Is that more than two decades after 9/11, here we are, no safer, certainly the worse for wear and all the original players still in positions of strength.

The Taliban rules Afghanistan, Pakistan is extremist. Saudi Arabia is extremist, Iran and DPRK remain "axis of evil".
Iraq and Syria are much much worse and Hamas and Hezbollah now have Western support and cheerleading.

It would be impossible to have predicted this outcome 23 years ago.

Yet some of us did predict the failure of nation-building in Afghanistan when we went down that road more than twenty years ago.

It was a classic example of American arrogance--a belief that we're better than everyone else, that they all want to be like us, and (by some) that our endeavors are blessed by God.

We never seem to learn from our mistakes.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
Yet some of us did predict the failure of nation-building in Afghanistan when we went down that road more than twenty years ago.

It was a classic example of American arrogance--a belief that we're better than everyone else, that they all want to be like us, and (by some) that our endeavors are blessed by God.

We never seem to learn from our mistakes.

Agree with this but will add the forgotten part. Nothing happens unless a profit can be made. There were those who got even richer over this and other similar issues.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
Is that more than two decades after 9/11, here we are, no safer, certainly the worse for wear and all the original players still in positions of strength.

The Taliban rules Afghanistan, Pakistan is extremist. Saudi Arabia is extremist, Iran and DPRK remain "axis of evil".
Iraq and Syria are much much worse and Hamas and Hezbollah now have Western support and cheerleading.

It would be impossible to have predicted this outcome 23 years ago.

I think there are some who predicted it. I don't want to research it so for the sake of peace I'll just agree with your post/premise, except the part about Western support for Hamas and Hezbollah, especially cheerleading.

You didn't mention the visionaries who predict a post-Putin Russia. I think Trump is not envisioning anything post-Putin.

With all that you say, with the exception, being real, which isn't likely to change for the good quickly, but more likely to change for the worse quickly, I think the number one issue is who we put in charge of the Exec Branch - the commander.

It's a fact that Trump actually commands an alt-reality domain, counting all the supporters, sycophants, GOPers in congress, Fox, etc.

Do we really want a person in the WH who dwells in alt-reality, and it's getting worse, with all the collateral baggage, personnel, project 2025, and much more?

In case it's not obvious, here's a definition of alt-reality:

"a state of things that does not really exist, but that some people believe to be real or true"

IOW "untethered to reality". That's literally where Trump is. The significance of that can't be overstated and certainly shouldn't be underestimated.

Now, tell me that you aren't worried, and we shouldn't be either, that Trump dwells in alt-reality, and there's no way he will pivot if elected again.

Tell me, again, that Trump's alt-reality worldviews are better than Harris/Walz's real world, in the context of the power of POTUS.

Or do you just want to talk about cats and dog on the menu of illegals? Or perhaps policy? Or maybe transgenders, men competing in women's sports?

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
Is that more than two decades after 9/11, here we are, no safer, certainly the worse for wear and all the original players still in positions of strength.

The Taliban rules Afghanistan, Pakistan is extremist. Saudi Arabia is extremist, Iran and DPRK remain "axis of evil".
Iraq and Syria are much much worse and Hamas and Hezbollah now have Western support and cheerleading.

It would be impossible to have predicted this outcome 23 years ago.

They are providing excuses for your government to keep you broke!

Actually, Scott, there are things we can do something about.

#1 is to call out lies for what they are and who is promoting them.

That seems to me to be an important first step if we expect anything good in the world.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...a3fe5e76a1a4d7&ei=38

'Utterly contrary to what Trump said': Steve Rattner breaks down Trump's debate lies

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...6ef14730b776f5&ei=38

Fact-Checker Exposes ‘Lie After Lie’ That Donald Trump Told At Debate
Story by Lee Moran • 9h • 2 min read

“No major presidential candidate before Donald Trump has ever lied with this kind of frequency,” Dale noted. “A remarkably large chunk of what he said tonight was just not true, and this wasn’t like little exaggeration, political spin. A lot of his false claims were untethered to reality. ”

Well, post 9/11, the democrats have been in power longer than the republicans.

Harris is more of the same as far as Biden’s policies.

Since things have gotten worse under the Democrat’s watch, I’m not sure how you can say they are “better” or “the solution”. In fact, the democrats are experiencing their own “Trump” movement with the far left elements of the party.

Sorry, but neither party is worthy of support right now.

I believe the republic is strong and we will survive whichever idiot leadership we put in, but it’s undoubtedly going to get worse on the international scene.

Saeed’s beloved isolationist policies will not solve Iran getting nuclear weapons and having a not very tightly wrapped (mentally) theocracy controlling them.

China is very imperialistic right now. That won’t end well…

And Russia seems hellbent on recovering past glory by use of force.

Then we have the religious right that wants to have another crusade in the holy land, and the woke left insisting we forcibly intervene in the name of extreme minority social rights.

No, until we all get our collective heads out of our arses, Scott, the odds are ever increasing that your daughter will have to fight a war.

quote:

I believe the republic is strong and we will survive whichever idiot leadership we put in

Well, you've been consistent about saying that, which could mean several things, none BTW gives assurance that you are right.

One thing it could mean is that you are slow or defiant to take into account facts and evidence in changing your opinions.

Another could be that you overestimate the resilience of the republic. The Founders worried about just such event as the rise of a Trump-like person. But you have no worry.

And you consistently make variations on the theme of false equivalence. Given the challenges of the future and now, which would you prefer as the wild card in the WH - a person who is untethered to reality and the rule of law (IOW tethered to alt-reality), or a person who is tethered to reality and rule of law?

What are the likely outcomes, given either, in a changing and unpredictable world regarding human endeavors and follies?

The simple fact and choice is really that clear, simple and as far as I know unique.

Trump and MAGA have placed us in an unprecedented, unique, situation where traditional policies, per party differences, don't matter. Policies are negotiable. Trumpism is negotiable just like insanity is negotiable, and neither can be fixed by running their course and suffering the consequences.

De facto your position is then that if Trump wins, armed insurrection is acceptable?

Sounds every bit as kooky as the Proud Boys et al.

I grant Trump is disgusting, and he says all kinds of stupid stuff, but really? He’s going to become the dictator and we will never have another election afterwards.

That’s your position with those claims.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

I believe the republic is strong and we will survive whichever idiot leadership we put in

Well, you've been consistent about saying that, which could mean several things, none BTW gives assurance that you are right.

One thing it could mean is that you are slow or defiant to take into account facts and evidence in changing your opinions.

Another could be that you overestimate the resilience of the republic. The Founders worried about just such event as the rise of a Trump-like person. But you have no worry.

And you consistently make variations on the theme of false equivalence. Given the challenges of the future and now, which would you prefer as the wild card in the WH - a person who is untethered to reality and the rule of law (IOW tethered to alt-reality), or a person who is tethered to reality and rule of law?

What are the likely outcomes, given either, in a changing and unpredictable world regarding human endeavors and follies?

The simple fact and choice is really that clear, simple and as far as I know unique.

Trump and MAGA have placed us in an unprecedented, unique, situation where traditional policies, per party differences, don't matter. Policies are negotiable. Trumpism is negotiable just like insanity is negotiable, and neither can be fixed by running their course and suffering the consequences.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
De facto your position is then that if Trump wins, armed insurrection is acceptable?

Sounds every bit as kooky as the Proud Boys et al.

I grant Trump is disgusting, and he says all kinds of stupid stuff, but really? He’s going to become the dictator and we will never have another election afterwards.

That’s your position with those claims.

You are not asking. You're making claims regarding my position that are not true. I'm surprised that you or anyone could make that assumption. I'm wondering how you got such a notion since I said nothing of the sort. I assume it's related to a weird sort of projection on your part.

However, any vote for Trump, or third party is complicit in the idea that insurrection, armed or otherwise, is acceptable if he loses. Actually, the "insurrection" attempt of Jan 6, before and after, isn't over. It's ongoing, but through the system, using the system on itself, with fascist-like ploys, like big lies, lots of lies, messing with voter registration and districts, and more. Trump has no intention of acknowledging loss.

There are many reasons to vote against Trump, but his insurrection attempt and the BIG LIE is reason enough.

We don't know how effective GOPers have been at loading the wagon per voting in their favor. There's been some reporting on the efforts to affect, but I haven't seen much on predicting effect. Georgia is an example of GOPers messing with rules on elections.

"He’s going to become the dictator, and we will never have another election afterwards." I didn't have to make that up, and didn't say it. I just listened when Trump said it, and a lot more.

Doc

I am shocked that you could make such a false claim

* 11th Sept 2001 to Jan 2009 - was GWB - GOP in charge for almost 7.5 years
* Jan 2008 to Jan 2017 - Obama - Democrat - 8 years
* Jan 2017 to Jan 2021 - Tump - GOP - 4 Years
* Jan 2021 to Sept 2024 - Biden - Democrat - 3.5 years

Both administrations have had almost equal days in power.

The problems were on the priority list for longer under GWB and therefore a bigger failure. Republicans went on a wasted war in Iraq and failed. Iran played GWB and got the US to topple Sadam so that the Shia militia and the mullas can take over.

I wonder what you get to gain by spreading this falsehood.

BTW - undermining democracy has already begun

The Economist has this to day

Edward Carr
Deputy editor

America’s presidential campaign was dominated this week by the debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris—an encounter in which the incumbent vice-president skilfully managed to present herself as the change candidate. To us, the ill-tempered dust-up served as a warning. Even if in the eyes of most voters Ms Harris won the debate, this is going to be a very close race—none other, we reckon, has been so tight at this point.

Given the complexity of America’s archaic election system, the low trust of America’s voters in it and the baleful precedent of the invasion of the Capitol on January 6th 2021, the weeks after the vote are almost certain to be filled with lawsuits and conspiracy theories. The Republican National Committee has pre-emptively filed more than 100 election lawsuits in states to create a paper trail in readiness to fight the result. Our cover this week looks at the mayhem ahead and the consequences for America’s beleaguered democracy.

https://www.economist.com/lead...is-mired-in-conflict

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Well, post 9/11, the democrats have been in power longer than the republicans.

Harris is more of the same as far as Biden’s policies.

Since things have gotten worse under the Democrat’s watch, I’m not sure how you can say they are “better” or “the solution”. In fact, the democrats are experiencing their own “Trump” movement with the far left elements of the party.

Sorry, but neither party is worthy of support right now.

I believe the republic is strong and we will survive whichever idiot leadership we put in, but it’s undoubtedly going to get worse on the international scene.

Saeed’s beloved isolationist policies will not solve Iran getting nuclear weapons and having a not very tightly wrapped (mentally) theocracy controlling them.

China is very imperialistic right now. That won’t end well…

And Russia seems hellbent on recovering past glory by use of force.

Then we have the religious right that wants to have another crusade in the holy land, and the woke left insisting we forcibly intervene in the name of extreme minority social rights.

No, until we all get our collective heads out of our arses, Scott, the odds are ever increasing that your daughter will have to fight a war.

No it is following from your constant threat to democracy commentary.

Trump may well want to be an emperor and his word being absolute law, but we all know that isn’t going to happen even if he’s elected.

Yet you keep going on with continual commentary about his fascist goals… and then in your response above you imply that if Trump is elected it’s the end of democracy.

You are stating that my statement of the republic is strong despite who wins is incorrect is identical to the righty loons who claim the country is over if Harris wins.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
De facto your position is then that if Trump wins, armed insurrection is acceptable?

Sounds every bit as kooky as the Proud Boys et al.

I grant Trump is disgusting, and he says all kinds of stupid stuff, but really? He’s going to become the dictator and we will never have another election afterwards.

That’s your position with those claims.

You are not asking. You're making claims regarding my position that are not true. I'm surprised that you or anyone could make that assumption. I'm wondering how you got such a notion since I said nothing of the sort. I assume it's related to a weird sort of projection on your part.

However, any vote for Trump, or third party is complicit in the idea that insurrection, armed or otherwise, is acceptable if he loses. Actually, the "insurrection" attempt of Jan 6, before and after, isn't over. It's ongoing, but through the system, using the system on itself, with fascist-like ploys, like big lies, lots of lies, messing with voter registration and districts, and more. Trump has no intention of acknowledging loss.

There are many reasons to vote against Trump, but his insurrection attempt and the BIG LIE is reason enough.

We don't know how effective GOPers have been at loading the wagon per voting in their favor. There's been some reporting on the efforts to affect, but I haven't seen much on predicting effect. Georgia is an example of GOPers messing with rules on elections.

"He’s going to become the dictator, and we will never have another election afterwards." I didn't have to make that up, and didn't say it. I just listened when Trump said it, and a lot more.

Doc

You missed my post above.

You also miss a lot of other CRITICAL developments on the Right. Project 2025 is a frightening threat to Democracy and freedom. It is funded by Oligarchs and the intent is clearly to establish Oligarchy and suppress the middle class. They already have a plan with 20,000 hand picked people to start in the new administration to implement this despotic rule.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
No it is following from your constant threat to democracy commentary.

Trump may well want to be an emperor and his word being absolute law, but we all know that isn’t going to happen even if he’s elected.

Yet you keep going on with continual commentary about his fascist goals… and then in your response above you imply that if Trump is elected it’s the end of democracy.

You are stating that my statement of the republic is strong despite who wins is incorrect is identical to the righty loons who claim the country is over if Harris wins.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
De facto your position is then that if Trump wins, armed insurrection is acceptable?

Sounds every bit as kooky as the Proud Boys et al.

I grant Trump is disgusting, and he says all kinds of stupid stuff, but really? He’s going to become the dictator and we will never have another election afterwards.

That’s your position with those claims.

You are not asking. You're making claims regarding my position that are not true. I'm surprised that you or anyone could make that assumption. I'm wondering how you got such a notion since I said nothing of the sort. I assume it's related to a weird sort of projection on your part.

However, any vote for Trump, or third party is complicit in the idea that insurrection, armed or otherwise, is acceptable if he loses. Actually, the "insurrection" attempt of Jan 6, before and after, isn't over. It's ongoing, but through the system, using the system on itself, with fascist-like ploys, like big lies, lots of lies, messing with voter registration and districts, and more. Trump has no intention of acknowledging loss.

There are many reasons to vote against Trump, but his insurrection attempt and the BIG LIE is reason enough.

We don't know how effective GOPers have been at loading the wagon per voting in their favor. There's been some reporting on the efforts to affect, but I haven't seen much on predicting effect. Georgia is an example of GOPers messing with rules on elections.

"He’s going to become the dictator, and we will never have another election afterwards." I didn't have to make that up, and didn't say it. I just listened when Trump said it, and a lot more.

Doc,
My wife has a copy of DSM 5 in my office.. since I am not qualified to to judge without consultation, I will refrain from asserting which conditions he suffers/relishes

I applauded your efforts to be civil with this guy.

But I will see his fixation on project 2025, and call you with the communist manifesto, and raise with Das Kapital

As to your comment Naki about US government control, 2001/the 107th congress was a nonentity. Pretty much both sides were in agreement with fighting the GWOT and it was bipartisan for the most part.

The 108th and 109th congress the GOP had control of at least 2 of the governing bodies (house, senate, and presidency)

The final 2 years of Bush were democrat controlled by both houses of congress.

The democrats controlled at least 2/3 for 6 of Obama’s years.

Trump had 2 years of Republican control of both houses and 2 years with just the senate.

Biden (and I include the remainder of his term as democrat because it’s not going to change) had 2 years of complete control and 2 years of the senate only. Identical to Trump, yet “all he’s done is clean up from Trump” who got exactly jack-all accomplished aside from a minor tax bill and getting nominees on the court due to who died. (Ie, through no real accomplishment of his own.)

So in the last 22 years (inclusive) the GOP had control of 2+ of the 3 for 10 years, the democrats for 12.


The GOP had control of both houses and the presidency for 6 years, the democrats for 4.

So the democrats have either had more control or equal control over governance.

Obama got more of his agenda through as he had both larger majorities and more competent legislative leadership than Bush or Trump.

He also got more done than Biden even though Biden had essentially the same congressional leadership as Obama… indicating that Obama certainly was more powerful than Biden.

Trump got nothing done when he had all three branches. Bush used all his credit with the wars, and other than the war, had next to no policy accomplishments.

So the democrats have had more control of government since 9/11. How can the situation be all on the GOP?

Doc,
He's never lived in The US, never been eligible to vote here, and never paid us income taxes.. by his own statement he's only ever had a tourist visa.

He will never understand that Congress controls the purse strings and makes the laws, including tax laws...

When I travel to a foreign country, as a guest, I never comment on their politics.. on some places that can even get you deported (Mexico for example)

But he also does NOTHING for relieving actual slavery in his home country

He wants to be a successful american so bad it burns a hole in his soul... but even more, since he can't qualify for a work visa, he wants everyone to hate the America that is

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
As to your comment Naki about US government control, 2001/the 107th congress was a nonentity. Pretty much both sides were in agreement with fighting the GWOT and it was bipartisan for the most part.

The 108th and 109th congress the GOP had control of at least 2 of the governing bodies (house, senate, and presidency)

The final 2 years of Bush were democrat controlled by both houses of congress.

The democrats controlled at least 2/3 for 6 of Obama’s years.

Trump had 2 years of Republican control of both houses and 2 years with just the senate.

Biden (and I include the remainder of his term as democrat because it’s not going to change) had 2 years of complete control and 2 years of the senate only. Identical to Trump, yet “all he’s done is clean up from Trump” who got exactly jack-all accomplished aside from a minor tax bill and getting nominees on the court due to who died. (Ie, through no real accomplishment of his own.)

So in the last 22 years (inclusive) the GOP had control of 2+ of the 3 for 10 years, the democrats for 12.


The GOP had control of both houses and the presidency for 6 years, the democrats for 4.

So the democrats have either had more control or equal control over governance.

Obama got more of his agenda through as he had both larger majorities and more competent legislative leadership than Bush or Trump.

He also got more done than Biden even though Biden had essentially the same congressional leadership as Obama… indicating that Obama certainly was more powerful than Biden.

Trump got nothing done when he had all three branches. Bush used all his credit with the wars, and other than the war, had next to no policy accomplishments.

So the democrats have had more control of government since 9/11. How can the situation be all on the GOP?

Bush achieved No Child Left Behind which was his Texas plan gone national, tax cuts, and Medicare Part D. There was something else domestically? Oh, he got Congress to fund non profit religious based service providers.

Sen. Ted Kennedy was essential in getting No Child Left Behind passed.

Doc

I am seriously concerned for you. What happened to your great intellect and logical capabilities?

You said The GOP had control of both houses and the presidency for 6 years, the democrats for 4. So the democrats have either had more control or equal control over governance.

Your second sentence is a blatant contradiction of the first.

When the GOP admin has all branches under its control 50% more than the Democrats, that is a huge advantage and a HUGE FAILURE by the GOP.

Again, you have left out the undermining of Democracy by Project 2025 and the Oligarchs (GOP).

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
As to your comment Naki about US government control, 2001/the 107th congress was a nonentity. Pretty much both sides were in agreement with fighting the GWOT and it was bipartisan for the most part.

The 108th and 109th congress the GOP had control of at least 2 of the governing bodies (house, senate, and presidency)

The final 2 years of Bush were democrat controlled by both houses of congress.

The democrats controlled at least 2/3 for 6 of Obama’s years.

Trump had 2 years of Republican control of both houses and 2 years with just the senate.

Biden (and I include the remainder of his term as democrat because it’s not going to change) had 2 years of complete control and 2 years of the senate only. Identical to Trump, yet “all he’s done is clean up from Trump” who got exactly jack-all accomplished aside from a minor tax bill and getting nominees on the court due to who died. (Ie, through no real accomplishment of his own.)

So in the last 22 years (inclusive) the GOP had control of 2+ of the 3 for 10 years, the democrats for 12.


The GOP had control of both houses and the presidency for 6 years, the democrats for 4.

So the democrats have either had more control or equal control over governance.

Obama got more of his agenda through as he had both larger majorities and more competent legislative leadership than Bush or Trump.

He also got more done than Biden even though Biden had essentially the same congressional leadership as Obama… indicating that Obama certainly was more powerful than Biden.

Trump got nothing done when he had all three branches. Bush used all his credit with the wars, and other than the war, had next to no policy accomplishments.

So the democrats have had more control of government since 9/11. How can the situation be all on the GOP?

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
No it is following from your constant threat to democracy commentary.

Trump may well want to be an emperor and his word being absolute law, but we all know that isn’t going to happen even if he’s elected.

Yet you keep going on with continual commentary about his fascist goals… and then in your response above you imply that if Trump is elected it’s the end of democracy.

You are stating that my statement of the republic is strong despite who wins is incorrect is identical to the righty loons who claim the country is over if Harris wins.

What we all know that's going to happen if Trump wins the election is that he will never be held accountable for the crimes he's already committed. He will pardon all the criminals associated with the insurrection attempt, plus a lot more. He could even SELL pardons, and get away with it.

Plus, with the recent SCOTUS ruling on immunity, he WILL push that beyond the limits, whatever they are, in every aspect imaginable and more, and drag the sorting out over a very long time. He WILL committ crimes while in office and claim immunity. GOPers in congress WILL NOT impeach him, no matter what.

And he and others will implement project 2025 to the fullest extent they can, and that's despite current law. They will do it anyway, and then beat the legal system just as they have already.

And you make another false equivalence. Trump plans specifically to attack the rule of law. The democrats do not have such an abhorrent plan.

“The democrats do not attack the rule of law”

Then what in the blue blazes is the defund the police movement, not charging people with crimes that are committed and against the law as a matter of policy?

You’ve said Trump is a liar. Yes he is.

Yet you make the same sorts of comments about misstatements and such that I made about Trump 4-6 years ago about Biden and Harris now.

Power corrupts.

Trump is certainly corrupted.

So are your standard bearers.

Harris refuses to answer questions and sticks to statements that she can disavow in a year or two. Biden ran a campaign based on decieving the people about his ability and status.

Yet you called him a fundamentally decent man.

I have no issue with someone saying they think Harris is a better choice, as long as they’re not hypocritical about it.

If Trump is re-elected, he will have fulfilled his lifelong dream and actually become Teflon Don with practically unlimited powers.

We're talking about an amoral man with no conscience, and a fake Christian too.

Yes, power corrupts, but in the case of Trump, and Team, they are already corrupt and looking for the power to exploit it to whatever extent they can get away with.

There is a big difference, comparing your false equivalences.

In a "normal" situation checks and balances have held for a long time. Trump and Team intend to specifically target the checks to achieve the balance they deem sufficient for their corruption to run amuck.

That is well outlined in the Project 2025 manifesto, which really is a fascist plan.

How could anyone think this guy should be elected again?

https://youtube.com/shorts/yuM...?si=CbKAJwcdRX8nvxsO

As usual, here's an article that explains the #1 issue far better than I can, by someone who has lots of actual experience.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...288a2423d7a174&ei=86

What I Saw on the January 6 Committee

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
No it is following from your constant threat to democracy commentary.

Trump may well want to be an emperor and his word being absolute law, but we all know that isn’t going to happen even if he’s elected.

Yet you keep going on with continual commentary about his fascist goals… and then in your response above you imply that if Trump is elected it’s the end of democracy.

You are stating that my statement of the republic is strong despite who wins is incorrect is identical to the righty loons who claim the country is over if Harris wins.

What we all know that's going to happen if Trump wins the election is that he will never be held accountable for the crimes he's already committed. He will pardon all the criminals associated with the insurrection attempt, plus a lot more. He could even SELL pardons, and get away with it.

Plus, with the recent SCOTUS ruling on immunity, he WILL push that beyond the limits, whatever they are, in every aspect imaginable and more, and drag the sorting out over a very long time. He WILL committ crimes while in office and claim immunity. GOPers in congress WILL NOT impeach him, no matter what.

And he and others will implement project 2025 to the fullest extent they can, and that's despite current law. They will do it anyway, and then beat the legal system just as they have already.

And you make another false equivalence. Trump plans specifically to attack the rule of law. The democrats do not have such an abhorrent plan.

All of your fears are based on the assumption that if elected Trump will face no opposition from Congress, the Judiciary, within his own branch of government as well as the states and We the People.

M.E., that is simply not going to be the case.

You know , we all know regardless political leaning that if Trump is elected it will be by the slimmest of margins. You can't think that group opposing Trump will disappear. During Trump's first administration his branch was full of staff opposing him, the next time certainly won't be miraculously different.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
No it is following from your constant threat to democracy commentary.

Trump may well want to be an emperor and his word being absolute law, but we all know that isn’t going to happen even if he’s elected.

Yet you keep going on with continual commentary about his fascist goals… and then in your response above you imply that if Trump is elected it’s the end of democracy.

You are stating that my statement of the republic is strong despite who wins is incorrect is identical to the righty loons who claim the country is over if Harris wins.

What we all know that's going to happen if Trump wins the election is that he will never be held accountable for the crimes he's already committed. He will pardon all the criminals associated with the insurrection attempt, plus a lot more. He could even SELL pardons, and get away with it.

Plus, with the recent SCOTUS ruling on immunity, he WILL push that beyond the limits, whatever they are, in every aspect imaginable and more, and drag the sorting out over a very long time. He WILL committ crimes while in office and claim immunity. GOPers in congress WILL NOT impeach him, no matter what.

And he and others will implement project 2025 to the fullest extent they can, and that's despite current law. They will do it anyway, and then beat the legal system just as they have already.

And you make another false equivalence. Trump plans specifically to attack the rule of law. The democrats do not have such an abhorrent plan.

All of your fears are based on the assumption that if elected Trump will face no opposition from Congress, the Judiciary, within his own branch of government as well as the states and We the People.

M.E., that is simply not going to be the case.

You know , we all know regardless political leaning that if Trump is elected it will be by the slimmest of margins. You can't think that group opposing Trump will disappear. During Trump's first administration his branch was full of staff opposing him, the next time certainly won't be miraculously different.

He will only appoint loyalists, will order his Attorney General to halt all Federal prosecutions/investigations of him and will implement as much of Project 2025 as he can, either through Republican toadies in Congress or Executive Orders and the corrupt Supreme Court will do nothing to rein him in after granting him immunity.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
No it is following from your constant threat to democracy commentary.

Trump may well want to be an emperor and his word being absolute law, but we all know that isn’t going to happen even if he’s elected.

Yet you keep going on with continual commentary about his fascist goals… and then in your response above you imply that if Trump is elected it’s the end of democracy.

You are stating that my statement of the republic is strong despite who wins is incorrect is identical to the righty loons who claim the country is over if Harris wins.

What we all know that's going to happen if Trump wins the election is that he will never be held accountable for the crimes he's already committed. He will pardon all the criminals associated with the insurrection attempt, plus a lot more. He could even SELL pardons, and get away with it.

Plus, with the recent SCOTUS ruling on immunity, he WILL push that beyond the limits, whatever they are, in every aspect imaginable and more, and drag the sorting out over a very long time. He WILL committ crimes while in office and claim immunity. GOPers in congress WILL NOT impeach him, no matter what.

And he and others will implement project 2025 to the fullest extent they can, and that's despite current law. They will do it anyway, and then beat the legal system just as they have already.

And you make another false equivalence. Trump plans specifically to attack the rule of law. The democrats do not have such an abhorrent plan.

All of your fears are based on the assumption that if elected Trump will face no opposition from Congress, the Judiciary, within his own branch of government as well as the states and We the People.

M.E., that is simply not going to be the case.

You know , we all know regardless political leaning that if Trump is elected it will be by the slimmest of margins. You can't think that group opposing Trump will disappear. During Trump's first administration his branch was full of staff opposing him, the next time certainly won't be miraculously different.

He will only appoint loyalists, will order his Attorney General to halt all Federal prosecutions/investigations of him and will implement as much of Project 2025 as he can, either through Republican toadies in Congress or Executive Orders and the corrupt Supreme Court will do nothing to rein him in after granting him immunity.

Seems like I remember his cabinet has to have congressional approval.
If the Dems have a majority in Congress come this next January,......
What?

I also seem to remember the SCOTUS not always going with Trump either.

Although now that you mention it, what could we get MTG appointed to? Secretary of Defense seems a little suicidal, Surgeon General? Secretary of Space Force?

Nope! I got it, Ambassador to the UN.

OMG! :tu2 :

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

All of your fears are based on the assumption that if elected Trump will face no opposition from Congress, the Judiciary, within his own branch of government as well as the states and We the People.

M.E., that is simply not going to be the case.

You know , we all know regardless political leaning that if Trump is elected it will be by the slimmest of margins. You can't think that group opposing Trump will disappear. During Trump's first administration his branch was full of staff opposing him, the next time certainly won't be miraculously different.

Three parts:

I do not assume that Trump and Team will face NO opposition. Certainly he will. But look at the situation now. He really shouldn't be on the ballot at all and the GOP should have rid themselves of him long ago, through impeachment for starters. But we know what happened instead. Congressional opposition is impotent, left and right. He exploits the judiciary, and SCOTUS has leaned hard in his favor especially with the immunity thing. "We the People" are also a big problem. His base followers are rabid. He has more than sufficiently proven to be able to manipulate them at will. The radical militia types are eager to get the "go ahead" as they "stand down and stand by".

You say "not going to be the case". Do you have any idea of how many power players have a hand in the cookie jar called project 2025. This manifesto is exactly how fascism takes hold. The very idea and gall to publish it, to think it out, to fully expect it to convert alt-reality to reality should be a serious wake up from denial.

If Trump is elected, the 20,000 Shock Troops, per Steve Bannon's vile dreams and Heritage Foundation's LinkedIn list and plan WILL happen, first through exec order. There may be far more than 20,000 loyalists appointed or hired replacing career civil servants all based on loyalty test. For starters, as an example people like Stephen Miller will be serving Trump in some role, whether cabinet or not. Trump and his Team will vet the people who surround Trump. There will be no more Mattis, Kelly, or others to hold him back. They ALL will magnify his vengeance and whims, and perhaps most importantly - manipulate him, use him. There is a long list of probable Trump appointees, many who are part of the Heritage Foundation's project 2025 authors and thinkers. ALL of them have fascist intentions. The closed feedback loop will be atrocious.

=========================================================

One may presume that Trump and Team and supporters and apologists think they are doing the RIGHT things, literally. After all, who wouldn't want to do the right thing?

When they tell you who they really are, pay attention, believe them.

There are many fascist attributes already in play, and have been for some time, all attributed to Trump. The vast sum of lies is just a part of it. There's the attacks and threats on judges and family, on DOJ employees and family, and the direct claims by Trump about weaponization of the rule of law. It's a direct attack on the rule of law and it will be magnified greatly under a new Trump term. He and Team WILL corrupt the justice system throughout, and weaponize it against Trump's enemies, real or imagined. It's a setup beginning with lies, and supposed justification per the lies - tit for tat.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politi...ent-trump-rcna170783

Attorney General Merrick Garland denounces 'dangerous' and 'outrageous' attacks on DOJ prosecutors and personnel
Former President Donald Trump and his lawyers have claimed that the Justice Department has been weaponized to keep him from being elected to another term.

https://www.politico.com/news/...-department-00178907

Merrick Garland decries threats to feds, vows to keep DOJ above politics
The attorney general in a speech on Thursday insisted that the Justice Department won’t allow political considerations to impact its decisions.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...d826bec4f582be&ei=41

Bomb threats shut down Springfield, Ohio after Trump's pet-eating migrants lie
Story by Rey Harris • 15h • 2 min read

====================================

This short video may be seen to support both our points:

https://youtu.be/1m1NuZMQQtU?si=JG10hlWKmnj7F29l

Gen. Milley responds to Trump post accusing general of treason | 60 Minutes

This is exactly the kind of person Trump will NOT appoint:

https://youtu.be/gzp_vwmZCcw?si=z6bMECULkyQAv5C9
Gen. Mark Milley on a 'mistake' he made with Trump

https://youtu.be/oFVuQ0RP_As?si=VusRqe3-sABMCNHF
Gen. Mark Milley: The 60 Minutes Interview



However, I partially read an article recently about the military taking steps to minimize radicalization within the ranks.

The fact that was necessary is concerning.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...f97ad1a982285a&ei=73

'Those are Maduro numbers': Top Trump advisor explodes when confronted about crime claims
Story by Alex Henderson • 23h • 2 min read

Top Advisor or Top Spin Doctor?


https://www.nytimes.com/2024/0....html?smid=url-share

Laura Loomer, a Social-Media Instigator, Is Back at Trump’s Side
The former president’s decision to elevate Laura Loomer, a far-right activist known for racist and homophobic posts online, has stunned even some Trump allies.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...288a2423d7a174&ei=68

Donald Trump Calls for 'Everybody at ABC' To Be Fired After Debate
Story by Flynn Nicholls • 18h • 3 min read

Start this video at 7:30 for some relevancy specific to this thread:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...288a2423d7a174&ei=63

Or watch the whole thing if you want.

https://youtu.be/RrPlLhYFJOg?si=hO7FxaiOCDjCHGpN

Trump's new Love

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...5cdd2d1ec5eb5d&ei=77

Trump’s Golf Club Hosted Events Featuring ‘Nazi Sympathizer’ Over The Summer
Story by Zachary Folk • 16h • 1 min read

https://nj1015.com/awards-gala...poned-nj-trump-club/

‘Gala’ for Jan. 6 defendants was set for Trump golf club
Date and location now up in the air

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Well, post 9/11, the democrats have been in power longer than the republicans.

Harris is more of the same as far as Biden’s policies.

Since things have gotten worse under the Democrat’s watch, I’m not sure how you can say they are “better” or “the solution”. In fact, the democrats are experiencing their own “Trump” movement with the far left elements of the party.

Sorry, but neither party is worthy of support right now.

I believe the republic is strong and we will survive whichever idiot leadership we put in, but it’s undoubtedly going to get worse on the international scene.

Saeed’s beloved isolationist policies will not solve Iran getting nuclear weapons and having a not very tightly wrapped (mentally) theocracy controlling them.

China is very imperialistic right now. That won’t end well…

And Russia seems hellbent on recovering past glory by use of force.

Then we have the religious right that wants to have another crusade in the holy land, and the woke left insisting we forcibly intervene in the name of extreme minority social rights.

No, until we all get our collective heads out of our arses, Scott, the odds are ever increasing that your daughter will have to fight a war.

Like Trump getting $10 million from Egypt and a Billion from Saudi Arabia.

Take off the blinders...

Get a grip.

Both parties are bad is my point.

Your insistence that the dems are somehow better is part of the problem.

If the dems are better, and they have controlled government for a little better than half of the time since 9/11, why is the world going to hell in a handbasket?

quote:

Originally posted by 300shooter:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Well, post 9/11, the democrats have been in power longer than the republicans.

Harris is more of the same as far as Biden’s policies.

Since things have gotten worse under the Democrat’s watch, I’m not sure how you can say they are “better” or “the solution”. In fact, the democrats are experiencing their own “Trump” movement with the far left elements of the party.

Sorry, but neither party is worthy of support right now.

I believe the republic is strong and we will survive whichever idiot leadership we put in, but it’s undoubtedly going to get worse on the international scene.

Saeed’s beloved isolationist policies will not solve Iran getting nuclear weapons and having a not very tightly wrapped (mentally) theocracy controlling them.

China is very imperialistic right now. That won’t end well…

And Russia seems hellbent on recovering past glory by use of force.

Then we have the religious right that wants to have another crusade in the holy land, and the woke left insisting we forcibly intervene in the name of extreme minority social rights.

No, until we all get our collective heads out of our arses, Scott, the odds are ever increasing that your daughter will have to fight a war.

Like Trump getting $10 million from Egypt and a Billion from Saudi Arabia.

Take off the blinders...

quote:

Both parties are bad is my point.

If the dems are better, and they have controlled government for a little better than half of the time since 9/11, why is the world going to hell in a handbasket?

Why do you think the world is going to hell?

And if it is, why is it the fault of dems?

What you said there is a belief, ideologically influenced, exploited by Trump - "American Carnage".

IMO, it's absolutely not one of those things that belief and saying it often enough makes it true.

Give me verifiable evidence, with actual dots connected, skip the theories.

BTW, I don't want to read the BS again that Putin didn't invade while Trump was in office, so you can skip that.

Quote:
"Both parties are bad is my point."

It's a sad situation that you are compelled to make false equivocations, forcing yourself into choosing the lesser of deemed evils.

https://youtu.be/Y-aPp7Kiiyg?si=jpQklRnrFrOBX1Hv

I would choose the weevil that has significant advantage in both length and breadth.

Wikipedia:
"In logic, equivocation ("calling two different things by the same name") is an informal fallacy resulting from the use of a particular word/expression in multiple senses within an argument. It is a type of ambiguity"

Yes M.E., we see Trump in all things everywhere too.


But anyways, back to my post,
https://www.timesofisrael.com/...pment-and-documents/


So Israel is now raiding up into Syria where Iran is making missiles underground.

Syria of course being a Russian ally where we apparently have a base that was recently attacked by Iranian forces operating from Iraq.


That place is a tinder box that we dumped hundreds of chords of dry firewood into for two decades, Democrats and Republicans bearing equal responsibility.

Until recently we were considering letting either Trump or Biden have another turn despite their well documented record of previous failure.

A few pages forward and now Harris is under consideration despite her never succeeding with anything more than elections.

There's not a member here that will wake up to headlines of another catastrophic attack by Islamic terrorists with anything other than a grunt and "uh huh".

False equivocations?

You think we are materially better off than 9/10/01?

We’ve had multiple wars and are dealing with nuclear brinksmanship again.

The Middle East is still a mess.

The far East is sitting on a nuclear armed tinderbox…

Our economy is less resilient than ever (see the supply chain issues in 2020-2022…)

I’m not claiming it’s all the Democrat’s fault… but they sure haven’t improved it. They along with the Trumpian GOP have made things worse.

Dr. E when he makes comments about the GOP is saying they are less rapidly doing bad things. If a Republican partisan has to say relatively less bad, why are the democrat partisans here so reluctant to admit any fault on their side of the aisle?

Your blind statements following the left are identical to the MAGA types, just the opposite side of the political spectrum.

quote:

False equivocations?

Now there's a redundant expression.

I don't suppose you meant "false equivalencies."

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:

quote:

False equivocations?

Now there's a redundant expression.

I don't suppose you meant "false equivalencies."

Yea.

In logic, equivocation ("calling two different things by the same name") is an informal fallacy resulting from the use of a particular word/expression in multiple senses within an argument. It is a type of ambiguity

e·quiv·a·lence
[əˈkwiv(ə)ləns]
noun
the condition of being equal or equivalent in value, worth, function, etc.

====================================

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Your blind statements following the left are identical to the MAGA types, just the opposite side of the political spectrum.

Just think how much Doc is depriving himself of quasi-legitimate indignation and outrage, relying on generalized equivalence, unable to distinguish.

Since you seem to be debating with me in good faith, I should respond likewise, as best I can, respectfully.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

You think we are materially better off than 9/10/01?

I didn't say my opinion on that.

We’ve had multiple wars and are dealing with nuclear brinksmanship again.

It's been that way for a long time.

The Middle East is still a mess.

Ditto

The far East is sitting on a nuclear armed tinderbox…

Ditto

Our economy is less resilient than ever (see the supply chain issues in 2020-2022…)

I'm not knowledgeable enough to agree or disagree with you on that.

I’m not claiming it’s all the Democrat’s fault… but they sure haven’t improved it. They along with the Trumpian GOP have made things worse.

That's hard to measure with facts.

Dr. E when he makes comments about the GOP is saying they are less rapidly doing bad things. If a Republican partisan has to say relatively less bad, why are the democrat partisans here so reluctant to admit any fault on their side of the aisle?

"Relatively less bad" is subjective, subject to bias.

IMO, there is only one or two factors that sway me, aside from environmental issues.

#1 is Trump's incompetence, which goes much further than merely governance. He's nutz, to put it simply. He's utterly untrustworthy re foreign policy.

Let me make my own equivalence. I think Trump and Ted Nugent are much the same regarding putting either in a position of power especially regarding foreign policy. But the difference mostly is that Ted probably won't lie, at least he's not known for lying such as Trump is.

Aside from international issues, I don't want domestic matters dominated by Christian Nationalists, radicals far right of all sorts. That's Trumpism. I choose the only viable other side/path. The flaws I see/estimate there are less drama, less harmful than what I see on the Right.

Actually, I don't see much good, potentially, future, promoted by Rightists, especially given the high percentage of real radicals and nutz cases populating and influencing the Republican party. These rightists radicals are more likely to win the party platform and agenda (they already have) which they hijacked than leftist radicals re dem party.

Plus, my estimation of what the Rightists will do to the country will not be recoverable, by intent. They want lots of drama.

I see more continuity with the status quo from the left. That's Founder's principles, rule of law, etc.

https://youtu.be/8koGVT8E7IU?si=XpEMzUsRLR4PviZY

Stephen Colbert sheds light on Trump and Laura Loomer's relationship, 'cozying up at Mar-a-Lago.'