No, while the Republican strategy is to wreck things and then blame the Democrats, the current Democratic strategy, it seems to me, is in line with Sun Tzu’s maxim as popularized by Napoleon: “Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.”
Of course, the Democratic leaders are forgetting that the Republican’s mistakes hurt them too, perhaps irrevocably.
I don’t have any proof. I was merely offering a hypothesis, in response to this question from @Just_Asking_Questions:
Why aren’t they doing something about our fascist government? Because they want it, too? I don’t know.
I fear we are all pawns in some game that we don’t even know is being played.
I don’t there’s a strategy, just normal Democratic passivity and timidity. The Democrats have been the punching bags of the Republicans for decades by now.
Interesting hypothesis…if there was any evidence behind it (not proof, just evidence).
I have never heard this. You are the first to bring it to my attention.
IDK, for me, when something is evident, it needs no more proof. Evident literally means you can see (vedere) that it is so. That is a very high bar.
And concerning Alessan’s hypothesis: I am sure some idiot in the Democratic Party has argued in this sense. Not the majority, I hope, but some fool, probably high on coke? Sure.
It’s the sort of thing I hear from far left accelerationists, not Democrats. The sort of people who think the world needs to collapse so they can build their Eternal Glorious Socialist Utopia on the ashes (and that they’ll somehow be the survivors). The Democrats are nowhere near fanatical enough for that kind of self-immolating strategy.
The flaws of the Democrats are all related to how unfocused, passive and directionless they are; for decades they’ve flinched at so much as calling the Republicans names like “weird”. The idea of them having some grand and ruthless strategy is just totally unlike them. Or really, any strategy.
They drift, they don’t plan. They move with the current and flinch whenever a Republican scowls at them.
It has become problematic, that the Democrats, the one source of opposition we have, has an deeply low approval rating, in part because people like us are pissed at them for being so ineffective. Where do we go from here?
However, for your convenience, a site called Public Square serves as the MAGAt yellow-pages. If you want to know where to not spend your money, here you have it (though that would run counter to their aim, so do not use that site for avoiding evil businesses, because that would be wrong).
It’s part of what I was alluding to.
People compare our government to parliamentary systems sometimes. And in that sort of system, there are often cases where no single party gets an outright majority and must form a coalition. This occurs after the election.
In the US, we do that before the election, but we don’t recognize that. The Democratic Party is more or less a coalition of several sub-parties, which we typically call ‘wings’. And they’re rarely in lockstep on anything.
This was true of the Republicans at one point as well a few decades ago, but essentially one ‘wing’ has come to dominate the rest.
It’s reflected in what happened after the Civil Rights Act. The Southern Democrat “wing” basically decided to caucus with the Republicans instead. We call that switching parties but basically, it was essentially what would be a realignment of party coalitions elsewhere.
But since we don’t recognize that, we treat the Democrats as some monolithic bloc and expect them to act that way. And continue to be disappointed when they don’t. Worse, we each have different ideas, corresponding to the particular ‘wing’ we most closely associate with, on what the party as a whole should do and how individual members should act, as if there were some obvious way that such a clear course of action actually exists for a coalition of groups with diverse (and sometimes mutually contradictory) interests and goals.
Is there a clear way out of this? Nope. That is, unless the average American voter gets a lot better informed and interested in policy, which seems the least realistic option of all. Otherwise, we have the current situation where we try to muddle through.
“Intuitively obvious to the most casual observer”?
Nobody near me that would be likely to get my money anyway, but I thought it was interesting that a Baptist church was listed.
Disaster relief checks from FEMA are bouncing.
How are they gonna blame that on Biden?
When there’s a will, there’s a way.
By saying it’s Biden’s fault.
well, duh.
Except for the part about “carefully constructed lies”, this passage could have been written as an opinion piece today.
“To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again: and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself – that was the ultimate subtlety: consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word ‘doublethink’ involved the use of doublethink.”
― George Orwell, 1984
I will admit that I don’t know if this is a “clusterfuck” or not, but it certainly seems like a bad idea to buy a very expensive jet at the same time that tariffs will make things more expensive and the President is getting criticism for a big expensive jet. Or perhaps it’s business as usual.
This woman is deranged.
What’s next, shoot each other for our entertainment?