You think Democratic politicians arent demonized? That’s…odd.
In a sense I agree with this, although I disagree with some of the individual points as below. I’d also say much of my beef with the current republican party is all the additional stuff they’re doing, and the lies.
Cutting taxes for the rich? Of course no surprise there.
- “Secure borders” =/= build a wall no matter the cost and no matter whether it will be effective. It’s also not the same thing as a muslim ban, picking on legal immigrants, and I don’t think anyone voted for family separations either.
- Previous politicians didn’t move the Israeli embassy because it was an important bargaining chip for one, and would piss off the palestinians if was done outside the framework of any kind of deal for two.
You might say it’s good Israel knows what side we’re on. But was there any doubt about that? The US could have at least got something in exchange for moving the embassy. - Agree there should be no tariffs both ends, but it’s wrong to paint this as the EU trading in bad faith and poor America having to respond.
The US also already had tariffs on many items, and we can cherry-pick plenty of examples where the US import tariff was higher than the EU’s or Canada’s. Overall the picture was pretty balanced, and also most developed countries had been lowering tariffs for many years. Notsomuch now.
When you go before an international audience as the chief representative of the United States and tell that audience that you trust a former KGB spy over your own intelligence services, your own military, and your own law enforcement, then your non-policy stuff becomes pretty damn important. A democracy operates on the idea that people in power have the implied consent to do what they do. Trump and his party are using their platform to gain implied consent to tear down the norms and institution of democracy. And once that happens, they don’t necessarily need consent to do whatever happens next.
If everyone were laughing Trump out of the room and viewed it as harmless buffoonery, that would be one thing, but the reality is that the majority political party really is collaborating with a foreign adversary to subvert the will of the people, and they are actively trying to discredit our intelligence services, military, and law enforcement in their quest to uncover this truth. Their misconduct is not something that can be easily reversed, either; it has potentially permanent consequences - consequences that are lethal to a democracy. There can be no democracy without confidence that there is the rule of law, that public services are not above the law, and that our systems of jurisprudence and justice are at least attempting to be impartial and function independent of politics, which is not to say that it does so 100% of the time, but that on balance, the systems behave in a way that supports democracy.
So Trump’s history has nothing to do with this? There’s no connection between what Trump does/says and how much criticism he gets from Democrats?
I understand that there is hyperbole and partisan attacks on every president. But there are also reasonable criticisms of every president.
I guess the sarcasm wasn’t obvious enough…for you.
Exactly. Trump has earned his labels. People who can’t see that he’s differnt from prior Republicans aren’t paying attention.
Definitely this. Throwing massive hissy fits about Obama’s imaginary foreign birth cannot be compared to the honest disgust at Trump’s siding with Putin over our own security services, then saying that Putin’s proposal that we should question those Russian spies on his terms, in his country while he also questions our security leaders in return is a good idea.
I think his policies are different from what mainstream Republicans advocated until recently. His immigration, travel-ban/border policy is different. His trade war stuff is real, and different. And even though it’s in the process of playing out, I’m of the opinion that he will likely leave NATO, which is certainly a break from past Republicans. I hope I’m wrong on the last front, and I’m hopeful that he wakes up on trade. But I don’t think he will.
Also, it’s not been talked about much. But some of his policies on attacking the ACA have actually resulted in a higher level of government subsidy than under the previous situation. So, in some ways, his attacks on the ACA are costing tax-payers more.
He is not a typical republican wrapped up in a bad exterior. We get the bad exterior with him, and what’s inside is also very bad, IMO.
Once upon a time, the Republican party was an organization that wanted what was best for the American people.
Today, it’s a neo-Nazi terrorist group that seeks to abolish democracy, impose Christian Sharia, and murder and/or enslave the majority of the population for the benefit of the aristocracy.
That’s what’s changed.
The biggest change I’ve seen in my lifetime is that Republicans stopped competing in the contest of ideas.
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the Republicans of the Reagan era competed with Democrats on the issues. Reaganomics might have been flawed, but in the context of 40 years of the New Deal and Great Society, they could pass it off as a legitimate alternative to the existing progressive status quo. Moreover, this change enjoyed popular support.
In 2018, the Republican party passes tax cuts that only 35% of the country want, and they try to sabotage a healthcare policy that the majority of the country supports. The Republican stopped trying to win the war of ideas; they’re now just trying to shove the interests of the few down the throats of everyone else.
BUT, since he is effectively enabling the putting into place, finally, of various ostensible Republican policy aspirations **UltraVires **mentioned in post #11 above, they’ll take that if it’s what it takes – even if it comes along with a Fortress America neo-isolationist nationalist-populist “ideology” that is alien to what the party was officially advocating for decades.
Back in the later W years, the “base” got sick of waiting for the NeoCons to deliver on the promises, while on top of it they egregiously violated another ostensible Republican point of the Reagan-and-later age: that Repub administrations strengthen the military but would not get us into prolonged foreign quagmires, rather having an army strong enough to go in, kick ass and get out, no “nation building”.
Meanwhile, sure, they made the right genuflections in the direction of the neotheocrats and effectively used *“OMG the gays want marriage!!” *as a wedge at state-election level but at the time that did not change things on the ground, and *that *part of the base noticed that the culture kept slipping out from under them.
The Republican Party hasn’t become more extreme, its just gotten smaller. Those Republicans who actually believed in an arena of competing ideas have bailed, and now call themselves “independents”. A bunch of others haven’t bothered to change how they label themselves, as they have yet to come up with a good answer to “WTF?”. They just stick their hands in their pockets, rock back and forth on their heels, and watch the show. Maybe shrug. Look for new and novel ways to say “But both sides do it!”.
“Yeah, sure, the Emperor has no clothes, and his pecker looks like a mutated Circus Peanut, only smaller. But fuck you guys for talking about it all the time! Like it matters, or something!” Their faith in Il Douche crumbles, but they hate us just as much as they ever did.
This makes no sense, aren’t tax policy and health care policy ideas?
It doesn’t much in the way of intelligence or planning to destroy policy.
They are, but the point is that the Republicans aren’t competing in the contest of ideas. They may have an idea, but they are not trying to convince voters of its wisdom; they’re fine with a minority of people supporting it, and majority opposing it, and then doing it no matter what.
Forty years ago, if they’d wanted to get rid of something like Obamacare, the GOP would have made an effort to actually sell the idea to a majority of Americans.
*scratches head. Trump and all of the Republicans running for office in 2016 proposed tax cuts and getting rid of Obamacare as part of their pitch to voters to elect them. They won both houses of Congress and the Presidency. Isn’t that how elections have always worked?
So, are you basing your case for a mandate from the people on the massive wave of overwhelming popular support?
I’ve noticed that too. After Clinton was impeached because of personal peccadilloes (and lying about them) I said that every president from that point forward would get impeached. That didn’t happen. But folks sure want(ed) to see Dubya, Obama, and Trump impeached and the topic is always in the air.
(Emphasis mine)
Trying is not part of the picture. The interests of the few are already how decisions are being made. (Or, too often, the interests of the one, rather than of the few. Trump is against his enemies, but he doesn’t give a shit about his allies either.)
great grandpa always said "Woodrow Wilson was the last true democrat and teddy Roosevelt was the last true republican "