It will be interesting to see if all of this sways those who are less-committed, which is the group that everyone needs to win over. Meantime, Trump is attacking RFK, Jr., as a perceived threat. Recent polling has many more Republicans "RFK-curious" than Democrats. If that holds, and RFK, Jr. stays in the race, for now it does look like a threat to Trump. And he's treating it as such.
I definitely blame Nader, to some extent, for Gore's loss. But I blame the electorate more. We will be a two-party system until we aren't. If they can't understand what's at stake, they're not living in the real world.Dem's aren't the brightest in the world, but even Kennedy's family is backing Biden over their "boy!" Supporting freak 3rd party candidates has cost us elections several times over the last 2 decades! I'll never forgive Nader who just couldn't help himself in 2000 giving us "W!" Sanders fought to the end w/ Stein taking just enough away to subject us to a Trump admin. over one led by Hillary! I keep saying "the right" can't scrape the bottom of the sewer much more, but they find ways to get thru to another layer! I feel terrible for the future of the country as it's destined to go down in flames even if we have to do it to ourselves! Russia & China just need to wait us out as we play "Russian roulet" w/ those guns we have a right to pointed at our own heads! Sooner or later, the chambers will be loaded & that w/b that! Jan 6th was a close call, but some are looking for a repeat performance! Scairy!
Russia cannot be allowed to overrun it's neighbours, that's the path the WW3. Anyone thinking that the likes of Poland, the Baltics and Romania won't be next are in delulu land. And China also needs to be deterred. The lessons of appeasing aggressors was learned in blood in WW2.
Sorry man but it's the opposite of what you're thinking. There's ZERO chance of Putin EVER attacking a NATO country and anyone saying Russia will attack any NATO country unless provoked is delusional. He's been provoked A LOT by the stupidity of the west but he's not going to end humanity. He's a very intelligent guy unlike Biden. To date, the only country to ever use nukes is the US. People getting killed isn't peace and this wasn't just about Ukraine and that pointless proxy "war". Israel are a scum nation and good old uncle Sam is arming them to the teeth to kill thousands of mostly women and children in Gaza. The irony of becoming the nazi scum that you hated. Netanyahu and his IDF "defense forces" of butchering nazi scum, the Azov and countless other nazi battalions in Ukraine and Klaus Schwab and his nazi scum in the WEF who want to control every aspect of our lives. The nazis are back in large numbers right now on this fucked up planet and they have the backing of Biden.it was a great day for world peace
And by the way it wasn't just America announcing new aid. Many European countries did or have already as well. They know which side their bread is buttered
www.bbc.com
What is bad for Biden is the whole Israel/Palestine thing. Campus protests are not his only problems on this issue. I don't agree with you as to the root of campus protest. "Illiberalism." No. Young people will take on causes, even if they're being stupid and unsubtle about them. Biden can't pander to that, but he has to understand what it's about, and hear it. But he has nothing to do with how universities run themselves.
well I certainly agree that Israeli policy has to change. There HAS to be a two state solution, and the Arabs have to be part of it, police it. I agree that what's happening on campus's is not Biden's fault. But that's not how politics works. It will be perceived by most that the Democratic Party is stained by this, even if they're not directly responsible for it. In effect it sets up a nasty pincer movement that Biden has to contend with. He'll be blamed by those on his far left for Israel's attack on the Gaza and he'll be blamed from the right for the anti-semitism being openly displayed on the left. Trust me on this, I've seen this happen in the UK. But that leads me to university administrators and the permissiveness they've had in allowing the tail to wag the dog. If Trump was President right now, there can be no doubt that he would have the police more aggressively involved if it is within his power. While I don't believe that's something that Biden should or can do, it sadly redounds to him. My point, like it or not, is that the average Joe Blow.. is going to observe this, the protests, the fact that this is clearly from the left, and it's bad bad bad for Biden. I can't see how anyone can dispute the fact that this permissiveness on the left for the type of dissent that has pretty much cancelled dialectic on campus is something Democrats could have handled but now it's completely out of hand. It was fine when Speaker guests on the right were being forced to retreat from campus speeches, only Republicans voiced concerns. Now it's coming back with a nasty bite. As @Fiero425 pointed out, this has parallels with the late 60s, and that worked well for Nixon. I'm not saying this will have more power than the abortion issue, but it's a PROBLEM.
I agree with some of this, not all. And I'm not being contentious here, but I'll make a point about the difference between campus unrest now, and in 1968. A lot of people are making the comparison. 1967-68 were a LOT about the Vietnam war and the escalation of it. Johnson's unpopularity had a lot to do with the war, which we were directly involved in, and was showing on our TVs every day. On top of that, students weren't just showing off their lefty bona fides....there was a draft, and all the young men were under threat to go to war, even with the minimal protection of college. Yes, there was a lot of upheaval...much more than now, I'd say. Two things that happened, to add to the chaos of 1968 were the assassinations of MLK (and the riots that followed) and RFK. Remember that RFK was running for President. Nixon got in, in part because every viable Democrat kept dropping out...or, well, getting assassinated. Yes, there was an age gap and a culture gap, and conservative and older people were looking for some law-and-order.
I think part of the disconnect we're having is that I'm naturally more conservative than you, and there are a couple of things I take for granted.. (1) there's something fundamentally broken in the West (2) as much of a practiced politician Trump is, he's not a part of the establishment..
I don't think we're especially having a "disconnect," but I do understand that you're more generally conservative than I am.
That's a big statement, and maybe we could explore that further.
I disagree that Trump is a politician, or at least not a practiced one. Politics is actually a real vocation, and many come to it with actual backgrounds in things that serve them in understanding history, law, and also a background of public service. Trump comes at it as a huckster, which is only the cynic's idea of what makes a politician. IMO. Yes, I understand the appeal of the Beltway outsider. This is not new. It's how we got Carter as a reaction against Nixon.
Yes, you might be wrong that I "underestimate how dissatisfied those more conservative than (I am) with the state of the world." You say I am unaware, or I dismiss it. You do rather say that a lot, no matter how much I try to tell you that I have lots of friends of all political stripes all around the US. And, while your sister's opinion is interesting, she won't be voting in the US elections, correct? Nor will you.
It DOES matter that the US isn't directly involved, which is why I brought up Vietnam. You completely gloss over my point that Americans don't much pay attention to foreign policy. I've lived in the US most of my life, (with the exception of about 5 years in mostly Europe,) and I do kind of object when you ignore what I say about what Americans tend to vote on.
We agree on this.
Here I will address what you said above about what the likes of Britbox are concerned about, and the "tyranny of the state." Or, if we're being honest, the "rise of the tyrants," which they don't seem to be as concerned about. When you say, "We want our world back, our freedoms. We don't want the State to tell us how to live," I'm unclear about this. We're talking about US politics here, but who is restricting your right to abortion? Who is banning books? Who is re-creating how the Civil War should be taught in the US so that white children, tender little snowflakes, shouldn't feel bad about themselves? That's not the Democrats. And who is offering more freedoms, like gay marriage? Fighting for voting rights? Fighting for equal healthcare for women? Trying to make an equalization as to who pays taxes, and therefore into the general good?
he is a politician. He's just not the type of politician you recognise. And he is certainly not about governing. But please never make the mistake of thinking it's not politics. His kind has existed since the beginning of time. It's only that those types are generally not wanted by the electorate. They require a fertile situation to gain power. A time of dissatisfaction, a time when things are broken
no we won't, but we both know a hell of a lot of folks who will. It's roughly 60-40 against Trump in terms of view point. Even then I hold myself apart. It's no secret that there are many things Trump says that I'm not opposed to. But for me it's important that democratic institutions survive
that can't be helped and one of the sources of the disconnect. Sadly the world is less different than you might think. Whether it's social media, communication, whatever it is.... we're all less different than we think we are in this era. Didn't we all learn this lesson after Trump followed the Brexit vote? I personally believe that the fact that the US is not putting boots on the ground matters. Heck the distribution of arms to the Ukraine is enabling the US military to get rid of old generation weaponry for good purpose while funding the production of more up to date weaponry. Add to that the economic benefits for the States that are involved in arms production. But sadly you talk to anyone opposed to these wars on either side of the pond and they are convinced that it's a proxy war and even if our own soldiers aren't involved we're still fighting the war. They believe it's one rule for the West (imperialists, colonialists) and another rule for others. Facts mean less than perceptions in politics, so excuse me for disagreeing with you
they don't want dictatorship. They want someone to cut through the bullshit and protect their values. I completely disagree with them for the simple reason that the next dictator might require us to all cut off our dicks and become women
@britbox is not wrong about social credit systems, surveillance, the threat of digital currencies. It's happening. These are all threats to our freedoms. We want laws that protect our property and our freedoms, not laws that permit the government to tell us what is good and what is bad. That enables the state to punish us. We see you Canada. As I've repeatedly said there are threats to freedom from both sides. The right is learning the lesson about curtailing women's bodily autonomy. In the UK, perhaps the left is being forced to retreat on transgender issues with the Cass report, but it's still not going to stop the Conservative government getting smashed in the next election. I'm no more a fan of book burning than I am a fan of children's books telling kids how to have gay sex, or heterosexual sex for that matter! I think I'm part of the silent majority on that. But common sense tells me that as long as there are sexualised books that try to disintermediate parental responsibility people will try to burn books. I hope your outrage about book burning is also complemented by outrage for books that are being changed to fit our times. I'm as outraged at people trying to teach bad history to white kids as I'm outraged by teachers trying to tell those same white kids that they're bad because they benefited from slavery. It's complex and could easily be resolved by common sense. I hope we still all have that. I'm not going to side with one side and accept the bad things they want to do. I don't understand that type of politics. If one side is right on an issue they'll have my support. If the other side is right on an issue, they will have my support. I just wish others weren't so tribal and are unwilling to see the stupidity on their side. That to me is just as dangerous
poll.qu.edu
I still don't think he's much of a politician, even though now he has 4 years of the presidency under his belt. I don't know what you mean that "his kind has existed since the beginning of time." I looked up US Presidents with no political experience. Zachary Taylor, Ulysses S. Grant, and Dwight Eisenhower were all generals who led forces to victory in their respective wars. This is also public service. Herbert Hoover was a contributor to the Treaty of Versailles, which led to him being appointed as Sec. of Commerce. Only Trump had no government service nor military service before becoming President.
I'm not sure who your "they" is, but I guess we're talking about Trump supporters? Do they even know what their values are, anymore, if they back him, and they really believe in the Constitution, and protecting it? Because Trump doesn't. I've read enough to vaguely understand why Evangelicals can find their savior in this deeply unsaintly man. (It's bizarre, and counter-intuitive, but you have to go with it, if you're to understand it, at all.) But then there are the rest, and I have a harder time understanding how they reconcile their "values" with his lack of them. Their performative patriotism, with Jan. 6th. Just because Trump dry-humps the flag? (Which I mean literally and figuratively.)they don't want dictatorship. They want someone to cut through the bullshit and protect their values. I completely disagree with them for the simple reason that the next dictator might require us to all cut off our dicks and become women
Please cite for me a book that teaches children how to have gay sex. Actually, there is sex education in schools. Can you possibly object to that? Certainly, it matters when they start. Just prior to the onset of puberty would be my choice, and was when they did it in my school. But books like "Heather has Two Mommies" are good for younger kids. They have questions and confusions, and they do better when they have help understanding things. Gay marriage is legal in the US. Kids might want to understand why some kids have same-sex parents. It doesn't pollute their minds, it answers questions.
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Serious PC thread | World Affairs | 2443 | |
| T | THE EASTERNERS - THE SLAVS thread. | World Affairs | 13 | |
|
Russia Politics Thread | World Affairs | 82 | |
|
|
UK Politics Thread | World Affairs | 997 | |
|
|
Geopolitics in the Middle East | World Affairs | 46 |