This topic has been locked by a moderator.
I’d still rather live there. At least Syrian babies could get in the country and old Americans would still have healthcare.
I’m on the fence about it. On the one hand, yes, Trump has done some heinous crap and eroded the norms of political discourse, but one could argue that this had already happened in 2016. At least in this universe, the Republicans can’t constantly blame the Democrats for the state of the government (though they continue to try), and there is at least a chance that the midterms will be favorable to the Democrats.
And in early 2009 I breathed a sigh of relief, saying to myself “America survived the W administration! We’ll never have a worse administration that that!”
I 100% think things would have been better the other way, though I will say the fact that Trump got elected means we have to own up to the fact he got this far at all, rather than just hide it under the rug and pretend everything’s okay. So yeah the activism and the increased awareness in current issues is probably the main positivity of note.
I 100% think things would have been better the other way, though I will say the fact that Trump got elected means we have to own up to the fact he got this far at all, rather than just hide it under the rug and pretend everything’s okay. So yeah the activism and the increased awareness in current issues is probably the main positivity of note.
To draw a metaphor, I feel like the nation is like a person with a bad junk food habit and nonexistent exercise routine, who has denied this to themselves for years and finally admitted it in public. It is a good first step, but I fear that as a nation we will not do enough to combat the problem of partisan hackery and genuinely fake news, nor recognize that the problem with our government is that it has become a playground for financial gain, cynical deception, and extremist ideology rather than the abode of patriotic citizens capable of compromise.
I despair at times for it is so easy to fall into the echo chambers of our own making, both on the left and right, and respond with biting and easy retorts to any dissent for the support of our respective tribes. I am not absolved from guilt in this regard. The task, as I see it, is to hold ourselves to a higher standard of discourse, to always look toward de-escalating political rancor, to avoid demonizing political opposition in favor of seeing others as ultimately decent human beings. Such a standard is unnatural, and thus fragile, making it all the more important to cultivate and rigorously uphold.
You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)
I seem to recall someone here once saying The Hill leans left, and maybe that’s true, but they just gave space to SEBASTIAN FUCKING GORKA.
Here’s just two fun stories on Gorka.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/fbi-fired-sebastian-gorka-for-anti-muslim-diatribes
I was ruminating recently on how I never saw this Gorka guy on tv before the election. Like he popped up out of nowhere. Can’t decide if he’s like a character in a Bond film, or someone who would have been Damien Thorn’s mysterious close presidential adviser. 😉
JEDIT:I figured it out. He looks like Mr. French…uh…Satan, from that Twilight Zone episode where a recently deceased petty criminal thinks he’s in heaven, but is so very wrong.
Where were you in '77?
Oooh, here we go!
Bloomberg News is reporting that the Russia investigation led by special counsel Robert Mueller is zeroing in on President Trump’s business transactions.
The report quoted an anonymous source as saying that Trump’s financial ties to Russia are the focus: “FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008.” The Washington Post has not independently confirmed Bloomberg’s report.
Somebody is basically daring Trump to try to fire Mueller.
Oooh, here we go!
Bloomberg News is reporting that the Russia investigation led by special counsel Robert Mueller is zeroing in on President Trump’s business transactions.
The report quoted an anonymous source as saying that Trump’s financial ties to Russia are the focus: “FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008.” The Washington Post has not independently confirmed Bloomberg’s report.
Somebody is basically daring Trump to try to fire Mueller.
Here’s where we see what our constitutional safeguards are worth, a statement which can be expressed equally well in deadpan pessimist voice or steely, determined optimist voice.
I kind of hope he fires Mueller just to see what happens after that. I feel like that would be the beginning of the end for Trump.
Although I suppose the best scenario for the most people in our country (and the world, to some extent) would be for the Dems to make big gains in 2018 and then for Trump to lose badly in 2020 (assuming he even wants to run). President Pence as of late 2017 might not be such a good thing.
If there’s a big Democratic wave in 2018, Trump will probably get impeached by the House, but I’m not sure if enough Republicans would get on board to convict in the Senate.
Although, yes, it would be interesting to see what would happen if Trump did fire Mueller.
https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/please-just-fucking-die-already-acb3a879656e
Thankfully, the Left reminds us that the Right doesn’t really have a complete monopoly on hatred.
However you slice it, it’s time for one of those popcorn eating gifs.
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/please-just-fucking-die-already-acb3a879656e
Thankfully, the Left reminds us that the Right doesn’t really have a complete monopoly on hatred.
I don’t know about the “thankfully” part but you’re right, there are hateful people of all kinds on all sides. Apparently Caitlin Johnstone is a terrible person, because that’s a terrible article written from a terrible frame of reference.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-exxon-mobil-usa-ukraine-idUSKBN1A51UH
The United States on Thursday admonished Exxon Mobil Corp for “reckless disregard” of U.S. sanctions in dealings with Russia in 2014 when Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was the global oil company’s chief executive, and fined it $2 million.
In other news, the US admonished me for some bad puns I told in 2014, and fined me two cents.
For Dems to win in 2018 who do you think should lead them? I liked Bernie, he had some fans over here in the UK like Corbyn. However a lot of people on the far right feel empowered much like over here, plus there is a lot of people not voting so who do you think should lead the Democrats now?
Where were you in '77?
https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/please-just-fucking-die-already-acb3a879656e
Thankfully, the Left reminds us that the Right doesn’t really have a complete monopoly on hatred.
“Rogue Journalist”?
And yikes. I thought the usual loons on twitter were nasty.
Where were you in '77?
i had to click that just to see what she doesn’t.
HAHA, probably she just didn’t want to speak to Trump. i have tried using that excuse before when traveling. “no english”
https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/please-just-fucking-die-already-acb3a879656e
Thankfully, the Left reminds us that the Right doesn’t really have a complete monopoly on hatred.
“Rogue Journalist”?
Translation: Not a journalist.
For Dems to win in 2018 who do you think should lead them? I liked Bernie, he had some fans over here in the UK like Corbyn. However a lot of people on the far right feel empowered much like over here, plus there is a lot of people not voting so who do you think should lead the Democrats now?
The party’s “leader” in non-Presidential elections is the head of the DNC, which is Tom Perez. There’s some figurehead-leadership positions, and the presumptive Speaker of the House may take a campaigning role (that’s presumably Nancy Pelosi). It’s only in Presidential election years that the figurehead is a strong enough standard-bearer to realistically be called the leader of the party as well. It’s the American system–the opposition party doesn’t usually doesn’t have a leader in the Corbyn sense, someone who’s an officeholder and clear party leader at the same time.
Also, I don’t think Dems winning in 2018 has as much to do with who’s “leading them” as how you define winning.
Under inspired, brilliant leadership, the Democrats will take over quite a lot of state governorships, and maybe a few state legislative chambers as well. They’ll also have a very remote chance of taking the House, and will lose only a few seats in the Senate.
Under lackluster, middling leadership, the Democrats will take over quite a lot of state governorships, and maybe a few state legislative chambers as well. They’ll also have no chance of taking the House, and will lose about six seats in the Senate.
And that’s all assuming voting functions more or less the way it should. As you said, the far-right feels very empowered and has had great success with overt voter intimidation and voting-related violence in the past.
The leader of the party is TVS FRINK COMPUTER but no one knows it yet.
The leader of the party is TVS FRINK COMPUTER but no one knows it yet.
NOR WILL THEY COMMA UNTIL ITS TOO LATE EXCLAMATION MARK
Yeah party leadership is a bit different over here but there are sort of faces of the party, if you will, that help campaign for others and are sort of the more visible voices leading the charge. These will undoubtedly be Bernie, Warren, etc., but they only help so much as to raise awareness for and promote other candidates/the party strategy.
http://www.newsweek.com/porn-age-checks-uk-verification-637638
For Dems to win in 2018 who do you think should lead them? I liked Bernie, he had some fans over here in the UK like Corbyn. However a lot of people on the far right feel empowered much like over here, plus there is a lot of people not voting so who do you think should lead the Democrats now?
The party’s “leader” in non-Presidential elections is the head of the DNC, which is Tom Perez. There’s some figurehead-leadership positions, and the presumptive Speaker of the House may take a campaigning role (that’s presumably Nancy Pelosi). It’s only in Presidential election years that the figurehead is a strong enough standard-bearer to realistically be called the leader of the party as well. It’s the American system–the opposition party doesn’t usually doesn’t have a leader in the Corbyn sense, someone who’s an officeholder and clear party leader at the same time.
Also, I don’t think Dems winning in 2018 has as much to do with who’s “leading them” as how you define winning.
Under inspired, brilliant leadership, the Democrats will take over quite a lot of state governorships, and maybe a few state legislative chambers as well. They’ll also have a very remote chance of taking the House, and will lose only a few seats in the Senate.
Under lackluster, middling leadership, the Democrats will take over quite a lot of state governorships, and maybe a few state legislative chambers as well. They’ll also have no chance of taking the House, and will lose about six seats in the Senate.
And that’s all assuming voting functions more or less the way it should. As you said, the far-right feels very empowered and has had great success with overt voter intimidation and voting-related violence in the past.
Thanks for this explanation!! Really interesting how it works in other governments. Didn’t realise this is the way it works
Idiot.
https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/please-just-fucking-die-already-acb3a879656e
Thankfully, the Left reminds us that the Right doesn’t really have a complete monopoly on hatred.
Yeah, she is not a nice person.