surprised to hear that he apparently signed off on that speech before her horrific delivery of it. Seems like he would've demanded a bigger role in it.

Lmao

imagine getting cooked like this by the President of the United States, brutalpic.twitter.com/q7iFPmiY9h

— Bill Ari (@ImBillRay) March 8, 2024

i can't stop watching that rfk jr. video clip where they ask him about flying on epstein's plane. omg. what a weirdo.

"So and I run into everybody in New York. I mean, I knew Harvey Weinstein, I knew Roger Ailes, I knew -- O.J. Simpson came to my house. Bill Cosby came to my house.”

Losing My Edge (2024 Scumbag Remix)

Southeastern Pennsylvania update: I haven't driven out of my way or anything, but so far I have seen one Kennedy sign, one Biden sign, and one Nikki Haley sign. No Trump signs yet, maybe they are all embarrassed, like Marge in that post up thread.

Some people around here have never taken down their Trump signs

You know, there are people who actually live here whom ILX could ask about these things.

This not being a contested primary year, I would expect not to see many new signs out till late summer/fall, right?

The PA primary isn’t until April 23. Biden will probably give a speech in Philly, since he loves to say patriotic things where the Liberty Bell can hear him.

TRUMP PENCE 2020 2024

Biden was in Philadelphia (well, the suburbs thereof) yesterday.

i kept thinking when i was listening to Biden get all rah rah about rich people paying their taxes that you will never ever hear a president say that about churches. i know religion ain't what it used to be but they own so much land and have big gold chalices. we need some of that chalice money.

it is wearying to think of all the things i have to go along with because religious people think its a good thing. like, war. fish on friday. bad exorcism movies. child torture. christian rap.

honestly the churches not paying taxes thing is the most outrageous thing that nobody talks about imho.

Biden 2024: You Didn’t Build That, Jesus

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/republican-senator-decades-rapes-mexico-attack-biden-border-107967052

First-term Sen. Katie Britt of Alabama in the GOP response criticized current immigration policies, describing how she had met a woman at the U.S.-Mexico border who told of being raped thousands of times in a sex trafficking operation run by cartels, starting at age 12.
The victim has previously spoken publicly about the abuse happening in her home country of Mexico from 2004 to 2008 — not in the United States during the Biden administration. Yet, Britt used the account to chastise Biden's action on the border.

“We wouldn’t be OK with this happening in a third-world country. This is the United States of America, and it’s past time we start acting like it," Britt said in the Thursday night speech televised from her home in Alabama. “President Biden’s border crisis is a disgrace."

...

Independent journalist Jonathan Katz revealed in a TikTok video Friday that the sex trafficking of the victim mentioned by Britt on Thursday did not happen during the Biden administration or in the United States.
Britt spokesman Sean Ross on Saturday confirmed to The Associated Press that the senator was speaking about the account of a young Mexican woman who told of being repeatedly raped in Mexico from 2004 to 2008 — when Republican George W. Bush was the U.S. president.

Ross said people are still victims of “disgusting, brutal trafficking by the cartels.”

I think I saw that the New York Times has revised their headline reporting on her response at least six times.

I don't watch cable news, because it is stupid, but my mom leaves CNN on all the time, even though she thinks it is stupid. One of the shows this morning, the Republican side featured (former president) Scott Brown and some dude from the W. Bush administration, Jennings, and they were both so smug and disingenuous I wanted to punch them through the TV.

Good grief, Nancy Mace going apeshit on George Stephanopoulos on this morning's This Week for getting called out for supporting Trump after the Carroll judgement.

Nancy Mace is the poster child for cognitive dissonance.

she has real "long time customer that's been told the early bird special ends 30 minutes earlier than usual" energy

well, usually. i haven't seen this particular incident

here you go

Wow -- Nancy Mace gets mad when George Stephanopoulos asks her how she can support Trump despite claiming to care about rape victims.

"You are trying to shame me this morning, and I think it's disgusting," she says.

But Stephanopoulos holds his ground! pic.twitter.com/JSMOpduIwT

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 10, 2024

the whole thread is hair raising

ok, seen it now. so....she was a rape victim at 16. the "you were raped, how can you possibly believe/support xxxx" questioning often puts me off, because victims of rape all process their trauma differently, and sometimes there are contradictory behaviors that emerge. For example, after I was sexually abused by the same guy three times over the course of a year, I still inexplicably invited him to my grandmother's funeral and let him hug my mother. I also still victim-blamed Jordan Chandler in the Michael Jackson case for years. I could see people raising an eyebrow at either of those incongruities.

in this case, though - I don't think it was an unfair question to ask. She has presented herself as an advocate for other rape victims, and yet, still endorsed him over Nikki Haley a mere 3 years after she said he should never hold office again, and after being found guilty in a civil rape trial. In fairness, she hasn't exactly been a full-throated Trumper - she seems to more just be blowing the same way the wind does, and I know given the misogyny of the Trump base, there's much less wiggle room even for a politician like her than her mail peers - not least getting the type of threats that might actually trigger bad memories.

Likewise, I do feel like it's fair to ask similar questions of Biden-supporting politicians, given the allegations against him as well. We're truly in a poison pill situation here.

But, unfortunately, she chose to be a politician and she chose to be a member of the more racist/misogynist party, even as it's descended deeper and deeper into a Fascist White Nationalist platform. and when given the chance to at least be graceful to Carroll, she victim-blamed her, twice. Being raped is nobody's fault and all victims deserve empathy. But that does not give her a pass from being criticized, least of all for the racist policies she's openly stated she supports, or mocking other rape victims, which notably, Carroll did not do to her in response.

I mean, there's a person being shamed in that interview, and that's E Jean Carroll, by Nancy Mace.

As an astute politician she knew she might be asked that, so she had her answer ready. There was no hesitation, no stopping a moment to form her answer. Her answer was to go on the attack on her chosen ground, and keep repeating it, so that Stephanopoulos would have no chance to address her charge that he was shaming her, until he tired of the game and moved on.

An honest answer would have required her to be human, vulnerable and revealed the painful difficulty of the position that Trump's control of the party has put her in. It would also have been politically unacceptable. So, she did what she had to do to stay electable and inside the party. It is dehumanizing all the way around.

It is interesting that the media has taken its gloves off to an extent. There's no more talk of "allegations of assault" etc. It's straight up "Donald Trump has been found liable for rape in court."

staying electable and pleasing the party are choices that she is in no way obligated to make

xp

of course that's true and she's made her choice. my point is that compromising herself in this way in order to retain her position and power was most likely a painful choice. there's no need to dehumanize her because she shredded her conscience and sold out. that's an extremely human thing to do and the pain of knowing it as you do it has a habit of coming back at you later.

Can we dehumanize her for what she said about Carroll?

the conflation of internalized shame she felt about being assaulted and the shame of claiming to be an advocate yet ignoring it because she’s supporting Trump is pretty psychologically messed up. hopefully she’s just being disingenuous to try to derail the conversation because, woof

criticizing? yes. dehumanizing? at your own moral peril

do you feel that being asked these questions about supporting Trump was a dehumanizing move?

There's no more talk of "allegations of assault" etc. It's straight up "Donald Trump has been found liable for rape in court."

how is that 'gloves off' - you literally have to refer to them as allegations when there's no verdict in a court case. changing the wording reflects the changing in his legal status on the matter

it's just a statement of facts, and Nancy Mace wanted to take a bunch of time to parse the out that he was found liable in a civil trial rather than a criminal trial as if that invalidates the result or casts doubt on Carroll

I think it is more in declining to accept the GOP framing, that a civil judgement does not make him a rapist.

The media finds ways to soft peddle what they want to soft peddle

nor does getting caught on a hot mic talking about grabbing women by the pussy

It would be nice, when a politician like Mace pulls some bullshit like that, if the interviewer would respond along the lines of, "Wow — you'll just say anything, won't you?"

That's a part of it too, there's no sugarcoating that case, and any attempts to do so should be challenged. It gets tiresome to keep pointing this out, but this would have ended any other politician's career.

xxxp

No. I don't think being asked these questions about supporting Trump was a dehumanizing move. Stephanopoulos was representing the many women who would have wished to hear her honest answer. She failed that opportunity in a blaze of calculated dishonesty.

When I said it was dehumanizing all the way around I was thinking not only that in order to make the answer she did, she had to shut down the most human side of herself, but that having done so in such a public way, the kinds of criticism she's opened herself to will constitute a similar opportunity for millions of people to shut down their own most human understanding of her predicament and mock her as an evil automaton. That's where the public discourse is and it shows no signs of improving.

what then would you consider an acceptable response? do you consider the conversation about this ITT to be dehumanizing? or are you just saying that this topic, just like every topic ever, will lead someone on the internet to post something shitty about it?

I covered what I think in my four previous posts on this subject, clarifying as best I could. if they haven't been sufficient to understand what I'm getting at, then my trying to answer all your additional questions is only likely to introduce further details you wish me to clarify. I'm not sure that's the best path to go down. why do you need this amount of detail?

because it's not clear who you are talking about when you say she is being dehumanized and I'm trying to understand if you mean this is something happening in this thread or somewhere else

I think he means she dehumanized herself but I don't think it's really the right framing

(pauses to wait for three sentence correction)

Yeah I didn’t think it was that hard to parse

My take is that Aimless said “it’s difficult to watch someone debase themselves like this, it’s dehumanizing” and then got grilled about who in the thread was dehumanizing her

my point is that compromising herself in this way in order to retain her position and power was most likely a painful choice. there's no need to dehumanize her because she shredded her conscience and sold out.

This sounds like its someone else doing the dehumanizing.

That's how I read it, and a follow up post said the problem is that this is giving people the opportunity to mock her or say bad things about her. It sounded like he was saying that there was a problem with the way people were talking about this, but I apologize if I misinterpreted.

as I understand your replies it sounds like you thought I was unjustly criticizing you or some other ilxor's posts as dehumanizing Mace. I was not speaking to any other posts made here. At the risk of repeating myself, I'll repeat myself.

When I said it was dehumanizing all the way around I was thinking not only that in order to make the answer she did, she had to shut down the most human side of herself, but that having done so in such a public way, the kinds of criticism she's opened herself to will constitute a similar opportunity for millions of people to shut down their own most human understanding of her predicament and mock her as an evil automaton.

Here's the thing — victimhood does not automatically grant, or equate to, virtue. Nancy Mace is a rape victim: sad. Nancy Mace is a piece of shit: infuriating. Nancy Mace being a rape victim does not make her a piece of shit, nor does Nancy Mace being a rape victim ameliorate her shittiness.

xp

fair enough, to the extent that people say things about her that are gross or dehumanizing, I absolutely agree that's a bad thing, but in no way should that make anyone shy away from criticizing her for torching what tiny shreds of credibility she had to support Donald Trump and further her own pursuit of power

fairly sure Aimless has been on board w/ that from the jump.

It's not about virtue or victimhood but actions and statements. Here, it's about answering the question. The way Mace avoided answering the question was to attack the questioner's motive over and over instead of answering the question.

You see this tactic of delegitimizing the question or questioner as a substitute for answering the question frequently.

I would call it more of a cynical or bad faith diversionary tactic. It's extraordinary that she acted like discussing rape is the problem, that it's the discussion's fault for being disgusting instead of the rapists'.

that's exactly right and why I find all this fretting and squeamishness annoying because it feels like we are just falling for Mace's bullshit DARVO response, especially when she is straight up undermining another rape victim

look I think the point is clear you cant support Donald Trump and retain any sense of morality

We're--what?--about 9 years into Trump having a complete stranglehold on the Republican Party. Anyone with a sense of morality would have gotten out by now.

Seriously, I can't spend a bunch of time lamenting the sad "predicament" of a congressional Republican who had on occasion shown some tiny flickers of a conscience, but then decided to torch it in the grossest way possible on national TV. The thing I keep thinking about is that the whole point of going on a show like this is to gain some appeal with people outside of the core demographic, but it's an utter mystery how she thought her response might have accomplished that.

who's being squeamish exactly? I count exactly zero people itt that didn't criticize her for her reaction. does every reply have to be squarely on the nose?

Moodles, who's arguing with you?

that's what comes across to me when we spend our time worrying about the state of the discourse rather than the actual topic, it feels redirecting to an appeal for civility based on what exactly?

excuse my bad syntax

it feels redirecting to an appeal for civility based on what exactly?

I wish I had the time right now to fully develop an answer to this question, because I think it is an extremely important one, but it will have to wait. Life intervenes for now, but hold that thought.

and by "appeal for civility based on what" I'm not asking why should we be civil, I mean what exactly is driving this appeal? Is it based on actual things that you saw people say about this topic? or if it is purely hypothetical, why is it important to raise in this specific instance?

I still have no idea who you're talking to here.

I reread Aimless’s initial post and it still reads to me that he said her tack was gross and the political climate that would have torn her apart had she not been gross was also gross and dehumanizing to everyone involved, ie Republicans, and then a couple of posters decided this was a land mine directed at them and began to vigorously jump up and down on it with a pogo stick.

I agree with his initial post, it's the subsequent ones that had me scratching my head

the thing about this that's so aggravating is that her point would be good if I could believe it was in earnest. nobody has any right to tell any disenfranchised class of people who they have to support, how they have to vote. but do I think that's why she's making this point? absolutely not. she just wants to shut people up who rightly ID trump as a rapist

He didn't tell her who she had to support or how she should vote, he asked how she reconciled her support for rape victims with her support for Donald Trump. It's a tough question and maybe a bit of a gotcha, but there are certainly better ways to answer than splitting hairs about the difference between a civil and criminal trial and talking trash about E. Jean Carroll.

it’s an extremely difficult question for her, and I think it is possible for her to be angry in good faith about the question.

do I believe that is the case here? no. do I believe Stephanopoulos wanted the q to be a straight victim shame? i do not, but can be persuaded otherwise.

and not a gotcha imo— it’s obvious apparent incongruity to me.

I think it’s simple, you can care about rape victims but care more about shutting up the people you don’t like and making sure they suffer

Or you want to be vice president and some twisted moral calculus makes you believe that the "good" you could accomplish one heartbeat away from the presidency outweighs throwing the occasional rape victim under the bus

She was employing the basic DARVO move there, as well as a furious gish gallop (talking rapidly over the top of someone), its classic troll/bad faith arguing.

watching this dumbass biden hearing really makes you realize that the tragic flaw of democracy is that complete fucking idiots get to help run things. we need a king again!

You can have ours, if his God doesn't save get him first

it is kinda fun that the Demz are just going in hard on Trump and ignoring everything else. playing video clips of trump not remembering anything. how do you like it, fucko! everyone should just call trump Fucko now.

In which President Biden engages in a long discussion about cars as Robert Hur tries, unsuccessfully, to get him back on track. Twice, according to the transcript, the president "makes car sound." pic.twitter.com/tEo5X59pjB

— Matt Viser (@mviser) March 12, 2024

Well, I don't know, hearing the president get all jazzed up about electric cars isn't exactly the worst thing in 2024.

makes car sound

Mr. Krickbaum: Instant torque.

This reminds me of reporters rolling their eyes when Bill Clinton went on long discussions about the history of the Federal Reserve.

starting to get the feeling that the people initially summarizing this deposition were not acting in the best of faith

Biden might have just been fucking with Hur (Hur), Bill C. couldn't help showing off his knowledge.

Also, no one really learned anything after Bill Barr's "summary" of Mueller's findings.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/biden-robert-hur-transcript-rcna142855

At one point, Hur acknowledged that some of his questions would “relate to events that happened years ago.” Biden joked in response: “I’m a young man, so it’s not a problem.”

According to the review of the transcript, Biden at times expanded beyond the narrow subject areas of particular questions. At one point, he described in vivid detail a 2011 visit to Mongolia, where he displayed unexpected archery skills at a cultural performance in his honor.

people have dug up the video of that, and he does do pretty well with a bow and arrow

lol

Considering the newspaper, I'm surprised by the fairness.

Hur should’ve just enjoyed the ride and the stories

Hur: Have you ever driven a chariot?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GIeBGm9XoAAzEze?format=jpg&name=medium

Scranton Joe

I was trying to explain to a coworker a sequence of events at work that I was deeply involved in around the same date range that Biden's testimony covered today and had to backtrack several times. I don't think there was a "gotcha" moment and they're lingering on whether he has photographic recall (he doesn't)

I freeze up almost every time I’m asked my kids’ birthdates, and often get them wrong even so.

Azi Paybarah:

Sort of funny that in a hearing focusing on President Biden’s alleged memory lapses — which his aides say are really verbal slips — that Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) himself just made a verbal slip, referring to Dana Remus incorrectly as President Barack Obama’s former White House counsel, instead of Biden’

is Biden....funny?

Republican Rep. Ken Buck announced Tuesday that he will leave the House on March 22, moving up his existing retirement plans.

Buck's decision will leave Republicans with a paltry 218 seats in the chamber, compared to Democrats' 213, furthering Speaker Mike Johnson's constant struggle to herd the House GOP and pass any legislation through regular order. Republicans can still only afford to lose two votes on any bill with united Democratic opposition, assuming full attendance.

Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters Tuesday that he didn’t know about Buck's departure plans shortly after the announcement, noting he is looking forward to talking to the Colorado Republican. A Buck spokesperson told POLITICO that Buck called Johnson about 30 minutes before the announcement went live and left a voicemail. The move caught many of Buck's GOP colleagues by surprise.

“This place has just devolved into this bickering and nonsense,” the conservative Colorado Republican said in an interview on CNN shortly after his announcement. "It’s the worst year in 40, 50 years to be in Congress.”

There's already a competitive primary to replace Buck in the red seat. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) jumped into that race for Colorado's 4th congressional district and moved across the state after she narrowly won reelection by just several hundred votes in her current district in 2022. Asked if Buck's announcement would shift her plans to run in his district, Boebert replied: “I’m running in the 4th.”

In Colorado, the governor is required to set a special election 85 to 100 days after the vacancy occurs. Candidates are nominated by the state party. The Buck spokesperson predicted it would occur in June, likely the same day as the primary election for the full term: June 25.

One member to go before we get Speaker Jeffries.

the squeaker of the house

It'll be hard for them to keep up their furious legislative pace after this

Running for Ken Buck's seat is . . . Lauren Boebert.

It could not possibly come too soon, but even if Jefferies won the speakership I wouldn't expect an avalanche of progressive bills. Mainly I'd expect passing the appropriations to fund the government would get somewhat easier. There's still the Senate filibuster out there to kill everything in sight.

Well, the two biggest blocks to filibuster reform--Sinema and Manchin--will both be gone, just in time for the GOP to take the Senate of course.

Boebert thinks she'll win in the 4th. I'm not so sure. It's pretty red, but not crazy red like (parts of) her old district.

didn't Bobo nearly lose in a Trump +30 district vs. some nobody the DNC wouldn't even fund

But that was before the Beetlejuice tape

xp Yeah, Adam Frisch. He is running in the 3rd again. I get pretty constant emails from his campaign.

The 4th includes Longmont, which is much larger and bluer than it used to be. This could be another win for the Dems.

Haha, RFK Jr floating Aaron Rodgers and Jesse Ventura as running mates. What a clown.

I wish he wasn't running but I also think he probably hurts Trump more than Biden, so w/e.

Especially if he does pick Rodgers.

Jesse Ventura was the most pro-mass transit Governor of Minnesota up to that point. He also tried to organize a union at the WWF, but Hulk Hogan ratted on him.

yeah, the Biden campaign should run some pro-RFK ads.. "This guy is the REAL Trump! He's too conservative for America, and doesn't believe in forced vaccinations!"

If he's ever seen as a serious threat by anyone other than bored journalists, the campaign that feels most threatened by him will burn him to the ground in a weekend.

I actually hope he does pick Rodgers just to see the inevitable Trump meltdown over another "betrayal".

Rodgers would be a hilarious pick. My only hope for Biden is that Trump picks an absolute freak as his VP. I got a little scared when Tim Scott was rumored but the latest news that he was looking at JD Vance or Katie Britt has given me hope.

lol Tim Scott would not win over a single important Black constituency c'mon

They may not like Biden, they may sit out the election, but they're not voting for Tim Fucking Scott.

I think Tim Scott looks like Bert Lahr's Cowardly Lion.

My only hope for Biden is that Trump picks an absolute freak as his VP.

I can't parse this sentence. You think who Trump picks as VP will move the needle by either a) making people say, "Oh, that sensible person will moderate Trump — now I can safely vote for him!" or b) making people say, "Wow, I thought Trump was a little erratic, sure, but picking that freak as his new VP is a step too far!"?

It's boring to say so, but this election is Biden's to lose, and he'd have to faceplant in a major way to do it (and apologies to whoever doesn't want to hear it, but Gaza is not that faceplant).

I agree that it's Biden's to lose, but I also think it's possible he'll lose it not through any giant stumble but just by being old and uninspiring and perceived as ineffective. (I know he hasn't actually been ineffective, but this isn't gonna be decided on the facts or the merits.)

I think Trump's VP pick could hurt or help him on the margins, mostly in terms of some Republicans who are sick of him and could have a hard time voting for Kari Lake or someone like that. But not by much either way.

In 2016, his choice of Pence made evangelicals feel safer and more assured about voting for him, it did make a difference

I think he should pick Kid Rock now

what kind of sensible person would agree to be Trump's running mate? what exactly did Pence get out of it? his entire legacy now is the guy Trump supporters raided the Capitol trying to murder. his 2024 campaign ended in front of like 3 people at a bookstore.

I think Biden is in the same situation Hillary was - he *should* win but does have some weaknesses and if those happen to pop up 2 weeks before the election like the email thing did, he could lose the electoral college

that said I'm curious what all these Nikki Haley supporters who swore up and down they wouldn't vote for Trump are gonna do. obviously most of them will, but he kinda needs all of them to

Party Unity My Ass

I would just like to reiterate that if Trump wants to lose by an embarrassing margin, he’ll pick Tim Scott, who is to cultured for his fanbase and too Tim Scott for everyone else

otm

his 2024 campaign ended in front of like 3 people at a bookstore.

This was his destiny all along, with or without the VP credential. But blind ambition will ensure Trump has his choice of almost any VP candidate he decides on. Look how many DC insiders accepted cabinet level positions even after his administration was a train wreck and his penchant for feckless idiocy in the presidency was a 100% established fact.

Tim Scott, who is too cultured Black for his fanbase and too Tim Scott for everyone else

fixed

Frogbs - I think that's it. Trump 2024 as an electable inevitability reminds me heavily of Hillary 2016 (no shade at H.C., just viewing it as similar scenario). Trump '24 as Hillary '16? Let's do the list:

1. Mediocre primary performance? Check.
2. Primary opponent's vote share revealing a difficult truth regarding the stability of your coalition? Check.
3. Perception (once again, no shade, HC) that the nomination should be yours, and how dare anyone else even try? Check.
4. Underestimated, gaffe-prone opponent in the General Election? Check.
5. A non-insignificant chunk of your base dying an early death due to a global pandemic because they refused to take a free vaccine, nor wear masks amidst the height of the viral spread, all while the most diverse, pro-LGBTQIA+ generation in US history joins the electorate, replacing said covidiots? OK, this might not be a parallel. But you see what I mean.

Either way, I feel cautiously optimistic about the Prez race. If only I could get similar vibes from the Ohio and Montana Senate races...

lol Tim Scott would not win over a single important Black constituency c'mon

The Tim Scott thing there he kept boasting about how he was saving himself for marriage and then years go by and he never got married did give the best setup for an amazingly awkward interview question

Trump is only looking for a more loyal lapdog than Pence, he doesn't care about growing his appeal with another politician's constituency. His campaign at this point is basically just a front for stealing or overthrowing the election and shutting down any further repercussions from there.

he should pick the scary kitchen mom demon! she is totally unhinged enough for his fanbase and everyone else would be too scared to say anything about her.

I was thinking more like matt gaetz, the lesson Trump took from pence was probably "don't pick someone you can't blackmail"

I do think that Trump cares more about staying out of jail and not having his properties seized or being forced to sell them than he does actually being President. like a normal politician probably wouldn't keep bringing up the fact that he's been charged with nearly 100 felonies and has to pay like half a billion dollars in penalties for running a sham business and being a rapist but Trump can't shut the fuck up about it. it's the only thing he thinks about. if I was conservative I'd worry a lot about Lara Trump being in charge of the RNC where she can just funnel a bunch of money to Trump's legal team at the cost of funding downballot races. I mean they're probably gonna go all "a rising tide raises all boats!" and put every cent into Trump's re-election campaign. who's gonna say no to them

I don't know a lot about how campaign finance works, but do they even have a budget to be competitive or is there not going to be an actual campaign at all?

Well he’s not gonna win it on Truth Social

the RNC has about $8m in the bank (i.e. a couple months of interest on the current fines). the DNC has $24m. in terms of campaign neither is a big player iiuc. they're more important in terms of media response and coordination.

Super PACs and dark money probably look like a better investment to the billionaires and multi-hundred millionaires who might have given to the RNC or DNC before Citizens United reconfigured the playing field.

that's another thing you'd have to think they may be having second thoughts about giving to a guy who desperately needs cash and is obviously corrupt enough to use the RNC as his own piggy bank especially when he lost this exact matchup 4 years ago and didn't really show much ability to get stuff done even when he was in office

Can you imagine if the General Election was still as it was originally imagined?

(That is, the person who gets the most EC votes becomes the President; the person who gets the second-most EC votes becomes the Vice President.)

So you'd have:
Obama/McCain
Trump/Clinton
Biden/Trump

that’s assuming that the prior result under that system would have no affect on the next result

it’d probably be something weird like several Romney types

in that being VP gave you more of a leg up to the presidency. Biden’s kind of the outlier and it seemed like a lame duck thing when Gore was the candidate, but I might just be hallucinating because we did get George HW

my brain is forever poisoned by the Quayle yearst

Potatoe

So you say.

I didn’t say that. If he’s picked it would reassure wavering non-MAGA Republicans that they aren’t racist if they vote for Trump and centrist media that Trump has “pivoted to the center.”

Non-MAGA Republicans have largely left the fold and are unlikely to go back barring Biden ripping off a mask and revealing a reincarnated Josef Stalin. Anyone left is MAGA, MAGA-but-won’t-admit-it, or imaginary. Tim Scott is not a Dick Cheney; he’s not going to be directing policy from the background or wielding outsized influence over his President. He’s there to thoroughly tongue Trump’s supporting asshole and I don’t believe that’s the basis for a political coalition.

I feel in many ways that the Presidential election has already been decided and the real question is how many voters are willing to out themselves as stupid racists.

^^^^^^^^^^^

yeah, some of you guys still think it's 2016

I wish I could be as sanguine as you guys.

Seriously. I was so casually, unwaveringly 'Hilz got this in the bag!' eight years ago that I got the wind knocked completely the fuck out of me. Never again.

It's one thing to worry, which I get. It's another to think he might win in the same manner.

re: the RNC's budget

Lara Trump says the RNC will devote ‘massive resources’ to election integrity before soliciting the audience for volunteer lawyers pic.twitter.com/CE0b9GRs6n

— Acyn (@Acyn) March 13, 2024

They should spend all of their money on proprietary postage stamps that can only be used by (real) Republicans.

Biden's very unpopular and the polls right now are definitely worrying (though arguably they don't mean a thing) - hate to get all Nate Silver here but there's a pretty wide latitude of possible outcomes. I don't think any of them involve Trump actually winning the popular vote or taking all the swing states but a 2016-type victory is definitely in the cards somewhere. But I also think it's equally likely he gets massacred due to how incredibly weird the party has become. Trump's popularity at this very moment is probably as high as it's ever gonna be. Once things get into swing and he's actually saying shit on TV again...

We live in a society where the GOP’s placed all its faith in Donald Fucking Trump. Aaron Rodgers is mentioned as a potential VP running mate to Kennedy, whether seriously or as clickbait. All bets are off afaic. This country is irredeemably stupid.

I mean I pretty much took 2016 as a blanket statement that the US was no longer interested in even feigning to be a serious and functioning institution. At that point, it was just a question of how long it would take entropy (and, yes, stupidity) to bring it all toppling down. I'm frankly pleasantly surprised it's managed to somehow stay afloat this long.

My open-hearted faith in the American people allows me to believe that they will only elect an insane criminal president once.

societies don't collapse all at once usually

Americans aren't stupider than anyone else, but we do have a stupider electoral system than most more-or-less democracies. If we had a normal system with proportional representation in Congress and a presidency where the candidate with the most votes wins, we wouldn't seem quite so loony.

Motion to change spelling of stupider to stupidier - more fun to say

y'all ever think how crazy this is

CLinton 65,853,625 votes (48.0%)
Trump 62,985,106 votes (45.9%)

only for four whole years

We are kinda stupid, I think. I mean, we made billionaires out of Kanye West and Kim Kardashian. Don’t know who ever thought we’d be effective guardians of democracy.

We are definitely kinda stupid, but so is everyone else.

The thing that is aggravating to me is that to this day people still talk about how bad and hated Clinton was because she only managed to get slightly less than 3 million more votes than Trump. It's just totally normal at this point to assume that a "good" Democratic candidate is expected to get vastly more votes than whatever piece of garbage is running on the other side, and there's no obvious problem with that.

The Electoral College was necessary to get the slave states on board with the whole America thing, this effect is calculated and is doing what it was designed to do and has always done, let racists win elections they would otherwise lose. Southern states with a large population of enslaved people wanted to have their cake and eat it too: Not let the enslaved vote, but make sure they counted in terms of electoral power. Thus the Electoral College, which formalized population count's advantage over the popular vote.

maybe schumer is going to protect biden from signing this in an election year

A notably bland statement from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer on the House-passed TikTok bill: “The Senate will review the legislation when it comes over from the House.”

No commitments to hold a vote on this or any other TikTok bill.

— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) March 13, 2024

I think it's in everyone's interest to have elections decided by people in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. It saves the candidates and the press a lot of travel time.

otm

and now the College also empowers the states created by Republicans in the late 19th century to counter the Solid South. Irony!

I'm still stunned by seeing Santos at the SotU. Like there are so many ridiculous loopholes and privileges barely known about (perhaps including by those who exploit them) until right before they/we do.

Meanwhile Greg Abbott is in the UK for another state-specific trade deal, another unbelievable thing that should not be happening.

“Volunteer lawyers”, everyone

Motion to change spelling of stupider to stupidier - more fun to say

We're the stupidiest. #Americanexceptionalism

Meanwhile Greg Abbott is in the UK for another state-specific trade deal, another unbelievable thing that should not be happening.

I'm sure there will be some shaking down.

They should spend all of their money on proprietary postage stamps that can only be used by (real) Republicans.

― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, March 13, 2024 10:07 AM (two hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

We
Await
Second
Trump
Empire

Crying of Trump 47.

lol

I would just like to reiterate this statement from my last post:

the real question is how many voters are willing to out themselves as stupid racists

I’m not sanguine about this election because I think this number is higher than we currently think it is. However, I’m very willing to go on record with the opinion that that number is not at all affected by the presence or absence of Tim Scott on the ticket.

I grew up in rural Wisconsin so I'm kind of sympathetic to these folks. I mean I think they're generally dumb and hateful and actively bad for this country but I've spent enough time around them to at least know how they think. Their primary political view is really simple - everyone's screwing you, all the time. The elites are taking advantage of you. There's a big coordinated effort going on involving every celebrity on the planet (minus Kid Rock and Dilbert) and it's all done with the goal of keeping you down. Like 95% of this comes from right wing media. If you watch any of it for just 10 minutes this is always the overarching theme. They believe in personal responsibility when it comes to good things but when anything goes badly it's because ~they~ are taking it away from you. This is why they love Trump. The media focuses so much on his personality and the constant stream of dumb shit that comes out of his mouth but the reality is they love him because he's just as whiny and aggrieved as they are. The media focuses on his crimes and business fraud and how he never suffers any consequences but his voters like him even more for that, because it means someone on "their side" actually beat the system.

The most enthusiastic Trumpers I see and know drive new F-150s, sent their kids to expensive private schools, and benefited from the Cuban Readjustment Act, i.e. the most obvious beneficiaries of The System, The Swamp, what have you.

i can't imagine ever being sympathetic to folks who vote a fascist into office

My sister was momentarily stopped in her Trumper tracks by me saying ‘so the trade-off for cheaper gas is… Fascism?’

i can't imagine ever being sympathetic to folks who vote a fascist into office

This is certainly the case.. I've always hated the GOP but I could at least understand why some people voted that way, for what we now would refer to as 'country club republicans' like Mitt Romney or Bob Dole. But I can't imagine ever having any kind of relationship with a Trump voter. I would be courteous but that's about it

I don't respect ANY reasons for voting for Trump, but "cheap gas" is such an idiotic thing for anyone to say that it makes me scream. People ascribing things to presidents that have nothing to do with presidents is just straight-up magical thinking. They might as well be voting for who will make the sun come back faster every spring.

I've met people who seem nice but vote GOP out of religious tribalism. I don't want to see them hit by a car or anything.

The System, The Swamp, what have you.

El sistema de la guayabera.

They believe in personal responsibility when it comes to good things but when anything goes badly it's because ~they~ are taking it away from you.

This is the problem with the whole meritocratic libertarian mindset. If you conceive of the world as a place in which you are always the central hero, then personal responsibility necessarily disappears when anything bad happens. How could you, the hero, ever be responsible for something negative?

People ascribing things to presidents that have nothing to do with presidents

Yeah but he said 'drill baby drill'

or if you conceive of the world, or this country, as a place that needs a central hero, to restore the country to this magical, ideal time where everything was perfect, and this hero could do this, could lead people* into the promised land, you vote for them because they're the chosen one, and the only one who can fix it

* only certain people of course, who look the right way and do the right things.

TLDR: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millenarianism

xpost

back when you could buy a candy bar with the shiny nickel you earned shining shoes in front the general store

I only mentioned ‘cheap gas’ because my sister is one of those idiots that think a Republican administration has the ability to make that happen. We work with what we’re given sometimes!

Yest in Boulder I saw a big nice F150 with two bumper stickers:
“i am a KENNEDY democrat”
and
some bullshit for RFK jr

gas is like 4% of the average American’s discretionary income. If you’re trading something for fascism you should at least get cheap housing.

Somewhere in America, a citizen is replacing his "Politicians are Temporary, Wu Tang is Forever" yard sign with a "RFK 2024" sign.

Probably my next door neighbor

i can't imagine ever being sympathetic to folks who vote a fascist into office

― a (waterface), Wednesday, March 13, 2024 1:41 PM (forty-four minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

i might just be using the wrong word. like I see what they're coming from. hell the "everyone's trying to screw the little guy" thing isn't exactly wrong. but yeah I don't have any relationships with Trumpers anymore. you'd think maybe we could reach this understanding of "lets just not talk politics" but no. it's all they ever want to talk about. and they're so misinformed too. like they genuinely have no clue that Trump's been charged with so many felonies.