Who is the most extreme and unbelievable candidate Republicans are running this cycle?

Okay, I see the point now. In fact I am sometimes tempted to follow that path myself.
(Being a non-affiliated voter I could have used either ballot. I had planned to use the Republican ballot and vote for spoiler candidates, but was overcome at the last moment by a burst of self respect and morality and instead took the other ballot and voted for those I wished to support. I DO get the temptation, but I believe it is the wrong course in the long run.)

My view is to always consider the very long view. What will the history books have to say about this era? In fifty and a hundred years will the story be:
~ In the early 2020’s fallout from a universally agreed upon corrupt and criminal presidency, religiously conservative forces gamed the system to impose their wildly unpopular views on such issues as abortion and gun control for a period until the majority was able to right the course and correct the evils. Laws were overturned and Executive Orders were withdrawn or overwritten routinely.
OR:
~ The second decade of the last century was dominated by partisan divide and corruption. Both sides participated in one of the darkest periods in the history of the nation. While fueled by a corrupt right wing agenda, it was not long before the left was as guilty as the right. While decrying the treatment of Japanese citizens during World War Two and the treatment of indigenous peoples throughout the history of the country, the left nether the less committed . . . .

Yes what happens in the moment can be very significant, but sinking to the level of the current GOP cannot be a winning strategy – certainly not in the long run. We KNOW for a fact after the Kansas vote on Tuesday that we are on the right side of this. Every moment that Roe v Wade is impotent is a crisis for some. But like the civil rights battle that has been raging for two or three hundred years – things are much better now than they were twenty-five and fifty and a hundred years ago. Progress can be painstakingly slow- but the only way to make permanent and lasting change is to act with morality and demonstrate the righteousness of your cause in no uncertain terms

Put another way, if WE, if our side engages in this tit for tat battle-- it really does become a tennis match where one side moves the needle as far and as hard in their direction as possible only to have the other side reverse those gains four years or eight years later.

The outrageous corruption of the right seems so threatening that any means seems reasonable to oppose them. But all that THAT manner of proceeding does is convince the larger society that both sides are as shallow and bad as the other and no one cares about the whole. The reason people believe that is because it becomes true when you act just like them.

I really want to go on and on-- the above is just laying out the foundation for me. But I will stop now and ask you this - -
If you could ask John Lewis if the best way to fight oppression and injustice was to sink to the level of your murderous opponent - or to show character and courage and dignity, even while under duress, what do you think he would answer??
How about Dr. King?
Rosa Parks?
Gandhi?
Even one nominally from “their” side- What would Jesus say about sinking to their level?
What would he say about bearing injustice and grief well for a greater good in the future?
How about the philosophers, what would Socrates say about the matter?

I get the temptation, and given the desires of the right to end democracy entirely- I see the danger. But Kansas proves that we can win without cheating and without harming those who stood up to the corruption in their own party. It will take some effort and more time, but let’s fight the good fight and win slower but better and for the long haul.

(Sometime remind me to tell you the difference between a get rich quick scheme and a get rich slow scheme. The difference is that the later works pretty much every time and the former – only very rarely. Sometimes that lesson can apply to politics as well.)

More directly on topic, here in Arizona each and every Trump supported Republican candidate won. Hopefully that will make November a great big blue wave but nothing is assured as of yet.

One more little blurb, earlier I saw that Joe Arpaio is still in his mayoral race although he is a few hundred votes behind with the count winding down.

Soooo…
…a little to unpack here, not sure how much I want to wade in this…
The beginning and ending of your post seem a little on the unfinished side, or maybe this is some edgy new salutation/sign-off thingie.
For the following, keep in mind that your post, above, was in response to my post (directly above yours)…

Someone upthread I can’t arse myself to find out?

Well, ok, buddy was indicted for participating in the riot, but do you think most of us probably still have no clue he who is?

Should I have bothered? I think I need to stop already.

I understand where you’re coming from and I get what you’re saying, but there is some urgency here. Urgency to staunch the regression and rolling back of rights and freedoms we all have enjoyed. Many in the current GOP aren’t interested in governing any more; they’re whole program is to stop the Democrats, and undo things.

Here’s an analogy: you know there are termites in the walls of your house. You can see thier little dust piles, and you can hear them chewing at night when it’s quiet. The exterminator offers you the all-natural pesticide, which is okay and works 50% of the time and the bugs may come back. Or the more toxic but more effective “nuke-em from orbit” option, which is 90% effective and they are not likely to return. Which one do you choose to protect your house?

It seems like a good – what they call a “wise” decision could be made in most cases if both things are kept in mind and a sincere effort is made to be both forceful and moral. They are not mutually exclusive or even on a scale from one end to another. They should both be guiding principles that are given proper consideration. Compromising your principles is hardly ever the best course of action.

Please indulge me to give one example. It was probably natural and expected for Alex Jones to lie about his text messages and to try to hide the truth, just like it is natural for him to be abusive and reprehensible. But then a year or so later he is on the witness stand being asked if he knows what perjury is. Now- when everything is said and done, don’t you think he wishes he had been up front instead trying weasel- instead of lying and scheming and creating more potential problems for himself?

One more thing on a completely different topic. The absolute worst “candidate” - - okay not the right term, political figure who gives speaches and influences public debate is not even an American, nor is he a candidate. But he is the model for all the evil and anti democratic nonsense the Republicans are standing for now. He is even the inspiration for Trump himself. Someone who DID overthrow democracy and is doing all the evil the current Republican Party will do if given the chance.

I received this opinion piece this morning. After the link I will paste in a short except (every word is frighteningly true so just one paragraph).

Okay, I could not resist the temptation to quote two paragraphs because of the stupendous lies:

Orbán urged his audience to have courage to address sensitive questions around migration, gender and “clash of civilizations”, assuring them: “A Christian politician cannot be racist.” He accused progressives of trying to separate western civilization from its Christian roots.

“If you separate western civilization from its Judaeo-Christian heritage, the worst things in history happen. Let’s be honest, the most evil things in modern history were carried out by people who hated Christianity. Don’t be afraid to call your enemies by their name. You can’t play safe but they will never show mercy.”

Hardly boring – Walker has apparently had one too many football concussions; his recent statement on climate change, for example: :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:

“Since we don’t control the air, our good air decided to float over to China’s bad air. So when China gets our good air, their bad air got to move. So it moves over to our good air space. Then – now we got to clean that back up.”

More here – the guy is unbelievable. And yes, he has Trump’s endorsement:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/11/politics/herschel-walker-republican-risk-campaign-trail/index.html

I apologize for running on and on, but there is one more thing I meant to include above but forgot until it was too late to edit into the previous post.

Two months ago I was pretty fed-up with everything related to American politics, but I was specifically disappointed in what the Democrats were doing. Seemed like failure and victim hood on all fronts back then. Inflation just kept growing, Roe was just overturned and there was little good news on that topic until the Kansas vote, nothing passing congress, no Republicans watching the Hearings, Garland seeming to spin his wheels when it came to the actual authors of the insurrection, and so on.

Now, Manchin and Sinema are making the renamed bill happen (right during the midterms!), gas prices are dropping, Garland has subpoenaed some higher-ups, DOJ is suing Idaho over abortion ban, the Kansas vote, and a few other things are more clear also.

In addition, the opposition party has chosen to remain insane and nominate the worst possible candidates. But they are polling poorly in Pennsylvania and Georgia. Soon I hope in Arizona also; the fact that all the Trump Republicans are incapable of pivoting for the general will put them in a similar boat. My point is that just being the good guys is turning out better than expected right now.

Yes, I know. But he is just unqualified, not dangerous like Mastriano in Pennsylvania, Lake and Finchem here in AZ, and others. Dumb and misinformed is one thing – actively working to dismantle democracy is quite another. Mastriano wants to create a theocracy for (literally!) God’s sake!! Our senatorial candidate, Blake Masters believes anti-abortion voters are demonic. Walker is almost quaint by comparison! At least in my view.

Maybe, but it’s easy to underestimate the damage that “dumb and misinformed” can do, given enough power and just half a chance. Cite: the Trump presidency.

True enough!!

You probably mean “pro-choice voters”?

I did get it backwards, thanks.
I am trying to find the TV spot that runs here several times a day so I can link it here but have not found it yet.

Thank you for straightening me out, sorry for the misinformation.

Holy shit! This Blake Masters guy is completely insane! :astonished:

Yes, our entire slate of Republican candidates is made of rather colorful characters. Here is the nominee for Secretary of State-- the official who oversees the elections (guess what he denies!!!):

So… This Mark Finchem is a member of a far-right extremist armed militia group, who are anti-government. It’s leader and many others in his group have been indicted for seditious conspiracy against the government of the United States of America.

This is today’s GOP; Violent extremists whose goal is to destroy the government and take over the country by force.

They did manage to short-circuit the legislature and cut short public debate by moving through the courts rather than the tougher course of changing minds and winning elections.

AKA “protecting individual rights”. I mean, if it’s not “cheating” for gun-rights supporters to use the courts to fight legislation that they consider an unconstitutional violation of individual rights, then it’s not “cheating” for abortion-rights supporters to do so.

We can all argue about different interpretations of the Constitution and the extent to which it actually does prohibit legally restricting one’s right to obtain an abortion or to own various types of weaponry, etc. But pretending that it’s automatically “cheating” to involve the judiciary in matters of constitutional rights at all is simply sloppy reasoning.

I did not say cheating. I said they short-circuited the normal legislative process. It is probably better to work through yelling and screaming of democratic norms than to rely on the lawyerly doubletalk of our black-robed masters.

Rather than relying on dictates it is better to change minds.

Judicial protection of individual rights is not “short-circuiting” anything. Nor are legislative means intrinsically more “normal” than judicial ones.

There was nothing wrong with using the courts to defend, e.g., civil rights against racial segregation laws in Brown v. Board of Education. And there was nothing wrong with using the courts to defend abortion rights against abortion bans in Roe v. Wade.

Sure, a court decision is not necessarily permanent for all time, any more than a legislative decision is. Courts can change their interpretations, just as legislatures can change their laws. But that doesn’t mean that it’s in any way illegitimate or “abnormal” to appeal to the courts to defend individual rights.

Not going to look for a cite, but I’m guessing support for abortion rights is much higher now than it was in 1972, so apparently the two aren’t mutually exclusive.

Groovy. I suppose you are chill with the Supremes reversing Roe? It must seem perfectly normal to you.

What’s not “normal” about conservative Supreme Court justices making bad decisions? We see legislatures making bad laws all the time, too.

Just because one or the other of us may not like how a certain Court rules on abortion rights does not mean that abortion rights are not inherently a constitutional issue, or that legislation is the only permissible or “normal” way to address them.