Welp here we go, election madness.

Post Reply New Topic

As a non American I seem to remember listening to part of DT's inaugural speech where he pledged to be "a president for all Americans" yet it turned out to be among his first lies as a newly elected president. He became among the most divisive presidents in US history.

So many people in both your major parties would do a far better job than the two semi fossilized gentlemen currently in the lead! But US democracy doesn't seem to follow any pattern of logic and when offered truly out of the box thinkers, the primary voters flee into the "laager".

Like this one?

This is the first election I am aware of in which a Republican candidate is ...ashamed...to admit that she belongs to "the Party of Lincoln", and is ashamed of, and tries to hide the fact that it was her Republican party who...freed the slaves!

If I were Nikki Haley I would be boasting about that fact!

That shows that there is no GOP anymore. The modern MAGA GOP is ostensibly a continuation of the Gingrich GOP which is a coalition between northern Republicans and the old southern wing of the Democratic party (ie Dixiecrats).

Half Nixon, half Strom Thurmond.

But in fact the post Trump GOP is pretty much all Dixiecrat (White surpremist, and Christian Nationalist). All Strom Thurmond, and no Reagan or Nixon anymore in the mix. Lacking any message for the American electorate the old GOP is gone and done for.

Though the Libertarian Party is a more extreme version of the old traditional "party of business" style of conservatism of the old GOP. So if you are the rare traditional Republican you might find refuge in the Libertarian Party.

So there is no Republican Party anymore.

What exist is 1) Dixiecrats (under the MAGA GOP label), (2) old style Democrats (like Biden), and (3) Everyone to the left of middle of the road Dems like Biden (Jill Stein, Bernie Sanders, AOC, et al). Call them "Greens" or "Socialists".

Dixiecrats, Northern Style Democrats, and Socialists. Thats the real political landscape.

Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., on Sunday wouldn’t commit to certifying the 2024 election results during an interview on NBC News’ “Meet the Press.”

While interviewing Stefanik, who serves in House Republican leadership, host Kristen Welker asked, “Would you vote to certify, and will you vote to certify, the results of the 2024 election no matter what they show?”

Stefanik, who has boosted former President Donald Trump’s baseless claims of widespread fraud in the 2020 election, said that she did not vote to certify the 2020 results in the state of Pennsylvania and several other states because there were “unconstitutional acts circumventing the state legislature and unilaterally changing election law.”

After Welker pressed her again on the matter, Stefanik wouldn’t commit to certifying the election results and criticized efforts to remove Trump from the ballot in Colorado, Maine and other states.

“We will see if this is a legal and valid election,” she said. “What we’re seeing so far is that Democrats are so desperate, they’re trying to remove President Trump from the ballot. That is a suppression of the American people. And the Supreme Court is taking that case up in February — that should be a nine to zero to allow President Trump to appear on the ballot because that’s the American people’s decision to make this November.”

Welker noted that she didn’t hear Stefanik commit to certifying the election results before asking, “Will you only commit to certifying the results if former President Trump wins? Does that mean only if former President Trump wins?”

“No, it means if they’re constitutional,” Stefanik said. “What we saw in 2020 was unconstitutional circumventing of the Constitution, not going through state legislators when it comes to changing election law”

Stefanik also defended Trump’s recent remarks calling rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and remain in prison “hostages,” echoing that language herself. During a rally in Iowa on Saturday, Trump urged President Joe Biden to release the rioters from federal prison: “I call them hostages. Some people call them prisoners. I call them hostages. Release the J6 hostages, Joe. Release them, Joe. You can do it real easy, Joe.”

When asked if she stood by the comments that she made on the House floor calling Jan. 6 a “truly tragic day for America,” Stefanik said, "I have concerns about the treatment of January 6 hostages."

She added that she stood by her full speech on Jan. 6. "I condemned the violence just like I condemn the violence of the BLM riots, but I also importantly stood for election integrity and security of our elections," Stefanik said.

But US democracy doesn't seem to follow any pattern of logic and when offered truly out of the box thinkers, the primary voters flee into the "laager".

If you put Trump and Biden together, you'd have an entire person with an average IQ. The last time that America had and intelligent president was in 1960.

When politicians fail to look beyond the next election – or even the latest tweet – they are neglecting the rights of future generations, argues public philosopher Roman Krznaric.
Why we need to reinvent democracy for the long-term

My reaction whenever I read that "we" must do one thing or another, is that I have to ask, who are "we"?

TBH I can't criticize Xi Jin Ping's authoritarian approach to dealing with modern day problems in China, even if some innocent people might be sitting in prison for not having supported him. At least he's getting things done that need to be done. Of course, his approach is inconsistent with Western Democracy, but then China is not a Western country, in fact judging China according to Western Values seems rather antagonistic.

My reaction whenever I read that "we" must do one thing or another, is that I have to ask, who are "we"?

When people say we as a society need to accomplish something for our own self-interest, the 'we' in question are the members of that society, no?

Democracies are being explored, and all existing ones have their own flaws. I do not clearly support any one.
I hope you don’t misunderstand me as an “evangelical”

I suddenly realized that you think I am not qualified to dictate the internal affairs of the United States. I believe that human beings should unite across national, political, cultural, racial or class lines to promote their common interests.i think i have the right

Why can't you criticize? As long as xi is not perfect enough, you can and even should criticize him. If an doctrine is afraid of criticism and criticism can make it disappear, then this doctrine is of no use.