Don’t you think that the fact you had to drop concentration camp from you list of hysterical overreaction when it was pointed out that he did in fact create one kind of undermines your central argument?
When Trump starts calling up the National Guard to “protect the northern border” he’ll conveniently and quietly forget about that one, too.
Stranger
^
This.
I agree! I have been feeling this same sentiment with all the epstein stuff. For me this feels like pretty pointless chatter that is diverting attention away from all the real tangible horrible things that trump’s administration is doing. Like obviously the epstein stuff is important but it sometimes feel like people and the media are fixating on the less important things.
In your opinion, what are the top three things people should focus on?
To some extent, yes. But, likewise, because it’s the thing that people do fixate on, it’s sort of the one opportunity to finally coax his adherents into giving the guy an honest look.
I mean, if dozens of Trump’s own appointments and Republicans around the country all went on TV and stated with no ambiguity that the guy was pressuring them to ignore the Constitution and the vote, and pretend that he’d won the 2020 election - which, to be clear, would be an attempted coup against the American people - and, yet, people still talk more about Hunter Biden’s laptop, then you are pushed into accepting that…well, the people just care more about the things that titillate their fancy than things that really should matter more to them.
So, if you want to move the people, you just have to go to where they are and give them the fight that interests them…maybe?
- Investigation of criminal activities by Republican politicians and prosecution for those criminal activities.
- Resistance to Republican efforts to undermine civil rights, with a special emphasis on protecting voting rights.
- Working on mitigating climate change.
I’d also like to see a public healthcare system and an equitable tax system but I don’t feel those are at the crisis stage the way these three are.
I’ll note (before somebody else makes the point) that I also support prosecuting Democratic politicians for any criminal activities. But the Republicans are already doing that. And if I ever see any evidence that Democrats are working to undermine civil rights, I would oppose that. I specified Republicans because they’re the ones who doing these things in 2025.
I fully agree. It’s not the hysteria I object to, it’s the misguidedness.
The crisis is the systematic dismantling or corruption of virtually every pillar of governance. This is something that is actually happening. This is what we need to be fighting.
As wide spread as all three of those targets are, how could you possibly focus in on any of them. Could you at least try to be a bit more specific?
Just my opinion (I’ve never met the man) but I tend to disagree. I feel that George W. Bush was very aware of all of the things that were going on in his administration and wanted those things to occur.
But he also wanted to distance himself from any public relations problems that might arise. So he adopted a good cop/bad cop policy where he assigned the dirty work to other people and then acted as if he was unaware of what they were doing, even though they were acting on his orders.
His “good old simple country boy” public image was part of this.
1 and 3 are outright impossible while the Republicans are in control, and #2 is only marginally possible (or relevant) at this point. #1 would require both that the Republicans be removed from power and that the courts be purged of their appointees before even a serious attempt can be made. #3 requires the Republicans be removed from power as well, since they’ll never permit it while in power. #2 can an least be attempted, but at this point is a rearguard action given that the Republicans control all the levers of power.
Personally, no. Because you seemed incredulous in this post:
That’s entirely untrue, you cannot say Trump is definitely not planning any of those things. Some of those things are less likely to be true than others, but none of them are impossible or even so incredibly unlikely that they might as well be impossible.
Hell one of those things may very well already have happened. It’s entirely possible that Trump actively planned genocide of the Palestinians with Netanyahu. Give what was said in public would anyone be remotely surprised if in private Trump said something like “if they don’t move you can wipe them out” to Netanyahu?
The only bit I’d consider stretching plausibility, is the word “planning”, as that implies Trump has a master plan for how the remainder of his reign will go. He doesn’t. It might end up in genocide, or reestablishment of slavery, or nuclear war, or all of that. But if it does it won’t be because of some master plan by Trump.
Something I’ve heard from some online sources - are Democrats trying hard to lose? Because every time something triggers Democrat response the Rebubs (especially Trump) take full advantage of it, usually portraying the “woke lefties” as out of touch with laughable predicable behavior. It does seem we could use reason and intelligence to respond in ways that blunts Rebub retaliation.
How I interpret your words:
- Every time a Democrat responds to something, valid or not, it hurts Democrats.
- Democrats never use reason or intelligence to respond to current political events.
- If only they did, they would start “winning” in the government, and winning the support of current Republican voters.
Do you really believe that Democrats don’t ever use reason and intelligence? And if you believe that they do use reason and intelligence some amount of the time, and yet every time they do anything Republicans take advantage, why do you think one response (intelligence and reason) or another (lack of intelligence? moronic ranting?) is the magic key to shutting it all down?
Do you believe that there are significant numbers of Republican voters and legislators who truly say (to pick examples at random) “well, I could be swayed against federal law enforcement rounding up illegal looking Mexican types and throwing them into detention facilities without due process or oversight, and refusing access to these facilities based on party affiliation, but I just haven’t heard a single Democrat say anything intelligent or reasonable about why I shouldn’t agree with this”? “No one has yet said anything reasonable about why there’s anything to be concerned about with suddenly releasing 150k federal employees from their jobs without a plan and without transparent reporting. I’m listening with open ears for someone, anyone, to say something that makes a lick of sense!”?
(Not reading this thread, it won’t go well. I’ll just make a single comment to this first post.)
I agree with you. Trump is terrible. A terrible person with terrible policies. He will keep being terrible until we stop him and his policies.
That means we’re going through terrible times, and there’ll be a terrible cost to stopping Trump. And that has caused despair and panic among us. Instead of finding allies among all who oppose him, we lash out against those who show any disagreement with us.
Your intentions are good, but criticizing those who oppose Trump with differing tactic is not helpful. And of course they will criticize you back, thus sowing bad feelings among all of us. It’s a waste of our energies and efforts.
We must make stopping Trump a priority. Arguments among allies always strengthens him.
Alternate perspective: the Left has been trying to warn you people for nearly fifty years that the GOP was moving toward fascism, and you ignored us until it actually happened.
Again this is a objectively incorrect statement. It is spectacularly naive and irresponsible to say a fascist leader (and Donald Trump is definitely that, that’s not hysteria) who claims that immigrants are “polluting the blood” of his country and then starts building brutal containment camps for a large segment of the population, is definitely not planning a genocide.
Agreed.
My wording, from the other – rather similar – thread:
I agree with your point, but we can quibble about semantics, I suppose. Trump himself is perfectly happy to use increasingly extreme fearmongering about and punishment of vulnerable minorities in the pursuit of power, money and adulation for himself, and if genocide happens, hey, it happens.
But the Stephen Millers of this world are definitely planning it.