US politics: Manchin to the beat of a different drum

[SpaceChampion]

1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

“If there was riots—not saying there was—they were only the result of right wing provocateurs  who either tricked or masqueraded as people I agree with on a particular topic.”
This post reads overly defensive. People who were outraged about Floyd’s murder and other perceived mistreatment. It’s not the first time an instance of brutality against a black person had kickstarted a riot by itself.

Listen I understand fascists did try to exploit the outrage to try to incite a race war.

But I think it’s really unwise to try to deny the rioters were a thing or a wholly a concoction of right-wing provocations.

Not once have you mentioned protests, the vast majority which were peaceful (or had violence instigated by the police) and instead refer to nothing but riots which is the right-wing framing you've fully adopted.  This is why you're not an ally.  What riots are you referring to that wasn't instigated by right wing provocateurs or organized crime using the opportunity?  What percentage of those were initiated by fully committed BLM activists?  As far as I know zero percent.

[Ormond]

15 hours ago, Kalebear said:

MTG is basically angling for a Sean Hannity type of role sometime in her future. 

I'm sure that may very well be her eventual career path, but I'm not at all sure that she's rational enough to be consciously "angling" for this.

[Jaxom 1974]

12 hours ago, Maithanet said:

Since when has Trump supported women in actual power?  He likes them in front of the camera, but not much else.  You think he's willing to listen to Greene's opinion on anything?

This statement presumes that Greene would think she actually was an independent person if she were to be Trump's hand picked Speaker and not the blonde puppet in front of the camera.  That's really what she'd be.

[Maithanet]

11 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

This statement presumes that Greene would think she actually was an independent person if she were to be Trump's hand picked Speaker and not the blonde puppet in front of the camera.  That's really what she'd be.

But to put another way, do you think that Greene has the discipline to repeat what Trump says and never go too far and steal the spotlight from him?  Because I certainly do not.  Speaker of the House is a lot more powerful than ex-president, so she's going to be very tempted to start peddling her own particular brand of crazy rather than endorsing Trump's over and over. 

[Jaxom 1974]

15 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

But to put another way, do you think that Greene has the discipline to repeat what Trump says and never go too far and steal the spotlight from him?  Because I certainly do not.  Speaker of the House is a lot more powerful than ex-president, so she's going to be very tempted to start peddling her own particular brand of crazy rather than endorsing Trump's over and over. 

See now that's an interesting idea.  In so much as any idea about Marge is interesting.  Is she capable of going rogue?  Yes, I believe that, but at the same time, her brand of crazy just doesn't seem that far away from Trump's. 

But really, aren't we devoting a little too much speculative energy to this?  

[argonak]

17 hours ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

More like expects them to try, don't you? I mean, if the House shifts in 2022 the first one lining up to challenge 'ole Kevin for the Speakership is going to be little old Marjorie...with Trump's blessing...

As awful as that sounds, Greene wouldn't want the job because she'd have to work.  The current generation of Republicans don't want to govern, they don't want to do the work.  They want to be popular and get on tv and social media.  They want to be able to just shout orders over Twitter while other people do things.  Just like their Glorious Leader.  

Unfortunately the rest of their behavior drives away anyone remotely competent, so, as we saw with Trump, its very difficult for them to get any of their Twitter rants turned into actual change.

But it doesn't really matter, because as far as their base is concerned, once Trump shouts about something on Twitter, it already happened.  They don't remotely begin to understand how government functions.

[Maithanet]

15 minutes ago, argonak said:

As awful as that sounds, Greene wouldn't want the job because she'd have to work.  The current generation of Republicans don't want to govern, they don't want to do the work. 

Yeah, I thought about bringing that up as well.  Although if we're being honest, being Speaker with Biden as president isn't that much work, because nothing is going to actually pass.  Yes, House Republicans will no doubt want to have another investigation of Benghazi and repeal the ACA again, but after doing that a couple times, they can probably take a break. 

Now if it's 2025 and you need the House to agree that 5 million Trump votes is greater than 5.2 million Biden votes in PA, then you probably need a Speaker who can get shit done.  But I'm not sure Trump realizes that. 

[Jaxom 1974]

1 hour ago, argonak said:

As awful as that sounds, Greene wouldn't want the job because she'd have to work.  The current generation of Republicans don't want to govern, they don't want to do the work.  They want to be popular and get on tv and social media.  They want to be able to just shout orders over Twitter while other people do things.  Just like their Glorious Leader.  

That presumes she understands the concept of the job. Obviously she does not. However, to her, and Trump, the position shouldn't be powerful and be nothing but a figurehead rubber stamp for the whims of the POTUS, specifically one that is Trump.  

Kevin McCarthy may make noises like he'd do work, but really, he be he same. He's just not blonde and female, the type of person who Trump would think would make him look better when up at a podium parroting his BS...

[Fragile Bird]

Eight dead in San Jose.

Too early to talk about gun control? Not the right time?

[DanteGabriel]

6 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Eight dead in San Jose.

Too early to talk about gun control? Not the right time?

Don't politicize it!

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 hours ago, Maithanet said:

Now if it's 2025 and you need the House to agree that 5 million Trump votes is greater than 5.2 million Biden votes in PA, then you probably need a Speaker who can get shit done.  But I'm not sure Trump realizes that. 

I think more importantly, in this scenario, is you need someone who is willing to destroy the democracy. The McCarthys and Scalises of the world are fine to play the part when they know it has no chance of happening, but I still have doubts they'd actually go through with it if they were given the opportunity. Greene or Gaetz would do it joyously. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

36 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

Don't politicize it!

Just remember, if the shooter is a minority, he was a violent criminal, but if he's white he's just mentally ill. 

[DMC]

Yeah two of the three reasons I don't think MTG would go for a [congressional*] leadership post have already been touched upon.  First, it is work, even if just as an opposition Congress in the House.  Whipping votes doesn't seem to be something MTG would ever be interested in.  Not only is any leadership post work, but leading the House Republican Caucus is an especially thankless job.  Guarantee if you asked any of the recent holders of that job off the record, they'd say it's frustrating as fuck.

Second, during the Trump era, the GOP congressional leadership plays the straight man to Trump.  MTG is one of the few people that can actually out-crazy Trump.  No way he wants someone like that as leader.  I don't know if he'd also hold it against her that she's a woman, but I'd say that's a valid premise.  And not just leadership, just look at the chiefs of staff he hired.  He clearly prefers a milquetoast and more grounded ally that, I suspect even he wants, will at least try to reel him in when he goes off the deep end.  Definitely does not want someone that could potentially outshine him.  There is only one Lord of the Psychos, and he does not share power.

Third, and related to the first one, is that being part of leadership is fairly antithetical to MTG's (Trumpist) brand.  She's an outsider, a rabble rouser, someone that blames not only the pedophile leftists but the weak and feckless leaders of her own party.  Trump, obviously does this as well, and really it gained considerable traction with the crazy right starting with the Tea Party.  You can't be the sole person that can save the country from evildoers and be floor leader of a party caucus.

*You're welcome Kal, or Karl, or Kale, or SuperKalifragilisticexpialidocious, or whatever the fuck you're calling yourself today.

[Zorral]

 

Sen. Warren (D-MA) grills JPMorgan CEO Dimon on overdraft fees

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-05-26/bank-ceos-take-punches-from-democrats-warnings-from-republicans?

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/wall-street-bank-ceos-prepare-senate-grilling-ppp-diversity-efforts-n1268596

 

 

[Varysblackfyre321]

12 hours ago, SpaceChampion said:

Not once have you mentioned protests, the vast majority which were peaceful (or had violence instigated by the police) and instead refer to nothing but riots which is the right-wing framing you've fully adopted. 

Because the peaceful protests weren’t the thing taken up a lot of focus in right-wing media.

They’re not the thing many white people, specifically people who’d fashion themselves as moderates and conservatives started envision when they heard the question “Do you support BLM?” They saw riots Along with ACAB and talk of defunding  the police. 

The majority of protesters and protests were peaceful. This of course should be noted.

12 hours ago, SpaceChampion said:

This is why you're not an ally. 

Oh because I’m not beholden to the idea everyone who agrees with me on a particular topic acts appropriately within regards to said topic all the time? 

Please. 

12 hours ago, SpaceChampion said:

What percentage of those were initiated by fully committed BLM activists?

I didn't say there were.

I said that due to the right-wing’s media’s framing around the protests many white people started to equate supporting blm with the rioters. They were both outraged at the mistreatment of black Americans so they can be lumped together right?I would say no but to many its not hard to make that leap.

It's unhelpful to just look at the tumbling support for blm and rising support for LE by white people as the just fault of “woke” white people lying about their levels of support.

[kairparavel]

1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Because the peaceful protests weren’t the thing taken up a lot of focus in right-wing media.

They’re not the thing many white people, specifically people who’d fashion themselves as moderates and conservatives started envision when they heard the question “Do you support BLM?” They saw riots Along with ACAB and talk of defunding  the police. 

The majority of protesters and protests were peaceful. This of course should be noted.

Oh because I’m not beholden to the idea everyone who agrees with me on a particular topic acts appropriately within regards to said topic all the time? 

Please. 

I didn't say there were.

I said that due to the right-wing’s media’s framing around the protests many white people started to equate supporting blm with the rioters. They were both outraged at the mistreatment of black Americans so they can be lumped together right?I would say no but to many its not hard to make that leap.

It's unhelpful to just look at the tumbling support for blm and rising support for LE by white people as the just fault of “woke” white people lying about their levels of support.

I take it you've not read Michael Harriot before. But even if you have, you're really not understanding what he's saying - that so much of last summer's white allyship was performative and trendy. And because it was performative and trendy, there was backlash from clout chasers being called out for said performance art.

Be it corporations or social media posts, white people pledged to do the work and they didn't.  They started, then moved on to the next thing when it got too difficult or summer was over or whatever. 

And as a white cishet woman, I can tell you there is a special kind of performance art in a very specific subset of white women who would, instead of digging in and doing better/learning, absolutely get turned off and turn against Black activists calling them out for centering whatever effort they made around themselves. 

I hope Ibram X. Kendi, Jason Reynolds, Ijeoma Oluo, and Layla Saad got looooots of royalties because that's all they got from last summer's run of anti-racist book clubs.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Maybe I'm just too cynical at this point, but I've found a lot of what's going on in liberal politics these days to be rather performative in nature.

[Varysblackfyre321]

1 hour ago, kairparavel said:

I take it you've not read Michael Harriot before. But even if you have, you're really not understanding what he's saying - that so much of last summer's white allyship was performative and trendy.

I have possibly not. I did not claim to. That does not mean I could not give my thoughts on his arguments in the article being discussed.

1 hour ago, kairparavel said:

And because it was performative and trendy, there was backlash from clout chasers being called out for said performance art.

This is where I disagree.

1 hour ago, kairparavel said:

Be it corporations or social media posts, white people pledged to do the work and they didn't.

Eh, corporation virtue signaling over a particular topic but reluctant to do anything that could cost them money isn’t surprising.

Still wonder if the expressed animosity about this from many on the left or social progressives is beneficial. 

Many on the right and social conservatives just take it as a given that the virtue signaling done to appeal certain sentiments of theirs is just a natural.

You know playing the national anthem at sports games or putting coffee cups in their country’s national  colors..

Don’t know how many everyday white people pledged to do work what that work would entail, and to what extent and they didn’t follow through on.

I don’t think most of the white people who said they supported BLM in the immediate aftermath of Floyd’s death considered themselves “woke” or social activist when they answered the question.

Its just that the most recent image they connected to the phrase BLM was of a man being murdered 9 minutes on video by a cop.

1 hour ago, kairparavel said:

And as a white cishet woman, I can tell you there is a special kind of performance art in a very specific subset of white women who would, instead of digging in and doing better/learning, absolutely get turned off and turn against Black activists calling them out for centering whatever effort they made around themselves. 

Hmm white women really are the white people to which the right and left can summarily agree are terrible for their politics.

The right for being too “woke” and the left for not being genuinely  “woke” enough.

 I don’t think awkward BLM activist who are  white women doing  performance art is what turned many white people off to BLM or talk of racial justice.

That can hurt a little. I don’t significantly though

It was more due to the riots, radical talk of defunding the police, and the insistence of all cops are bad.

 

[Martell Spy]

11 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

Eight dead in San Jose.

Too early to talk about gun control? Not the right time?

The U.S. of A has you covered!

 

Ex-Cop On Fox News Makes Bizarre Link Between Vaccinations And Mass Shootings
“You can be sure they probably got vaccinated,” retired NYPD detective Pat Brosnan claimed.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/fox-news-shootings-coronavirus-vaccinations_n_60af0ff0e4b09604b52b931e

Quote

 

A retired New York Police Department detective on Fox News made a head-spinning link between vaccinations for COVID-19 and the recent surge in mass shootings.

In footage posted on Twitter by the Daily Beast, Pat Brosnan initially appeared to blame Wednesday’s mass shooting in San Jose, California, on the loss of respect for law enforcement because the shooting, in which nine people died, including the gunman, took place near a police station.

“The rules have changed,” he said. “Crimes are no longer illegal. There’s no longer enforcement of lots of laws. And there’s an empowerment of these active shooters.” 

Then he really went off the rails: 

“This is a time that I wish I was wrong with my prediction, which I mentioned to anybody who’d listen, that once COVID starts to lift, these cowardly shooters will come out exactly in tandem with the number of vaccinations. You can be sure they probably got vaccinated. They were just scared to come out.” 

 

 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

Not sure whether this belongs here or somewhere else.

You can't make this up.

Short version. The white lady that took her dog (unleashed) to the central park, to threaten a black bird watcher with the police, has now sue her former employer over her subsequent firing, and accuses the company of racism and sexism.

Only in America.