Jump to content

US Politics - And Now it Begins


Lollygag

Recommended Posts

Just now, A True Kaniggit said:

Perhaps? Maybe that's why people follow him. His magic underpants.

Well, I'm not checking.

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

Did Romney have a cult like following?

No.  Which is why it's concerning from a violence/civil strife point of view for the next 60 days.  After that?  Being a cult leader with no actual power usually doesn't end well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:

Someone promises apples for everybody and gets 47.2% of the vote.

To be fair, this analogy is flawed.  Romney wasn't just promising apples as opposed to a kick in the nuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Did Romney have a cult like following?

If you ask many evangelical Christians they will tell you that Mormonism is a cult, so... maybe?

As a side note, since the other day, any time I think about the shit heel originalist judges that are going to drive our republic into the ground, and how really they are revisionists, given this is the truly originalist legal tradition of America.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

No.  Which is why it's concerning from a violence/civil strife point of view for the next 60 days.  After that?  Being a cult leader with no actual power usually doesn't end well.

It can end poorly for those whose wrath it provokes, too. 

2 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said:

If you ask many evangelical Christians they will tell you that Mormonism is a cult, so... maybe?

You said it, not me. But I think many evangelicals are in a cult too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be careful reading into Trump's vote count being just about Trump. Around my hometown, Republicanism has become ingrained and inseparable from identity, community, culture and one's place in it. I'm not exaggerating that for them to even consider voting D with any seriousness would cause real psychological harm.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/11/david-french-secession-divided-we-fall-gist-transcript.html?via=taps_top

Quote

OK. Do you think that the ideological sorting of the parties has been a bad thing?

For the sake of the country, I do think that has been a bad thing for a lot of reasons. Let me just give you a good example here close to home. I live in a very red district my representative is Mark Green. One district away is a representative named Scott DesJarlais, and I don’t know if you know anything about Scott DesJarlais, but he doesn’t make headlines—but wow. He comes from a pro-life very religiously conservative district. He has been disciplined for giving patients drugs. He is allegedly responsible for maybe two or three abortions, was caught on tape pressuring a mistress into an abortion. I mean, we’re talking [about] a guy with a really controversial checkered past that he has been evasive of. And he’s not somebody that the GOP, an honorable political party, would want representing its ideas, is this guy. Now I know—look, look, I know the House of Representatives has crazies here and there, but the reason I’m bring him up is that he beat a Democrat named Lincoln Davis, and Lincoln Davis was a pro-life conservative Democrat.

And he beat Lincoln Davis, not so much because there was anything wrong with Lincoln Davis’ record on the issues that mattered to the constituents. But because Scott Desjarlais had the R by his name. And so what ends up happening is the R—in an atmosphere of negative polarization—the R trumps everything. That identity of he’s on my side, on my team, trumps everything. It trumps integrity; it trumps often legality; it trumps ethics—it trumps everything. When political parties are sort of cross-coalitional, you can actually have a place for somebody who they might be a little bit to the left of DesJarlais on some things, but they’re not fundamentally different from them. And therefore voters who have in a district that’s overwhelmingly sort of religious and conservative have something more along the lines of a real choice other than in the primary.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

It can end poorly for those whose wrath it provokes, too. 

I don't really know what this means.  Look, if you wanna wet your pants about the small possibility a 78 year old Trump returns to power in 2024, that's your business, you're over 21.  I just don't really give a shit right now.  And would much rather focus my attention and concern on the far greater likelihood the GOP continues on their extremist path without Trump because it's incredibly rare in modern politics for anyone to get second acts.

5 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:

Then to make the analogy work, what was Trump promising?

Castration I suppose.

I dunno but my point was the 2012 GOP that Romney led wasn't exactly offering "apples" to the American public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DMC said:

I don't really know what this means.  Look, if you wanna wet your pants about the small possibility a 78 year old Trump returns to power in 2024, that's your business, you're over 21.  I just don't really give a shit right now.  And would much rather focus my attention and concern on the far greater likelihood the GOP continues on their extremist path without Trump because it's incredibly rare in modern politics for anyone to get second acts.

Find one post where I've argued this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

I dunno but my point was the 2012 GOP that Romney led wasn't exactly offering "apples" to the American public.

Granted. But this is what I was responding to with my dumbass comparison.

"Because "he got more votes than anyone in his party had ever gotten" needs to be contextualized.  He got 47.2% of the vote, which is the exact same percentage as Romney.  I don't recall much fear of Mitt Romney in late November 2012"

It doesn't matter if the two got the same percentage of votes, if one was able to do so while being obviously much more horrible than the other.

Edit: I wrote comparison as camparison the first time. So what, wanna fight about it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:

It doesn't matter if the two got the same percentage of votes, if one was able to do so while being obviously much more horrible than the other.

Right, I'm just saying the analogy should have been something like a spoiled apple to something like...Fred Armison forcing Ron Burgandy to eat piece of shit.

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

I would say you may be drunk or high, but I don't care, because Bell just scored a TD and that's exactly what I needed. 

Definitely not either, you're just spewing shit out of both sides of your mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DMC said:

Definitely not either, you're just spewing shit out of both sides of your mouth.

Explains why you're in such a crabby mood.

But if you're going to accuse me of taking a position I never took, how can you reasonably question my position? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tywin et al. said:

But if you're going to accuse me of taking a position I never took, how can you reasonably question my position? 

I said, like four times at least, that I'm very concerned that the extremist trend in the GOP is not going away and has not been defeated.  However, I'm not particularly concerned about Trump's personal role in this in the future.  You repeatedly responded clearly suggesting I should be more concerned with the latter.  If you're not concerned about him returning to power, then what the fuck is your concern?  That he'll continue to foment such extremist tendencies from the sidelines?  K, sure, never was arguing against that.  Otherwise there's no reason for your repeated objections to what I've been saying all along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DMC said:

I said, like four times at least, that I'm very concerned that the extremist trend in the GOP is not going away and has not been defeated.  However, I'm not particularly concerned about Trump's personal role in this in the future.  You repeatedly responded clearly suggesting I should be more concerned with the latter.  If you're not concerned about him returning to power, then what the fuck is your concern?  That he'll continue to foment such extremist tendencies from the sidelines?  K, sure, never was arguing against that.  Otherwise there's no reason for your repeated objections to what I've been saying all along.

Trumpism, not Trump himself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

Trumpism, not Trump himself. 

JFC.  Yeah, I said this an hour ago:

1 hour ago, DMC said:

If you want to call it Trumpism.  The fact it appears a considerable amount of voters voted for a GOP congressional candidate but not Trump suggests the perpetual centrifugal trend of the GOP that predates Trump will continue long after Trump.

And then, in response, you continued the argument by saying this:

56 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Why are you downplaying a person who took over a party and got more votes than anyone in his party had ever gotten? Moreover, reshaping into a cult based around him? 

If your concern is just "Trumpism," then stop trying to argue with me when I agree in principle but simply point out "Trumpism" long predates Trump himself and will continue long after he's gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At times, to me it seems like the current US political situation parallels that in Europe following the death of (Holy Roman) Emperor Rudolf, replaced by the nonentity Matthias (a Biden prototype) - with the inevitable aftermath being the thirty years war.  

Or a more modern analog for Biden, the succession of nonentities who took over the USSR after Brezhnev's death, which was followed by the breakup of the USSR.  

At best, I see Biden as a one term president who will accomplish very little.  Harris...is untested.  After that...some sort of half assed civil war or breakup of the country seems at least possible, though not probable.  The only things standing against it is sheer inertia and a belated realization that 'Red America' would be direly impoverished without 'Blue America' to prop it up.

I see more and more articles and commentary - especially on Facebook  claiming that Trump was cheated of his second term by Democratic treachery.  To the conservatives infesting my Facebook, this is an absolute belief.  Likewise, they hold it as an absolute belief that Democratic Party = Socialist = Communist = Venezuela, and regard democratic voters as mentally defective.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...