US Politics Thread

[Moxie]

Thank you for your post, Moxie. I love you also my dear, and I cannot say that I know one way or the other everything you say in your post is true as set forth above in your reply concerning immigration. I know that there were many immigrants who came here legally a century ago (and some illegal) but, more importantly, our nation was open to immigrants at a certain time because of the need for people to come to this country which was expanding, growing and needed people. Yes, there were altruistic reasons as well, including taking in people who were hungry and suffering in other parts of the world. We are still doing that today. It is the scale and orchestrated nature of mass illegal immigration that was not present back then. There were not the kind of coordinated smuggling operations for sick profits like today. Every nation has a right through its political system to decide how many people it wants to permit to come into its country. A number of countries have very strict laws in this regard. I do not see a problem with that. And when that law is there for all to see and understand, I do not see a problem with deporting people who illegally enter. From what I read here, there are countries out there that have much stricter regulations regarding immigration than USA does. I will want to go to one of these museums the next time in New York City. It is an ongoing issue and I find it interesting that some Western European nations are really feeling the pinch these days concerning mass emigration from North Africa, the Middle East and Asia into these previously largely homogenous societies of a different ethnicity and culture. It is going to be a struggle as it always is.

I totally take your points, Shawn, and I agree that the problem is huge now, and there is are several industries in it. I was only saying that there has been illegal immigration as long as there have been immigration laws, and also that some people come illegally now for perfectly benign reasons.

I do hope you will visit the Tenement Museum next time you're here. It's fascinating and affecting. The themes of apartment tours change all the time, and they are guided, so you have to book, as the groups are small, though I have ever walked up with a friend, and we just got in on the next one. Here is the website. (Sorry for the travelogue, folks. )

I hope you enjoy the Australian open even though your very favorite is injured again and will not be there. That is a very sad a piece of news and I sincerely hope he is back up and running for the claim court season and an effort to prevail in Paris yet again. If he got injured so easily plaintiff's one little event before the Australian open, that I have to wonder if he is going to play the grass court season. Maybe he makes it to Wimbledon but no other grass court events?

I'll be enjoying the fact that I don't have to care enough to stay up all night for two weeks, I can say that. LOL. I think Wimbledon and no other grass court events. It might be his last.

 

[Moxie]

I think you're misreading this. And that's not to say they won't take your view. But... Bush vs Gore was about... Bush vs Gore presidential election. In this case this is about a primary candidate. If Trump is off the ballot it doesn't mean that Republicans lose. It just means that another candidate will represent the Republican Party. The polling numbers seem to indicate that both Trump and Biden are unpopular. Biden's numbers against anyone not named Trump are bad... very bad. So if we want to frame this as a political decision, it's entirely possible that these very smart conservative judges might come to the conclusion that it's actually not harmful to the Republican cause. It's bad for Trump and Trumpers for sure. But not the Republican Party. I guarantee you Biden is hoping SCOTUS does what you fear they'll do. I find it hard to believe that all of them will disregard that aspect of this. It just might give them the comfort they need to focus on the constitutionality of this decision and not the politics. Look... I'm cynical enough to believe that they probably will do what you think, but I'm also smart enough to realise that if they do the right thing it just might work out that their political desires get realised. Are you telling me these guys aren't able to make the same calculation? Hmmm...

Actually, I think we're missing each other's point, yet again. Maybe I threw you off by bringing up Bush v. Gore. I meant that as an example of a political decision on the part of the court. I'm not talking at all about who wins the election, or even what this decision means to it. I'm only talking about the decision in the Colorado case...whether or not they will uphold Colorado's decision to keep Trump off the ballot. Like you, I see plenty of reason that they could. I just think they won't. Further, I absolutely don't think they'll make a sweeping-enough decision to keep him off the ballot nationwide. Technically, if they find that, on the merits, Colorado is correct, it could make Trump ineligible completely. They certainly will avoid that, IMO. I'd love to be wrong, though.

If I'm reading you correctly, (what are the chances?? LOL) you're suggesting that they might do just that, in order to put a more moderate Republican on the ticket who could actually, as it looks today, defeat Biden. IF that's what you're saying, that would be a deeply political move. Even I'M not that cynical. However, if you're just suggesting that they might rule wholly against Trump, and that would be the potential side-benefit to Republicans, I can't disagree.

Many people in this country seem to want any candidates besides Biden and Trump, and yet we seem to be in a march towards that inevitability. It's ironic, and bordering on the tragic. Personally, I think we'd be fine with another Biden term, but the fact that we're about to put up two candidates that most in the US don't want is terrible. If SCOTUS, or tragic circumstance (illness, death, incarceration) should block Trump from candidacy, sliding in a different candidate, I think that that person could win. Should tragedy befall Biden, the Democrats are in trouble, as they'd probably try to go with Harris, who is not popular enough. I'm not sure who else they've got.

This is an election year made for third-party candidates. Everyone is already gaming who spoils whom. I think Liz Cheney will run, and so will Joe Manchin. RFK, Jr. is already in. It's going to be the Wild West.

 

[Moxie]

Which guys? The ones reviewing the film, or the ones who made the film?

There were two guys in that video. Those are the ones I was talking about. I believe the agreement was that I watch that video, not the documentary they're talking about. Which even the suggested had a POV, including things they couldn't validate. I think the deal was that you'd read that Atlantic article, if I watched your video. Did you read it? #Christmashomework

 

[Kieran]

There were two guys in that video. Those are the ones I was talking about. I believe the agreement was that I watch that video, not the documentary they're talking about. Which even the suggested had a POV, including things they couldn't validate. I think the deal was that you'd read that Atlantic article, if I watched your video. Did you read it? #Christmashomework

You mean, Glenn Loury and John McWhorter? Surely you know of both of them? But I’m confused. You said they were “smart” and “fair.”

What does that mean? That you agree with them? They made a strong case. What did you think?

I was to read the article when you watched video. I read the article, but I’m curious about what you think of the video, first. This documentary is very important: it proves the George Floyd narrative pursued violently by the left - the Democrats, Biden on the presidential trail, BLM - is criminally wrong. I wonder what you made of that..

 

[Moxie]

You mean, Glenn Loury and John McWhorter? Surely you know of both of them? But I’m confused. You said they were “smart” and “fair.”

What does that mean? That you agree with them? They made a strong case. What did you think?

I was to read the article when you watched video. I read the article, but I’m curious about what you think of the video, first. This documentary is very important: it proves the George Floyd narrative pursued violently by the left - the Democrats, Biden on the presidential trail, BLM - is criminally wrong. I wonder what you made of that..

John McWorther I know.

I promised to watch, I didn't promise to comment. It's your issue, not mine. I don't know why I have to comment on something that would take more digging, for me. And you don't have to comment on that Atlantic article. Your only promise was to read. You don't have to comment. Fair?

One thing I did get out of that video is that I wonder why the body cam footage wasn't admitted into evidence at the time of the trial, which they say it wasn't. I'd think that cop has grounds for appeal.

 

[Kieran]

John McWorther I know.

I promised to watch, I didn't promise to comment. It's your issue, not mine. I don't know why I have to comment on something that would take more digging, for me. And you don't have to comment on that Atlantic article. Your only promise was to read. You don't have to comment. Fair?

Fair? Insane, more like. Why should you dig into an issue that’s your issue, race and political shenanigans in America? I don’t know why? I can’t think why. Especially that none of it involves Twump. Now if he was inciting a jury to reach the “right verdict” while a violent mob waits outside, then it would be your issue, right?

If the left do something egregious, that’s not your problem. So what if there were thugs on the streets rioting against systemic racism - in states where the system is Democrat? They won the election. Job done.

But the fact of the matter is, this is an American story, it impacted every level of your society, it normalised injustice, weaponised the courts, and it created a vector of hostility towards the police, which was encouraged by senior democrats in Minneapolis and nationwide; it spread lies about systemic racism and a police force that apparently was trigger-happy when it comes to black people, and it gave us all the bad ideas of CRT, ‘anti-racism’, Intersectionality, mostly peaceful riots and looting as being both virtuous and immune to viruses, and the unending plague of intellectual mediocrities like Ibram X Kendi telling us how bad whitey is.

None of this is your issue, meaning you don’t want to examine it, because it comes from the left.

One thing I did get out of that video is that I wonder why the body cam footage wasn't admitted into evidence at the time of the trial, which they say it wasn't. I'd think that cop has grounds for appeal.

The video on rumble is also on YouTube, if you’re scared of rumble, and it goes into great detail to show how those cops not only didn’t kill George Floyd, but they went out of their way to help him. That they’re in prison now and Derek Chauvin was recently stabbed 22 times should be everybody’s issue. Your country is crumbling around you and you’re determined to look the opposite direction. Village-idiot level ideas are the norm, from your side, and to question them is evidence of bad faith, ‘literal violence’, bigotry, Nazism, murder, transphobia, whatever.

You don’t know who Glenn Loury is? Then you’ve no interest in race as an issue. You’re only interested in what your tribe has say about it…

 

[Federberg]

If I'm reading you correctly, (what are the chances?? LOL) you're suggesting that they might do just that, in order to put a more moderate Republican on the ticket who could actually, as it looks today, defeat Biden. IF that's what you're saying, that would be a deeply political move. Even I'M not that cynical. However, if you're just suggesting that they might rule wholly against Trump, and that would be the potential side-benefit to Republicans, I can't disagree.

lol! What are the chances indeed. No I'm saying that because a constitutional decision is only directly related to the primaries and only indirectly the Presidential election, they don't have to view a decision as determinative of the 2024 election. This is really only about Trump, NOT the Republican Party. My point is that because of that they are actually free to go with their conscience or their legal understandings if you will. This is why I assign a slightly higher probability that Trump could get kicked off than you. Of course the cynic in me believes, like you, that they'll find a way to let him participate. But the reality is doing that would actually be the political decision

 

[Kieran]

I remember this well, when Biden had to drop out of his first Presidential campaign for plagiarising The Welsh Windbag, Neil Kinnock. For whatever reason, Obama then rescued his middling political career in 2008. Since the rise of trump, he actually became a good idea in 2020, which emphasises the way we've terribly declined in the west in providing great leaders..

 

[Federberg]

Biden was the big winner last night. Only hope for the GOP now is for Nikki Haley to come on strong in New Hampshire. DeSantis is pretty much toast as far as I can see. He had a massive ground game in Iowa. He's nowhere near as strong elsewhere

 

[Moxie]

Some of you have been played by a conservative agenda, manufacturing fears and bugaboos. Not mentioned here, but also part of this is "DEI". Way to fall for freaking about about things that aren't even a problem.

The guy who brought us CRT panic offers a new far-right agenda: Destroy public education

Christopher Rufo used "critical race theory" as a Trojan horse. Now he wants to sack the city and win the war

www.salon.com

(And please don't slag Salon: I've watched any number of non-journalistic YouTube videos from you lot.)

 

[Moxie]

Biden was the big winner last night. Only hope for the GOP now is for Nikki Haley to come on strong in New Hampshire. DeSantis is pretty much toast as far as I can see. He had a massive ground game in Iowa. He's nowhere near as strong elsewhere

I take your point, but it's hard to call him the "big winner." It just goes back to Biden d. Trump, having done it once. Still a bit nail-biting.

A couple of points: In very white, very Red Iowa, Trump still only just passed 50%, even though that was historic. (You may have noticed that he encouraged his supporters to risk their lives in the frigid weather, though he, himself, did not.)

Yes, DeSantis is toast. He put all of his eggs in Iowa, and barely capped Haley. She won one county, by one vote, and Trump the rest.

Haley has a great opportunity in NH, at least to show Trump up, a bit. I'm very curious about that. New Hampshire has an open primary, which means that independents can participate, and choose which one they want to vote in...and there are lots of independents. Given that there are no choices on the Democratic side, independent voters in NH will vote in the Republican primary. And they are not especially inclined to Trump. They are also not evangelicals, which you have a high percentage of in Iowa.

The bad news for her is that she's all but certainly going to lose her own state of South Carolina, which comes up soon. De Santis has completely passed on NH, heading straight for SC.

I think Haley will say in for a while. I think De Santis might concede after SC.

 

[Kieran]

(And please don't slag Salon: I've watched any number of non-journalistic YouTube videos from you lot.)

Yes, but you refused to comment on them because they exposed Joe Biden, the Democrats, the left in general, as race hustlers who weaponised the courts during a presidential campaign to win votes and push the worst possible lies about the police to the foreground. Not to mention the destruction of cities and the lynching of American cops. We can probably expect something similar to happen this year again..

 

[Federberg]

I take your point, but it's hard to call him the "big winner." It just goes back to Biden d. Trump, having done it once. Still a bit nail-biting.

A couple of points: In very white, very Red Iowa, Trump still only just passed 50%, even though that was historic. (You may have noticed that he encouraged his supporters to risk their lives in the frigid weather, though he, himself, did not.)

Yes, DeSantis is toast. He put all of his eggs in Iowa, and barely capped Haley. She won one county, by one vote, and Trump the rest.

Haley has a great opportunity in NH, at least to show Trump up, a bit. I'm very curious about that. New Hampshire has an open primary, which means that independents can participate, and choose which one they want to vote in...and there are lots of independents. Given that there are no choices on the Democratic side, independent voters in NH will vote in the Republican primary. And they are not especially inclined to Trump. They are also not evangelicals, which you have a high percentage of in Iowa.

The bad news for her is that she's all but certainly going to lose her own state of South Carolina, which comes up soon. De Santis has completely passed on NH, heading straight for SC.

I think Haley will say in for a while. I think De Santis might concede after SC.

Yup. Haley could well win in New Hampshire but it'll probably alienate core GOP voters as NH seems to be a bit maverick in GOP primaries. Winning there isn't necessarily a good thing. I think losing in South Carolina will probably do for her. Her only hope is for her to be the only alternative to Trump. 1 v 1 sets up a fairly clean choice for GOP voters. If it becomes clear that she has a better chance against Biden than Trump then non-Trump-deranged voters might make the rational choice. Not holding out too much hope for that though.

 

[Federberg]

Some of you have been played by a conservative agenda, manufacturing fears and bugaboos. Not mentioned here, but also part of this is "DEI". Way to fall for freaking about about things that aren't even a problem.

The guy who brought us CRT panic offers a new far-right agenda: Destroy public education

Christopher Rufo used "critical race theory" as a Trojan horse. Now he wants to sack the city and win the war

www.salon.com

(And please don't slag Salon: I've watched any number of non-journalistic YouTube videos from you lot.)

the thing that popped up into my mind reading this was... 'just because you're paranoid doesn't mean people aren't against you!'

The fact that this fellow is trying to make CRT and DEI wedge issues doesn't excuse us from objectively looking at both of those things. They are both toxic and awful. I have no doubt that in another life time before they became highly politicised and weren't elements of the culture war, someone like you might have been able to see the negatives. But that's not where we are now.

I'm glad I have a different mentality. Remember when Trump was campaigning in 2016? As much as I loathed him, and @britbox and I went round and round (because I loathed Trump and he loathed HRC), I always had sympathies regarding Trump's stance on China, and also immigration. I would just ask you to detach yourself from the politics and ask yourself if you're really willing to dive 100% into some of these insane policies from progressives. They're not good @Moxie, think through what the ultimate endgames of these things, and surely you can see it's not good for society, for humanity.

Yes I don't approve of this guy, I have no doubt he's not doing for the greater good, but for rather basic political motives. That doesn't mean he's wrong...

 

[Kieran]

This is a good question. And the answer isn’t simply, they’re all inbred racists. Why do Democrats not self-reflect, and ask themselves why they’re actually a bigger problem for a millions of people? The sanctuary state fiasco is an example of why…

 

[Federberg]

This is a good question. And the answer isn’t simply, they’re all inbred racists. Why do Democrats not self-reflect, and ask themselves why they’re actually a bigger problem for a millions of people? The sanctuary state fiasco is an example of why…

it's a fair question, but let's not act like the majority of folks in the US vote democratic. Things seem closer than they actually are because of the electoral college. That question would be better directed to those who vote for Republicans. I've always said that the Conservative Party for 20 -30yrs ago was the greatest wining machine of the last century. They did it by adapting to what voters wanted with a conservative and market bias. But the electoral college has become a crutch that the GOP uses to avoid examining their policies.

With regards to immigration, my sense right now is that Biden (if not progressives in general) is willing to reform immigration at the moment, but the Republicans don't want to lose another great wedge issue that worked to their advantage. They've already lost on abortion...

 

[Kieran]

it's a fair question, but let's not act like the majority of folks in the US vote democratic. Things seem closer than they actually are because of the electoral college. That question would be better directed to those who vote for Republicans. I've always said that the Conservative Party for 20 -30yrs ago was the greatest wining machine of the last century. They did it by adapting to what voters wanted with a conservative and market bias. But the electoral college has become a crutch that the GOP uses to avoid examining their policies.

With regards to immigration, my sense right now is that Biden (if not progressives in general) is willing to reform immigration at the moment, but the Republicans don't want to lose another great wedge issue that worked to their advantage. They've already lost on abortion...

That's true, it's a question for Republicans too, and has been since 2015, why vote for Trump? And yet here we are 9 years later still wondering why. Bear in mind he got the second highest number of votes in history in 2020: 74m+ voted for him. And he's trending well in the polls, very few of which have Biden leading him. I can think of all the bad ideas on race, gender, immigration, that insult Americans who don't want to be forced to think that way, when they have actual real life problems to solve. I can imagine that the snooty coastal element of the Democrat party is largely a big part of the problem. They seem not to care about the rest of America.

As it stands, it's more a real time question for the Democrats, who are clinging to Biden, which can explode in their faces at any time, but they're hoping lightning will strike twice. But why don't they ask themselves why they're not appealing to about 50% of the population, to the extent that they'd prefer Donald Trump, of all people...

 

[Federberg]

That's true, it's a question for Republicans too, and has been since 2015, why vote for Trump? And yet here we are 9 years later still wondering why. Bear in mind he got the second highest number of votes in history in 2020: 74m+ voted for him. And he's trending well in the polls, very few of which have Biden leading him. I can think of all the bad ideas on race, gender, immigration, that insult Americans who don't want to be forced to think that way, when they have actual real life problems to solve. I can imagine that the snooty coastal element of the Democrat party is largely a big part of the problem. They seem not to care about the rest of America.

As it stands, it's more a real time question for the Democrats, who are clinging to Biden, which can explode in their faces at any time, but they're hoping lightning will strike twice. But why don't they ask themselves why they're not appealing to about 50% of the population, to the extent that they'd prefer Donald Trump, of all people...

I think you're missing the point. First of all even as Trump got 74m votes, Biden got over 80m. For some reason no one seems to think that's important. I don't get it. Secondly, even if Biden were to lose, which I don't expect, Biden is still likely to comfortably have more people voting for him than Trump. Never forget that Trump has never been. able to get close to 50%. His numbers are very stable. In a funny way it's not a bad thing for Biden to be behind right now, this is probably a floor for him. Quite apart from that, no matter what the polls have shown Democrats keep winning. That tells us something... and please remember the mid-terms... there is a serious bias in the polling against Democrats. Remember in the mid-terms we all expected a red wave. It was far from that. The polls are showing slight Trump leads in swing states, but that assumes the polls are accurate. There is simply no evidence over the last few years. If anything whenever I see polls at the moment, I quietly add 3 - 4% for the Dem side. That seems to be the rough difference between polling and reality. If that's the case Biden will win going away.

Listen... I agree with you that Dems should do better on major issues. But so should the GOP on other issues. I'm a die hard conservative. If I was an American voter, I would vote for Biden to protect democracy. Purely because if he wins, I know we still get to have future elections, where any silly Democratic Party policy errors can be corrected. If Trump wins I'm not sure it'll be so easy to fix things in future...

 

[Kieran]

I think you're missing the point. First of all even as Trump got 74m votes, Biden got over 80m. For some reason no one seems to think that's important. I don't get it. Secondly, even if Biden were to lose, which I don't expect, Biden is still likely to comfortably have more people voting for him than Trump. Never forget that Trump has never been. able to get close to 50%. His numbers are very stable. In a funny way it's not a bad thing for Biden to be behind right now, this is probably a floor for him. Quite apart from that, no matter what the polls have shown Democrats keep winning. That tells us something... and please remember the mid-terms... there is a serious bias in the polling against Democrats. Remember in the mid-terms we all expected a red wave. It was far from that. The polls are showing slight Trump leads in swing states, but that assumes the polls are accurate. There is simply no evidence over the last few years. If anything whenever I see polls at the moment, I quietly add 3 - 4% for the Dem side. That seems to be the rough difference between polling and reality. If that's the case Biden will win going away.

Listen... I agree with you that Dems should do better on major issues. But so should the GOP on other issues. I'm a die hard conservative. If I was an American voter, I would vote for Biden to protect democracy. Purely because if he wins, I know we still get to have future elections, where any silly Democratic Party policy errors can be corrected. If Trump wins I'm not sure it'll be so easy to fix things in future...

But remember the question though: is the Democratic Party of the United States going to rely so heavily on J6 that it never does any self-examination as to why so many Americans are *still* voting for Trump?

I believe that’s a valid question. I agree with you on all the above, but the same reasons why people voted for Trump in 2016 remain unaddressed, because the lack of self-reflection, and God forbid, self-criticism in the Democrats, alongside their disdainful view of middle America, white America, white working class America, white working class male America, is a sign that perhaps they could care less about Americans.

I know that Biden got 80m votes last time, but more people voted for Trump than ever voted for Obama, for instance. It’s a problem! But we can see why, when all the wrong ideas are coming from the left, and when leftists activists are tearing up the streets, while being cheered on by Democrats.

I agree with you on conservatives. The gender/race ideologies have stepped into a vacuum where there are no strong conservative voices holding their ground. Instead of liberals we have the ‘left’, and instead of conservatives we have the ‘right’. This is a misunderstanding on both sides about what politics is, and how it works. Old fashioned collaboration and mutual respect have long since left the room…a plague on both the ‘right’ and ‘left’, I say..

 

[Federberg]

But remember the question though: is the Democratic Party of the United States going to rely so heavily on J6 that it never does any self-examination as to why so many Americans are *still* voting for Trump?

I believe that’s a valid question. I agree with you on all the above, but the same reasons why people voted for Trump in 2016 remain unaddressed, because the lack of self-reflection, and God forbid, self-criticism in the Democrats, alongside their disdainful view of middle America, white America, white working class America, white working class male America, is a sign that perhaps they could care less about Americans.

I know that Biden got 80m votes last time, but more people voted for Trump than ever voted for Obama, for instance. It’s a problem! But we can see why, when all the wrong ideas are coming from the left, and when leftists activists are tearing up the streets, while being cheered on by Democrats.

I agree with you on conservatives. The gender/race ideologies have stepped into a vacuum where there are no strong conservative voices holding their ground. Instead of liberals we have the ‘left’, and instead of conservatives we have the ‘right’. This is a misunderstanding on both sides about what politics is, and how it works. Old fashioned collaboration and mutual respect have long since left the room…a plague on both the ‘right’ and ‘left’, I say..

But remember the question though: is the Democratic Party of the United States going to rely so heavily on J6 that it never does any self-examination as to why so many Americans are *still* voting for Trump?

do you think they are? I'm not so sure. That's more of a media thing that they're willing to stand on the sidelines and applaud. The only way anyone believes this is a Democratic Party thing is if they believe that the DoJ is under political direction. I don't think it is. We can't have our cake and eat it. Hunter Biden remember? And let's remember that Hunter is accused of using his father's name to make a few million dollars. If the Dems wanted to retaliate why don't they investigate the $6bn that Jared Kushner was able to get from the Middle East? I guarantee that if the shoe was on the other foot there would be no bigger political scandal. Dems are vegans in a carnivorous political world...

I know that Biden got 80m votes last time, but more people voted for Trump than ever voted for Obama, for instance.

even in that Trumps percentage of the voters was well below 50%, while Obama's was comfortably above. There's no comparison, and the overall numbers are a function of demographics and high voter interest during the covid pandemic and Trump-mania. What I'm trying to say is that if anything the fact that over 80m made the effort to vote an incumbent out is by far the more pertinent issue

the same reasons why people voted for Trump in 2016 remain unaddressed

I completely agree! But that's actually not unique to the US. I find it hard to pin that on the Dem's as all Western democracies are going through the same issue. Clearly the factors are global: post financial crisis, free trade, economic/climate migration, social media. Pick one pick all. I don't believe anyone anywhere has found the solution yet. As contemptuous as I am of Democratic Party solutions or evasions, I can't pin it on them...