Generally considered liberal,[2][3] the Brennan Center advocates for a number of progressive public policy positions,[4]
You’re right, not sketchy. Probably not very objective.
…nope. Not sketchy at all.
By your standards? Probably not. Did Sweren-Becker get anything factually wrong in the article? If they did, please feel free to point that out.
It seems to me that President Biden has received great praise from all around the world lately. I’m very proud of him. I’d be happy to vote for him again and I was not really all that thrilled when he was the candidate, but he has surprised me.
He’s on the right side of history with regards to the war and it’s so obvious that he’s a good man, I’m always a little shocked to hear people disparage him. His age may be a factor, but that same age brings wisdom and experience that someone younger doesn’t have.
I’m also very surprised that conservatives support DeSantis with his very heavy handed governing style.
Fair enough. I can’t find the ‘vicious’ part of SB 7066 you referenced, and I can’t find anything factually wrong in the Sweren-Becker article (not that I tried all that hard).
…probably the part that “undermines the historic enfranchising effect of Amendment 4”, which, coupled with the “state’s byzantine record-keeping system makes it practically impossible for returning citizens and elections administrators to know who is eligible to vote”, lead to high profile arrests of people like this.
That’s just fucking cruel.
I saw this numerous times in the article. I’m not sure what it means.
…not Florida, but I’m sure the definition is the same.
Chapter 13. Returning Citizens. | D.C. Law Library.
" “Returning citizens” means persons who are residents of the District who were previously incarcerated."
Thanks for the definition, I didn’t know what that meant. The only reference I found in the legislation limits voting rights for convicted felons. I’m conflicted on this one.
That means you’re at least thinking about it, good for you.
I used to be a conservative but not a “subscribe to any belief a self-proclaimed conservative figure tells me to” kind of conservative, and often disagreed with things that I was supposed to go along with if I was s “real” conservative. Like, I have never been 100% pro life even when my political philosophy was at its farthest right point, and I voted to support gay marriage and legalize marijuana in my state even when I usually voted Republican.
Few people fit into cookie cutter molds.
Am I happy with Biden as President? Yes. Do I wish he had someone else as VP? Yes. I don’t think Harris is ready to step up yet. Happy to be wrong if it happens, though.
I adore your optimism! LOL
I do think you have good points, though. At least FEWER of us will be naive.
I-Swear-I’m-Not-Making-This-Up Disclaimer: in junior high, I had a social-studies teacher who breezily informed us that anyone could become president by just going all-in on saying what people wanted to hear and making tons of promises he couldn’t then keep; the guy’s problem wouldn’t be getting elected, but getting reelected.
Thinking that my cynicism exceeded his, I figured he was wrong: (a) if, for the sake of argument, it worked the first time, I figured it wouldn’t work a second time for another candidate, because we’d all have then seen what happens when promises like that get handed out in such a fashion; and (b) it wouldn’t even work once, because, c’mon, if it were that easy, because people were such It’d-Work-Once suckers, then wouldn’t someone have already used that Work-The-First-Time method and disillusioned the electorate by now?
I wasn’t cynical enough.
True-the second time, all the person has to do is make up some reason the promises couldn’t be kept. “I really wanted to do it, but…” Very slightly harder than just blowing off the promises, but still pretty easy.
See, I had, uh, more faith in cynicism than that.
I figured, if folks were foolish enough to go for it the first time around, they’d then know from an “I really wanted to do it, but” that (a) if he really wanted to do it, he’s a guy who makes promises he doesn’t keep, and the stuff we want isn’t the promise about the stuff but, y’know, the stuff; plus, (b) having just now wised up to that extent, shouldn’t they now be wise enough to ask ‘hey, is he also not telling the truth about having wanted to do it? I mean, sure, don’t vote for him if he doesn’t deliver as promised — regardless of whether he can’t deliver as promised or won’t deliver as promised — but can’t we now be properly cynical and have our guard up about whether politicians lie?
And I figured, no, people are already cynical enough to realize that politicians lie, right? Aren’t campaign promises already a joke? Instead of waiting to get wised up by someone who gets elected by making promises he can’t keep, can’t we all just play out the scenario in our heads and then be as wised up as if it had already happened?
Isn’t that why it hasn’t already happened?
As a general reply to the issue of promises, I don’t think the problem with Trump was that he didn’t keep his promises or even that he told people what they wanted to hear. The problem was that he had no respect whatsoever for the norms of our democracy.
I, personally, was naive to think that either someone couldn’t be that bad, or the people around him would stop him. Actually, to a measurable extent, the people around him did stop him; otherwise, 1/6 and more would have succeeded.
Trump also had many, many enablers who made his presidency and subsequent behavior possible. It was a perfect storm of failure in our Republic.
As to the issue of whether Biden is good enough, I will echo not_what_you_d_expect and say that I’m pleasantly surprised. I was more for Elizabeth Warren and wasn’t all that enthused about Biden, but of course I voted for him.
Despite his age, he has been a very strong president in the face of many challenging circumstances. I think he’s easily a better president than Obama (who I think was fine but didn’t fulfill his initial promise).
Well it will be interesting to see how it plays out. Some of the trumpists that I talk to somehow hold the contradictory positions that the wall is the reason that the southern border was safe before, and isn’t now, and that Trump couldn’t build the wall because of those lousy dems.
But surely even they would raise an eyebrow now if Trump claims again that he will solve healthcare or the deficit?
Maybe not…I haven’t noticed any rolled eyes when he talks about solving Ukraine.
Actually, this is a big, big part of the problem. That level of cynicism is what enables figures like Trump, DeSantis or Santos to appear, and shrug when caught out in blantant lies.
“Don’t trust journalists” was another meme that existed before Trump, but was skillfully leveraged by him.
I think distinctions need to be made between “spin”, disinformation and bullshitting. Spin is the normal thing politicians do. Where they sometimes take things out of context and/or present data in a misleading way. Journalists’ jobs are to make sure we are aware of such spin.
Disinformation and bullshitting are just lies out of whole cloth. Trump does both. The difference between these two is just the level of knowledge and awareness of what the truth actually is. When Trump lies, often he doesn’t even care or think about what the reality is. That’s bullshitting.
But that’s the part that gets me: why do people take them seriously to begin with? If, as you say, a blatant lie is the sort of thing that politicians can just shrug about, then why the heck don’t people treat it like Something-They-Can-Just-Shrug-About from the start?
If a shrug about it will be accepted then, why not already dismiss it as something shruggable now?
Well there are a couple of factors at play.
The kind of person that is most drawn to Trump doesn’t care to look into whether facts are true or not, and has no idea how to skeptically evaluate claims. The rhetoric and, yes, their feelings, are the important thing.
It was only as the number of lies was getting into the thousands, that Trump supporters reluctantly had to admit, “ok, maybe he’s not 100% truthful all the time”, but at that point they also used the excuse / handwave of “all politicians lie”.
So, yes, in fairness, the issue of invoking the meme of “all politicians lie” in order to handwave something egregious and dangerous that someone like Trump is saying, is only part of the problem.
It’s hardly helpful though.
There is considerable overlap with Trump. It’s one thing to promise a good health care plan, but when you announce you have one that provides better care for everyone and it’s been approved by congressional leadership and we’ll all see it soon," you’ve crossed over into “having no respect whatsoever for the norms of our democracy.”