General US Politics

[Azure the Scale Tipper]

@Pixelman I don’t know, just thought I’d bring him up. Important to know our candidates before we vote for them.

[Excellen Browning]

11 hours ago, Pixelman said:

Right. Which begs the question: of all the Democrats running, why is he unique?

Don't know right now, and don't care. All I'm saying right now is that he seems like a decent enough guy based on his voting record.

[XRay]

How do you guys feel about Cory Booker? I have not paid much attention to him, but he talks about love and unity from a recent article I read and I like that. He seems like a generic Democrat though, so that is probably a bad thing. I feel dissatisfied and disappointed with some on the left who are not as interested in making amends with less extreme Republicans, especially ones like Bush and Romney.

On 4/22/2019 at 4:31 PM, Pixelman said:

EDIT: Did a little bit more research. He's "bipartisan" which is a very very dirty word in this day and age

If this continues on the left, and depending on what candidates Republicans put up, I might register as Republican if they have a more successful moderate candidate.(Joe Biden just announced his run! So I think I am going to stick with Democrats most likely!)

To me, partisan is an even more dirty word, and I will do my best to prevent the far left from paralyzing and jeopardizing the country.

— — — — — — —

I THINK JOE JUST OFFICIALLY ANNOUNCED HIS RUN FOR PRESIDENCY ON TWITTER!!!

I am EXCITED!!! I think I will probably stay as Democrat.

And here is the YouTube video!

This is making me more giddy and excited than Avengers Endgame! My hands are a little shaky from the exciting news.

Edited April 25, 2019 by XRay

[Dr. Tarrasque]

I haven't seen anything regarding Booker lately other than him and Harris taking corporate PAC money when they had pledged that they wouldn't with Booker justifying his end saying that it's not from FEDERAL lobbyists.

The Biden campaign announcement video makes me see him as a second Hillary Clinton, just change the gender. Republicans will probably replace "Her e-mails" with "Sexual Harassment" or "His touching".

What I found most interesting is the discussion brought up about whether or not people in jail should have the right to vote. Initially I was skeptical about Bernie's position on the matter but after checking out the arguments on both side, I'm not opposed to what Bernie is saying (Everyone has the right to vote, even if in jail due to violent crime). Of course, the problem with this stance is that it gives perfect ammo for the Republicans to use for their fear-mongering and while I'd rather just say "Fuck them, they'd do this shit anyway", I fear it could drive away some low information voters. 

EDIT: In a normal world, this would make it harder and harder to argue that "white privilege" isn't a thing. In Trump world, standard affair.

McConnell declaring that he'll be the "Grim Reaper" of progressive policies, hellbent on policy obstruction. Funny, considering a few weeks ago he was whining about "Democrat Obstruction". His death or re-taking the Senate are the only cure for his cancer on our politics, I don't expect Kentucky to vote him out like they should.

Edited April 25, 2019 by Dr. Tarrasque

[Pixelman]

I wonder what Biden's policies would be

I think Democrats going into 2020 should be less about "ORANGE MAN BAD" and instead focus on domestic policy and all that jazz

[BrightBow]

12 minutes ago, Pixelman said:

I wonder what Biden's policies would be

I think Democrats going into 2020 should be less about "ORANGE MAN BAD" and instead focus on domestic policy and all that jazz

Removing a fascist from the highest position of power IS important domestic policy.

[XRay]

3 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

The Biden campaign announcement video makes me see him as a second Hillary Clinton, just change the gender. Republicans will probably replace "Her e-mails" with "Sexual Harassment" or "His touching".

Yeah, I wish he talked more about actual policy than on Trump in the video, but I expect Biden to have a strong list of talking points besides Trump.

Unless Republicans can field an even stronger centrist candidate, which I doubt, my vote is going to towards Biden.

57 minutes ago, BrightBow said:

Removing a fascist from the highest position of power IS important domestic policy.

While Trump certainly displays elements of Fascism, I am hesitant to call him a Fascist. Fascists promote massive government intervention in the economy, which I am sure Trump and the GOP do not want. Fascism is very aggressive foreign policy wise, which Trump seems allergic too; for all his threats against Iran and Venezuela, he does not seem willing to spend American lives and military assets against them. Trump and the GOP also do not denounce democracy; a key feature of Fascism is its combative stance and rhetoric against democracy. Fascism is a collectivist ideology, which does not really mesh with the strong individualistic nature of America's political parties.

Throwing around Fascism as a pejorative term devalues how horrible Fascism can actually be and it makes people desensitized.

[Excellen Browning]

6 hours ago, BrightBow said:

Removing a fascist from the highest position of power IS important domestic policy.

Look friendo, you really should stop playing the fascist card. Nobody cares.

[Lord Raven]

17 hours ago, BrightBow said:

Removing a fascist from the highest position of power IS important domestic policy.

Trump isn't a fascist; he's a narcissist and an idiot

If you play policy, you can pretty much do what the Republicans do and blame shit on Trump if good policy isn't getting passed

[Etrurian emperor]

18 hours ago, BrightBow said:

Removing a fascist from the highest position of power IS important domestic policy.

I wouldn't say Trump is a fascist. Not because Trump doesn't want to be but because he lacks the political skills and weak country required to reach that point. Trump admiring strongman wanabe dictators is a point of concern but he won't ever reach that point. 

16 hours ago, XRay said:

Trump and the GOP also do not denounce democracy; a key feature of Fascism is its combative stance and rhetoric against democracy.

They don't but they do denounce pretty much every institution a healthy democracy should have. Elections are obviously rigged unless Trump wins, the courts are fake if they disagree with the grand leader,  and if parliament gets difficult it should be circumvented. Its a starting point that can easily morph into a distaste for democracy even if they play coy about it. 

18 hours ago, Pixelman said:

I think Democrats going into 2020 should be less about "ORANGE MAN BAD" and instead focus on domestic policy and all that jazz

Orange man is bad though or at least very, very easily identified as completely unsuited for the job. 

In a just world voters should have reacted to a populist being identified as an incompetent buffoon, an openly corrupt businessman and a freak by not voting for him but apparently not. Just showing what Trump is should have done the trick but now that it weirdly turned out it didn't a new tactic is probably required. 

Edited April 26, 2019 by Etrurian emperor

[Shoblongoo]

20 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

I haven't seen anything regarding Booker lately 

I think he just recently introduced a federal bill fully decriminalizing marijuana in the Senate. (which didn't even come up for a vote, because there's no way in hell thats passing with the current batch of Republicans in control)  

Thats--something???

His presidential campaign isn't really going anywhere. And honestly--I'm fine with that. Keep him in the Senate. He's good there. He's the kinda guy you want picking up the torch on legislative issues the next time Democrats have a majority again. 
 

32 minutes ago, Lord Raven said:

Trump isn't a fascist; he's a narcissist and an idiot

Trump is a narcissist and an idiot who is also a fascist. 

 

16 hours ago, XRay said:

A key feature of Fascism is its combative stance and rhetoric against democracy.

Check and check. (See "Fake news is the enemy of the people." See also "I won the popular vote if you don't count the millions of illegals who voted for Hillary."

 

8 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

Orange man is bad though or at least very, very easily identified as completely unsuited for the job. 

"Orange man bad" is a good floor, but Dems need to raise the ceiling.

Edited April 26, 2019 by Shoblongoo

[Excellen Browning]

23 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

I think he just recently introduced a federal bill fully decriminalizing marijuana in the Senate. (which didn't even come up for a vote, because there's no way in hell thats passing with the current batch of Republicans in control)  

Thats--something???

His presidential campaign isn't really going anywhere. And honestly--I'm fine with that. Keep him in the Senate. He's good there. He's the kinda guy you want picking up the torch on legislative issues the next time Democrats have a majority again. 
 

Trump is a narcissist and an idiot who is also a fascist. 

 

Check and check. (See "Fake news is the enemy of the people." See also "I won the popular vote if you don't count the millions of illegals who voted for Hillary."

 

"Orange man bad" is a good floor, but Dems need to raise the ceiling.

jesus dude drop the fucking fascism stuff. go jerk off to something else.

[XRay]

31 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

They don't but they do denounce pretty much every institution a healthy democracy should have. Elections are obviously rigged unless Trump wins, the courts are fake if they disagree with the grand leader,  and if parliament gets difficult it should be circumvented. Its a starting point that can easily morph into a distaste for democracy even if they play coy about it. 

Until they fulfill more criterias of being a Fascist, I would not call them Fascists.

24 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

Check and check. (See "Fake news is the enemy of the people." See also "I won the popular vote if you don't count the millions of illegals who voted for Hillary."

It is one thing to denounce elements and institutions of democracy, but it is a whole nother thing to directly denounce democracy. Trump has not said anything like "fuck voting, I am staying in power for the rest of my life." If he says something like that, then I think we can safely call him a Fascist and overthrow the government if necessary.

There is a huge difference between "Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin should be raped and crucified" and "Russia and China should be sanitized with nuclear weapons."

[Etrurian emperor]

2 minutes ago, XRay said:

Until they fulfill more criterias of being a Fascist, I would not call them Fascists.

And neither did I.

[Shoblongoo]

1 hour ago, XRay said:

Trump has not said anything like "fuck voting, I am staying in power for the rest of my life." If he says something like that, then I think we can safely call him a Fascist

No--at that point you could safely call him an emboldened fascist. 

I would presently surmise that Trump is a failed fascist who has met more institutional resistance than he has been personally able to overcome with only his own (admittedly formidable) force-of-personality + band of cronies.

And who has been unsuccessful at acting upon his worse impulses largely because he is surrounded by individuals who have refused to fall-in-line with some of his more insane orders.  

1 hour ago, XRay said:

It is one thing to denounce elements and institutions of democracy, but it is a whole nother thing to directly denounce democracy.

 ...I mean thats literally like saying "Its one thing to denounce Christ and smear feces on a church while screaming "HAIL SATAN!", but its a whole 'nother thing to directly attack Christianity."

If you're attacking The Courts and The Press and the legitimacy of open-and-free Elections, you're attacking democracy. 

 

 

Edited April 26, 2019 by Shoblongoo

[XRay]

5 hours ago, Shoblongoo said:

If you're attacking The Courts and The Press and the legitimacy of open-and-free Elections, you're attacking democracy. 

He is not openly defying the Court and stripping away their power and allocating that power to himself. The fact that he had his executive order shot down and the fact that he appointed Kavanaugh and is willing to be restrained by his rulings means that the system is working as intended. His attacks so far were just verbal.

His attacks on the press so far amounted to whining and complaining and revoking some access to certain journalists. He is all bark and no bite. At best, revoking access to certain journalists might count as a nibble. He is not cracking down on the press. He is not jailing journalists. And he is certainty not killing them.

There is nothing wrong with complaining about the legitimacy of the vote if you do not think it is a free and fair election, since what is free and fair could be subjective. From the right's view, there is a huge problem voter fraud and Trump's ignorance led him to think that illegal immigrants can vote. Not once did Trump suggest abandoning the voting process and declare himself Supreme-President-for-Life or something.

Trump is working within the frame work of a democracy. Until he expresses a desire to abandon democracy and replace it with a one party rule or fulfills more criteria of being a Fascist, he is not a Fascist.

[Lord Raven]

A lot of those are just as easy to frame as a narcissist who has an executive spot than a fascist outright. Trump isn't nearly ideological enough to be a fascist.

[Dr. Tarrasque]

I don't understand the arguments going around to say that Trump is NOT a fascist. Some of it seems to be suggesting that Trump isn't a fascist because he can't/isn't currently doing x and y specifically but that's not so much a product of Trump but our government system. What we have is president with fascist tendencies who may as well be a fascist inside a democracy bubble, y'all seem to be suggesting that said bubble needs to pop for Trump to qualify as a fascist.

16 hours ago, XRay said:

He is not openly defying the Court and stripping away their power and allocating that power to himself. The fact that he had his executive order shot down and the fact that he appointed Kavanaugh and is willing to be restrained by his rulings means that the system is working as intended. His attacks so far were just verbal.

This is a by-product of how the government is setup, not because of Trump's decisions. In response to the bolded, he actually is, he bitches about the courts shutting down his proposals and putting in judges who will agree with him which in a sense is trying to allocate some of the judiciary power to himself (although this seems to be more of ploy in Mitch McConnell's part). The saving grace is that people just want the job and won't always stoop to pleasing the worst of Trump's impulses.

16 hours ago, XRay said:

His attacks on the press so far amounted to whining and complaining and revoking some access to certain journalists. He is all bark and no bite. At best, revoking access to certain journalists might count as a nibble. He is not cracking down on the press. He is not jailing journalists. And he is certainty not killing them.

Whining and complaining is all you can do when you have no evidence to back your shit up lol. It doesn't matter what kind of attacks he's using, the fact still remains that he's attacking the press. I'm willing to bet he has asked about prosecuting media outlets that are critical of him just like how he asked the DOJ to prosecute Hillary and Comey. Trump is not jailing journalists because those around him will not comply for their own sake, not because he's not choosing to do that. You've seen in the past how he's attempted to revoke security clearance and white house press passes to those critical of him.

16 hours ago, XRay said:

There is nothing wrong with complaining about the legitimacy of the vote if you do not think it is a free and fair election, since what is free and fair could be subjective. From the right's view, there is a huge problem voter fraud and Trump's ignorance led him to think that illegal immigrants can vote. Not once did Trump suggest abandoning the voting process and declare himself Supreme-President-for-Life or something.

Yes but when you run an investigation to try and prove that and it fails, it's time to shut up with that talking point, specially when your lackey (Sarah Sanders) regurgitate the lie that he won the popular vote. He still doesn't and when there's election fraud happening from his party, he stays silent about it. In response to the bolded: Oh he wants to be.

17 hours ago, XRay said:

Trump is working within the frame work of a democracy. Until he expresses a desire to abandon democracy and replace it with a one party rule or fulfills more criteria of being a Fascist, he is not a Fascist.

And that's why it's a fascist president under a democratic government, not a fascist government.

Ok so this is the point where it may come to where we just agree to disagree but I'll pose the question: Can someone be fascist without understanding of that ideology and living under the constraints of a Democratic Republic?

Personally, I'd say the answer to that question YES. You don't have to understand racism to be a fucking racist and if we look back at Michael Cohen's testimony, the fucker didn't run because he believes in Democratic elections, he ran to boost his brand and had expected to lose. He got the presidency, didn't really know what to do other than push to build the wall to keep appeasing his base and doing what he wants to further enrich himself. This isn't a man who believes and understands our system of government, this is a wannabe dictator and a shameful stain on US history that the country will have to carry for years to come.

[eclipse]

. . .and why is the fascist distinction important right now?  I'd rather the Democratic side run a tight campaign without resorting to name-calling and whatnot, just so that America can have someone more mature than a toddler as president.

[Dr. Tarrasque]

In this thread? Just discussion and understanding.

For our politics? Well I would hope that understanding of said distinction could be used so that in the future, it doesn't take as long to get rid of someone with such fascist tendencies like Trump. Impeachment should be a must for this asshole but he's probably going to serve the rest of his term and get off easier than Clinton and Nixon and that is absolute bullshit. If you don't call out a fascist president for what he is, people will use Trump's behavior as a point of reference for defending someone and say "they've committed no wrongdoing, otherwise he wouldn't have been impeached".

The nuance of why Trump isn't impeached will be forgotten by the general public with time and normalizing his crap makes it so that worse people can come in and have an easier time justifying such fascist tendencies.

Edited April 27, 2019 by Dr. Tarrasque

[XRay]

2 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

What we have is president with fascist tendencies who may as well be a fascist inside a democracy bubble, y'all seem to be suggesting that said bubble needs to pop for Trump to qualify as a fascist.

Having some fascist tendencies does not make one a fascist. Just because I want drugs and guns for everyone does not make me a libertarian, since that means I also want the government to have less role in the economy too, which I am not sure I completely agree with.

Trump is no doubt right wing. But calling him fascist is premature and it devalues the word to a slur and it loses its impact. In American politics, communist as a word is beyond saving at this point as it has lost all its impact and it is nothing more than an insult used by the right against the left.

2 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

This is a by-product of how the government is setup, not because of Trump's decisions. In response to the bolded, he actually is, he bitches about the courts shutting down his proposals and putting in judges who will agree with him which in a sense is trying to allocate some of the judiciary power to himself (although this seems to be more of ploy in Mitch McConnell's part). The saving grace is that people just want the job and won't always stoop to pleasing the worst of Trump's impulses.

Bitching is not the same thing as actually doing something. Barks do not hurt, bites do. Trump so far has not bite.

Putting in judges that rules in his favor is not the same thing as stripping the Court of power directly and allocating that power to himself. Trump is still subject to Kavanaugh's rulings. Every president before Trump have also nominated/appointed judges that more or less aligns with their political beliefs.

2 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

Whining and complaining is all you can do when you have no evidence to back your shit up lol. It doesn't matter what kind of attacks he's using, the fact still remains that he's attacking the press. I'm willing to bet he has asked about prosecuting media outlets that are critical of him just like how he asked the DOJ to prosecute Hillary and Comey. Trump is not jailing journalists because those around him will not comply for their own sake, not because he's not choosing to do that. You've seen in the past how he's attempted to revoke security clearance and white house press passes to those critical of him.

He is the Commander in Chief and he could order the military to detain journalists, shut down news organizations, and declare martial law.

His attacks on the press pales in comparison to what people think of when they hear attack on the press, such as China's detainmen of critics and Saudi's Khashoggi murder. Trump's level of attacks on the press is nowhere close to what a fascist is would do.

2 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

Yes but when you run an investigation to try and prove that and it fails, it's time to shut up with that talking point, specially when your lackey (Sarah Sanders) regurgitate the lie that he won the popular vote. He still doesn't and when there's election fraud happening from his party, he stays silent about it. In response to the bolded: Oh he wants to be.

Okay, I will give you that one. However, just to be a devil's advocate, he has not said that in public. At least in public, he is still extolling the virtues of democracy. He is at most a closet fascist though, since he is not railing against how bad democracies are and I am not sure if he is actually serious about wanting to dismantle our democracy.

2 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

And that's why it's a fascist president under a democratic government, not a fascist government.

Ok so this is the point where it may come to where we just agree to disagree but I'll pose the question: Can someone be fascist without understanding of that ideology and living under the constraints of a Democratic Republic?

Personally, I'd say the answer to that question YES. You don't have to understand racism to be a fucking racist and if we look back at Michael Cohen's testimony, the fucker didn't run because he believes in Democratic elections, he ran to boost his brand and had expected to lose. He got the presidency, didn't really know what to do other than push to build the wall to keep appeasing his base and doing what he wants to further enrich himself. This isn't a man who believes and understands our system of government, this is a wannabe dictator and a shameful stain on US history that the country will have to carry for years to come.

I would answer yes too.

However, the thing is that calling Trump a fascist just because he displays some fascist tendencies makes as much sense as calling him a communist for having a hard on for Putin, supporting government funded healthcare, and building the Iron Curtain on the southern border.

Trump does not understand fascism, but he also does not exhibit enough qualities of a fascist to be called a fascist either.

19 minutes ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

For our politics? Well I would hope that understanding of said distinction could be used so that in the future, it doesn't take as long to get rid of someone with such fascist tendencies like Trump. Impeachment should be a must for this asshole but he's probably going to serve the rest of his term and get off easier than Clinton and Nixon and that is absolute bullshit. If you don't call out a fascist president for what he is, people will use Trump's behavior as a point of reference for defending someone and say "they've committed no wrongdoing, otherwise he wouldn't have been impeached".

I agree that we should call out bad behaviors and tendencies because they are bad, and not just because they are fascist. Nazis (or at least Hitler) promoted animal rights and fascists promote government intervention in the economy to protect national security, but that does not mean those tendencies are bad. We also should not mislabel politicians for what they are not either.

Clinton did lie under oath, but I do not think what he did is comparable to what Nixon and Trump did. Clinton lied about his sex life, which is honestly peanuts compared to obstruction of justice and other shit Trump did.

[Shoblongoo]

3 hours ago, eclipse said:

. . .why is the fascist distinction important right now? 

Something Something “those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”

[Johann]

On 4/26/2019 at 1:19 PM, Shoblongoo said:

Trump is a narcissist and an idiot who is also a fascist.

Thems the facts. Y'all gotta understand, it's less "is he a Fascist™?" but rather "is he performing fascist acts and spreading fascist ideology?", which is definitely yes.

[Tryhard]

8 hours ago, eclipse said:

. . .and why is the fascist distinction important right now?  I'd rather the Democratic side run a tight campaign without resorting to name-calling and whatnot, just so that America can have someone more mature than a toddler as president.

it's not even that. if trump remained an egotistical toddler but actually favoured policies that may actually help average people, I wouldn't care about his belligerent attitude.

too many politicians have advocated for terrible things and were still perceived as respectable because they wore a suit and tie and spoke relatively politely (i.e Mike Pence). I actually kind of like how Trump completely diminishes this period of political posturing.

the problem being is that his policies are terrible at the same time, so he just loses on both fronts.

Edited April 28, 2019 by Tryhard

[eclipse]

7 hours ago, Shoblongoo said:

Something Something “those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”

Huh, this ties in nicely to what I'm gonna say below.

7 hours ago, XRay said:

Trump is no doubt right wing. But calling him fascist is premature and it devalues the word to a slur and it loses its impact. In American politics, communist as a word is beyond saving at this point as it has lost all its impact and it is nothing more than an insult used by the right against the left.

This is history repeating itself again. . .but replace "socialist" with "fascist" or whatever other label happens to be popular.

I'd sooner think that fascism would be used to describe the Chinese government, with the move to make Xi a lifetime president, political dissidents disappearing, the Great Firewall, a society that's subject to facial recognition for damn near everything, etc.  Is Trump way further to the right than most of the posters here?  Definitely.  Labels are easy to slap on, and IMO devalue discussion as a whole.