The Biden Presidency

[Stavros]

So far, Biden has done what was expected of him-

-The US will re-commit to the Paris Climate Change Agreement.
-The US will halt its exit from the WHO and return to full membership (I assume with the same level of funding as before).
-The ban on Transgendered Americans serving in the Military will end.
-The anti-Abortion restrictions linked to Foreign Aid will be lifted.
-A permit for the Keystone Pipeline has been revoked, halting the completion of this project (again!).

In new moves
-The US will join COVAX-
"a programme that pools international funds to buy vaccines and equally distribute them around the world.Trump has spurned the programme, but in its most recent Covid-relief package the US Congress reserved nearly $4bn (£2.9bn) for Gavi, the organisation that co-founded Covax, which was widely seen as intended to support the vaccine-sharing platform.
Its formal membership opens the door to more funding and direct donations of vaccines, and builds momentum for the programme and wider efforts to guarantee equal access to vaccines, treatments and technology to fight the pandemic."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/21/fauci-us-repeal-anti-abortion-rule-aid-join-covax-vaccine-scheme

-The US will not be moving the US Embassy in Israel back to Tel-Aviv, and the Biden Admin is expected to have a colder relationship with Netanyahu (still struggling to retain his position as Prime Minister) and make some effort to re-invigorate 'peace talks' with the Palestinians.

-After Kamala Haris, another first: a Transgendered American has been appointed to an official post in the US Government -if confirmed, Rachel Levine will become Assistant Secretary for Health. While Biden has said "her "steady leadership" was needed "to get people through this pandemic."" an online publication, freebeacon, has reported-

"Biden health nominee Rachel Levine directed Pennsylvania nursing homes to accept COVID-positive patients—even as she pulled her own mother out of a longterm-care facility over pandemic concerns".
https://freebeacon.com/politics/biden-health-pick-forced-nursing-homes-to-accept-covid-patients/

It remains to be seen if her appointment will be confirmed, but she appears to have reasons for her decisions as well as her mistakes (details are in the linnk above), and freebeacon might be campaigning aganst her- I don't know what the truth of these allegations are, so I have linked the story so others who may know can comment on it if they wish.

Going forward, the UK is anxious to begin negotiations with the US on a Trade Deal, about which I don't think the Biden team has yet made a statement. Biden is expected to make his first trip to the UK in June for the G7 summit which will be held in Cornwall at Carbis Bay, on the North Cornwall coast not far from St Ives, and lauded by the London Evening Standard-
https://www.standard.co.uk/escapist/carbis-bay-cornwall-g7-president-biden-b900265.html

I wonder if he will stop off in Ireland on his way to Cornwall?

[blackchubby38]

"The US will not be moving the US Embassy in Israel back to Tel-Aviv, and the Biden Admin is expected to have a colder relationship with Netanyahu (still struggling to retain his position as Prime Minister) and make some effort to re-invigorate 'peace talks' with the Palestinians."

I don't think the US Embassy should have been moved to Jerusalem because of the religious significance of the city to the three religions that inhabited it. But what's done is done and I don't think a thing should get started where the embassy keeps moving back and forth between Tel-Aviv and Jerusalem depending on who is occupying the White House. In essence, making it a political football.

I will add this caveat though. If it does get moved, I don't think it has to be done right away. While I'm not familiar with when Netanyahu's term in office is up, I think it might better if its done when he is no longer PM.


"Biden health nominee Rachel Levine directed Pennsylvania nursing homes to accept COVID-positive patients—even as she pulled her own mother out of a longterm-care facility over pandemic concerns".

It remains to be seen if her appointment will be confirmed, but she appears to have reasons for her decisions as well as her mistakes (details are in the linnk above), and freebeacon might be campaigning aganst her- I don't know what the truth of these allegations are, so I have linked the story so others who may know can comment on it if they wish.

IF (and I can't stress those words enough) the allegations are true, then I'm not surprised because it would just be another example of someone in power saying "Do as I say, don't do as I do" and I think you can make the argument that she should withdraw her name from consideration as health nominee.

Yes you can say that she wasn't only one and the biggest culprit of ignoring federal protocols and instead mandating COVID positive patients be forced back to their nursing homes (Governor Cuomo) still has his job. You can also make the case that people in power were still figuring things out at the time.

But her reason as to why she did it: Levine claimed the decision to relocate her mother from a longterm-care facility to a hotel was made at her mother's request following multiple confirmed cases within the facility.


Is not a good enough one to give her pass. It can also be viewed by many (although I don't hold it because if I had the means I would do the same thing) as someone being privileged enough to have the means to take care of a family member.

Although if she had ability to change the mandate at the time that she relocated her mother, than by all means she didn't do anything "wrong" and should be confirmed.

[Stavros]

Thanks for your thoughts, Backchubby -I did not approve of the Embassy move, but its done, and if anything, it makes it more logical for the US to abandon a 'two-state solution' and go for a Federation in which Israeli and Palestinian citizens have equal rights, and the same four freedoms the EU has -free movement of people, goods, services, and capital, though the last one might advantage Israelis. I see no other solution unless someone can revive the 'two-state solution' and explain how it will work. I still think, even in the Federation, that the municipal boundaries of Jerusalem must be re-drawn to remove all of the Israeli Government's buidings from it, so that the politics is taken out of that city and it becomes a regional hub of inter-faith dialogue.

Netanyahu has been in Coalition with his rival Benny Gantz, but it collapsed over the failure to approve a budget so Israel has it's 4th General Election in two years in March. There is an article on it here-
https://www.dw.com/en/can-benjamin-netanyahu-survive-israels-next-election/a-56151107

And a review of the Memorandum of Undestanding that the US and Israel signed in 2016 worth £38 billion over 10 years (mostly military) and an assessment in The Atlantic are here-
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/09/united-states-israel-memorandum-of-understanding-military-aid/500192/

I don't expect major changes in the US-Israel relationship, but relations with Saudi Arabia could get problematic as I understand Biden intends to make public an assessment of the involvement of MBS and members of the Saudi Government in the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/19/biden-administration-to-declassify-report-into-khashoggi

The obvious problem for Biden is Iran, both in terms of its adherence to the Nuclear Deal signed when Obama was President, and whether or not Biden can repair the damage done since then, and in terms of Saudi Arabia and Israel's anti-Iran alliance which Kushner did so much to deepen.

What Biden could do, and if he wants to help end the horrific war in the Yemen, must do, is try to create a conference or set of summit meetings which enable both Iran and Saudi Arabia to end the war in Southern Arabia. He could ban the sale of arms to Saudi Arabia, something the UK is supposed to be doing, but as a primary means of ending the war itself. A political settlement in Yemen is not impossible, but with the North and South fractured almost the same as it was when there were two Yemens, and with the Saudis intent on having 'their guy' in charge in Sana'a, that poses a major challenge -but as I say, ending the actual war must be the priority, as the Saudis cannot win this war -they fought a war with Egypt for control of the Yemen in the 1960s and lost that one- but the Iranians don't really need a client state in Yemen unless they feel threatened by SA, and a year or so ago there was even a hint that MbS realized he had made a mistake in Yemen so the possibility that Saudi Arabia and Iran meet over the negotiating table is not entirely impossible.
It would be a major boost to Biden's credentials, and also prove that Trump-style confrontation and angry rhetoric makes things worse, not better. War plus Covid is devastating Yemen, the costs of repairing that country are astronomical, but the US and the UK have been responsible for selling weapons to one side in the conflict, and cannot just walk away from it.

Summit meetings could also involve the urgent need for the US to have a coherent policy on nuclear developments in the Middle East, with specific regard to Israel, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. That's a lot to ask, but I think with a fresh team in place, and Saudi Arabia in a weaker position internationally than it has been under Trump -a financial beneficiary of their 'dollar diplomacy' in a way Biden is not-, they either get involved, or remain stuck in hugely expensive projets none of which have a positive outcome.

[filghy2]

Congress has now passed the $1.9 trillion Covid relief package, which will be the major determinant of the future prospects of the Biden administration.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2021/3/10/22320350/stimulus-bill-covid-19-passes-house
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/09/biden-economy-coronavirus-stimulus-474860

The design of the package has been heavily influenced by the experience under Obama in 2009, when the stimulus was widely recognised to have been too small. The consequent sluggish recovery led to the Democrats losing control of Congress in 2010, which crippled his Administration from then on.

There has been criticism that the package is too large, and not just from the usual suspects who discover government borrowing is a huge problem only when Democrats come into power. For instance, a former senior official under Clinton and Obama has warned about inflationary risks,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/02/04/larry-summers-biden-covid-stimulus/

While there are some risks, there seem to be reasonable arguments for erring on the side of doing too much rather than not enough, given the implications of another sluggish recovery. The key point is that inflation risks have been overestimated consistently for most of the past 2 decades, and the Federal Reserve is actually trying to increase inflation.
https://cepr.net/excessive-stimulus-and-other-things-larry-summers-worries-about/
https://slate.com/business/2021/02/larry-summers-biden-relief-plan-washington-post-op-ed.html

[Stavros]

Some fair points here. I think the fundamental trajectory is that if the US emerges from the Covid pandemic by the end of 2021, mosty through the vaccinations programmes, the economy will 'bounce back' or 'grow' as consumers re-enter the market place and businesses that have survived return to health- there are already signs of growth in the last quarter of 2020.

What I am not sure about is whether or not the Obama era experienced sluggish growth because these people argue

"In a healthy economy, growth, unemployment, and inflation are in balance. Most economists agree the ideal GDP growth rate is between 2% and 3%".
https://www.thebalance.com/what-is-the-ideal-gdp-growth-rate-3306017

What's wrong with 4% or even 5% growth? Perhaps you could help out here as your background in economics is superior to mine. Also, we don't yet know if or how the US is going to change as a consequence of the Covid pandemic, and how this may affect economic growth, job security, taxation, and incomes.

It is somewhat different in the UK because of the negative impact Brexit is having on the economy and so I expect the US to do much better than us over the next 12-18 months leading into the mid-terms. That said, I also think France and Germany will take longer to emerge from the pandemic with economic growth, though historically Germany performs better than France in this regard.

[filghy2]

What I am not sure about is whether or not the Obama era experienced sluggish growth because these people argue

"In a healthy economy, growth, unemployment, and inflation are in balance. Most economists agree the ideal GDP growth rate is between 2% and 3%".
https://www.thebalance.com/what-is-the-ideal-gdp-growth-rate-3306017

What's wrong with 4% or even 5% growth? Perhaps you could help out here as your background in economics is superior to mine.

There are two different issues. The first is the growth rate the economy can maintain in the long run, which is what the 2-3% refers to. Once the economy is effectively at full employment its growth depends on growth in the labour force and productivity.

The second is the rate the economy can grow at when it is coming out of a recession with high unemployment, which should normally be higher until unemployment comes down.

Growth coming out of the 2008 financial crisis was slower than in most previous recoveries, which meant that unemployment had not fallen much by the time of the mid-terms. That is what they are trying to avoid this time.

[Stavros]

There are two different issues. The first is the growth rate the economy can maintain in the long run, which is what the 2-3% refers to. Once the economy is effectively at full employment its growth depends on growth in the labour force and productivity.

The second is the rate the economy can grow at when it is coming out of a recession with high unemployment, which should normally be higher until unemployment comes down.

Growth coming out of the 2008 financial crisis was slower than in most previous recoveries, which meant that unemployment had not fallen much by the time of the mid-terms. That is what they are trying to avoid this time.

Thank you for your concise thoughts. I have had to do a search on the topic and it yields lots of surveys. From some that I have read the explanations range from a tightening of fiscal regimes when the recommendation was the opposite -but where the demand for, and implementation of fiscal 'austerity' as it was called in the UK, was primarily the choice of 'Conservatve'/Republican governments (in the US also at the State level); a shrinkage of the labour market, mostly through retirement (of people like me), and the lack of aggregate demand not hiring, a particular blow for young workers; and a contraction in production owing to a slowing of demand.

Here for example, is what one survey says-

"...our historically weak recovery has been accompanied by historically deep cuts in government spending.
...The Great Recession of 2008-2009 was the worst on record since the Great Depression of the 1930s, in terms of both total decline in real GDP (https://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-real-gdp) , and total increase in the unemployment rate between the previous peak and the beginning of the subsequent recovery. The economy was in a very deep hole in 2009, and had we spent the way we did after previous recessions, we would have experienced substantial increase in GDP since then. Instead, cuts in government spending over the last eight years have had a pernicious, negative impact on output and income, as well as on jobs and wages, which depend on the level of spending in the economy. If it weren’t for these cuts, the economy would likely be fully recovered by now, and the expansion would have equaled or exceeded the Bush recovery."

Thus:

"If government spending had increased by 33.5 percent, as it did during the Reagan recovery (1982-1990), then the Obama recovery would surely rank as one of the strongest on record. We would be enjoying true full employment and rapid GDP growth, as we did in the late 1980s."

But

"...instead of boosting spending, as is typical in a recession, Congress has abandoned fiscal policy, largely refusing to fund even normal (inflation- and population-adjusted) increases in government spending, as my colleague Josh Bivens has noted repeatedly (https://www.epi.org/blog/larry-summers-the-congressional-progressive-caucus-budget-and-the-abandonment-of-fiscal-policy/) (Josh will be releasing a paper exploring this same topic in depth in the coming weeks). Many state governments also made damaging spending cuts, and state government employment today is still below 2009 levels.
https://www.businessinsider.com/the-terrible-recovery-from-the-great-recession-is-due-to-budget-cuts-2016-8?r=US&IR=T

Another political assessment claims-
" We are enduring one of the slowest economic recoveries in recent history, and the pace can be entirely explained by the fiscal austerity, particularly with regard to spending, imposed by Republican policymakers, members of Congress primarily but also legislators and governors at the state level."
https://www.epi.org/publication/why-is-recovery-taking-so-long-and-who-is-to-blame/

A more technnical appraisal concludes-

An explanation for poor output growth needs to start with two key facts: Productivity grew substantially less than its historical growth rate, both in expansions and in general. and labor-force participation shrank an atypical and unexpected amount. Research on both topics is active today. We conclude in this paper that the large movements in both factors were in train prior to the recession, and cyclical effects contributed at most modestly to them.

https://www.princeton.edu/~mwatson/papers/FHSW.05.02.2017%20post-conf%20draft_Final.pdf

From these perspectives, and factoring in the Covid dimension, the Biden Presidency appears to have learned from the Obama experience that more is needed in terms of stimulus, indeed it is also closer to Reagan's reaction in the first term- and with control of Congress something it might achieve, though questions remain in the cases of Republican run States. The logic is clear as I suggested above with regard to the timing of the plan to show benefits as the US votes in 2022.

The danger is that borrowing continues to increase, which doesn't seem to bother you so much, but that demand and growth may not create the basis of long term growth owing to the changes to labour that Covid might force on companies.

If more people either work from home, or work from home say, 2-3 days a week, this will have a dramatic impact on transport, office rents, and the ancillary economy that supplies commuters and office workers with I assume an aggegate decline in economic activity in cities, and a corresponding decline in local and state and Federal tax revenues. I also wonder if a frenzy of consumer spending when the lockdowns end will fuel a sudden rise in inflation. Or Cities may survive by compensating for the decline in commuters by drawing in customers for shopping and entertainment -?

These thoughts also apply to the EU, and the UK where the double whammy of Covid + Brexit has resulted in a 40.7% fall in exports in one month-
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/mar/12/exports-to-eu-plunge-in-first-month-since-brexit-uk-economy

My last thought is that this is all about the State/Government as the lead player, rather than Markets. One wonders what a Libertarian, anti-Government, market-led strategy would do to cope with the fact that as services replace manufcture, so economies become more vunerable to recessions that begin elsewhere but have such a universal impact.

But I have been accused by people who know me as being a pessimist by nature -could the next four years be better than I think they will be?

[filghy2]

But I have been accused by people who know me as being a pessimist by nature -could the next four years be better than I think they will be?

Who knows? What we do know is that growth in most economies has been lower than normal over the past decade. There is no clear consensus on cause or cures, though lack of investment seem to be the factor that is most often mentioned. Ironically, the noted economist who first raised the possibility of 'secular stagnation' is the same one who raised concerns about the US stimulus.
https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2020/03/larry-summers-on-secular-stagnation.htm

[blackchubby38]

When I first heard about this plan and read up on it numerous times, I thought $600 was a really low number to begin with and I had some right to privacy concerns. The proposed amount has now been raised to $10,000, but I still don't see how this is a good idea.

Banks slam Democrats' narrower IRS bank-account monitoring plan: 'No fundamental difference'
Dems' plan to narrow IRS reporting threshold to $10K sparks same backlash


http://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/banks-democrats-slimmed-down-irs-bank-rule

[Stavros]

When I first heard about this plan and read up on it numerous times, I thought $600 was a really low number to begin with and I had some right to privacy concerns. The proposed amount has now been raised to $10,000, but I still don't see how this is a good idea.

Banks slam Democrats' narrower IRS bank-account monitoring plan: 'No fundamental difference'
Dems' plan to narrow IRS reporting threshold to $10K sparks same backlash


I have read the link twice and still don't really understad it, must be too American for me.

[Stavros]

Robert Reich does a good job defending the Biden Administation, but is anyone listening? It seems to me that while the evidence of the need to repair America's infrastructure has been evident for years, Congress seems to prefer nit-picking its way to not making a decision to do anything about it, and I don't know Biden can do anything to stop Congress from paralysing his ambitions- is it his fault? Is it the sectarian fight-do-the-death attitude of Trump's party of Sleaze, Sedition and Lies? Is it the divided Democrats torn between trimming the budget or claiming it's too small to deal with the problem?

From this side of the pond, it don't look good.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/26/is-bidens-entire-agenda-about-to-shrink-into-nothingness

[Nick Danger]

1351330
Why did I know I'd find Stavros in here blaming Biden on Trump?

[Stavros]

Anyone who links the Biden Presidency to 'economic ruin' is not reading the news, as these two reports on good news shows. There is just a possibility that if the Infrastructure Act delivers jobs and much needed repairs to bridges, dams, roads, reservoirs, public buildings, etc, that by 2024 the public will take the view Biden has not done such a bad job after all -and if by 2024 there has been a significant decliine in cases and deaths from Covid, that is another plus. A lot thus depends on the extent to which the public will be persuaded that so-called 'cultural' issues around the school/education curriculum and the anxiety over the reality of Race in American History, and Gender Identity, will swing it for the party of Sleaze, Sedition and Lies -assuming they have not fallen apart because of Cry-Baby Trump's sabotage of freedom....

Economy picking up-
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/11/05/economy/jobs-report-pfizer-biden/index.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-05/biden-says-u-s-economic-recovery-is-faster-than-expected

Dim-witted supportes of Cry-Baby Trump in denial -as usual-
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/nearly-half-republicans-don-t-184420925.html

[Nick Danger]

Anyone who links the Biden Presidency to 'economic ruin' is not reading the news, as these two reports on good news shows. There is just a possibility that if the Infrastructure Act delivers jobs and much needed repairs to bridges, dams, roads, reservoirs, public buildings, etc, that by 2024 the public will take the view Biden has not done such a bad job after all -and if by 2024 there has been a significant decliine in cases and deaths from Covid, that is another plus. A lot thus depends on the extent to which the public will be persuaded that so-called 'cultural' issues around the school/education curriculum and the anxiety over the reality of Race in American History, and Gender Identity, will swing it for the party of Sleaze, Sedition and Lies -assuming they have not fallen apart because of Cry-Baby Trump's sabotage of freedom....

Economy picking up-
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/11/05/economy/jobs-report-pfizer-biden/index.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-05/biden-says-u-s-economic-recovery-is-faster-than-expected

Dim-witted supportes of Cry-Baby Trump in denial -as usual-
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/nearly-half-republicans-don-t-184420925.html

Stavros, are you even peripherally aware that the American media is currently engaged in an ideological battle to see who can be the most partisan in their coverage? Any information you get from CNN or Bloomberg is garbage, with chewing gum and cigarette butts stuck to it. I mean, I could, at your request, list every single news service and which political party they're shilling for, if you actually don't know this. Let me know if this is something you need. The economy is shit now, if you lived in it, you'd know that.

I see you've also bought into the American racism narrative. There is no racism in America. None. If anything, there is the exact opposite of racism, there are white people who have created, and continue to create, programs to help black people; programs to ensure that black people don't starve or go homeless, and programs to ensure that blacks are given preferential treatment in both education and the workplace. There is literally nothing more we can do for black people. But without the "systemic racism" narrative, the Democratic Party ceases to exist. They certainly have nothing else to offer besides assurance that they will carry the program voters, i.e. the black vote, in every race, every time.

There are a lot of white people who "keep it real" about blacks, and this can be defined as racism by agitators. Some whites are scared of black people. Not because they're black, but because blacks commit a much higher proportion of crime than whites. It's 8 times more likely a random black person is a criminal than a random white person. Simple statistical fact, not racism. Being JUDGMENTAL about black people is no different than refusing to buy a Chevrolet because the last one you bought was a lemon. People are entitled to learn from experience; and to make judgments and decisions regarding their own self-interest and survival, and that of their family. Sometimes that decision is to walk down the other side of the street when they see a black man in a hoodie.

Critical Race Theory isn't evil, it's simply unnecessary, and that's what has parents angry - it's a waste of time. There are MUCH more important things to teach our children than the history of slavery and racism in the USA. Slavery and racism are global history, not just American history. What are you doing, Stavros, to address England's history of slavery? Hours a day in the classroom for years learning about it? Or nothing? Exactly, because there's nothing to be done. It's over. Our great-great-great grandfathers ended it. No one alive now even has a grandfather who was a slave owner, it's history. So teach it as part of history. But it's an absolutely wasteful thing to cram it down kids' throats as the centerpiece of their curricula, it's simply not important anymore. Do you want your kid to spend 12 years learning that he's a racist even though he isn't, or do you think that time could be better spent on more relevant material?

You're falling hook, line, and sinker for the media trap laid for you by the Democrats. They go out of business without racism. So they're lying to you, Stavros. In a VERY systemic way.

[Jericho]

Stavros, are you even peripherally aware that the American media is currently engaged in an ideological battle to see who can be the most partisan in their coverage? Any information you get from CNN or Bloomberg is garbage, with chewing gum and cigarette butts stuck to it. I mean, I could, at your request, list every single news service and which political party they're shilling for, if you actually don't know this. Let me know if this is something you need. The economy is shit now, if you lived in it, you'd know that.

I don't know about Stavros, but I'd be quite interested.
Also, just out of idle curiosity, what news services do you deem reliable?

[Nick Danger]

I don't know about Stavros, but I'd be quite interested.
Also, just out of idle curiosity, what news services do you deem reliable?

Gladly field that for you, Jericho.

The most obvious offenders are pretty well-known. Fox News is the national Republican circle jerk. The Democrats have several famous mouthpieces - The New York Times, Washington Post, MSNBC and CNN leaning the most egregiously left and doing the most talking.

Of the major networks, NBC is far left, ABC is middle left, CBS is closest to neutral.

Far left news feeds also come from Buzzfeed, Daily Beast, Bloomberg, Mother Jones, Slate, the New Yorker, Vox, the Guardian, the Economist, Politico, ProPublica, USA Today, the Atlantic, Huffpost, and NPR.

Far right news comes from Breitbart, the Blaze, the Federalist, the Washington Examiner, the Daily Mail, and the National Review.

The Associated Press leans left but very...carefully.

Any Fact Check site is a Democrat site. Remember, Republicans are evil, Democrats are stupid - stupid enough to "fact-check" their news source through an equally unreliable source.

Most major cities have two newspapers, one a conservative mouthpiece and one a liberal mouthpiece. In New York, for example, the New York Post is conservative and the New York Daily News is liberal. In LA it's the LA Times that's liberal, and ostensibly the Los Angeles Daily News is conservative, though since it's California, even the conservative news is basically centrist. In Chicago it's the Tribune on the right, the Sun-Times on the left. And so on and on until you get to cities that can't support two newspapers.

For a long time the two major weekly news magazines in the USA, Time and Newsweek, were left and right - Time being left and Newsweek being right. Time's still left, but Newsweek has moved left as well.

As for a reliable news source, Reuters is as close to center as I've seen. The Christian Science Monitor is surprisingly centrist. The Hill isn't bad, it tends to go slightly in the direction of the party currently in power. I get most of my news from the Wall Street Journal and the BBC, but if I'm very interested in a story I'll read everything on it. When you start parsing the news for yourself you get a true feel for the gaslighting most people go through daily.

[broncofan]

This is a guy who thinks a school full of children that were murdered were crisis actors and that the covid numbers are fabricated and who is unvaccinated during a pandemic when there are several approved vaccines. Even the clinical trial data is unreliable apparently so what source can we depend on?

I expected him to tell you his neighbor Bill publishes a newsletter using a stick in the ground.

My favorite quote "Any fact check site is a Democrat site." Indeed. Thanks for that dude. This is about as telling as Dave Rubin's recent comment that he doesn't know any anti-vaxxers who regret their decision not to vaccinate. And not many russian roulette players ever warn about the dangers of the game. One in six are speechless. The Christian Science Monitor is surprisingly centrist among those who think there's no conflict between theology and science.

[Nick Danger]

This is a guy who thinks a school full of children that were murdered were crisis actors and that the covid numbers are fabricated and who is unvaccinated during a pandemic when there are several approved vaccines. Even the clinical trial data is unreliable apparently so what source can we depend on?

I expected him to tell you his neighbor Bill publishes a newsletter using a stick in the ground.

My favorite quote "Any fact check site is a Democrat site." Indeed. Thanks for that dude. This is about as telling as Dave Rubin's recent comment that he doesn't know any anti-vaxxers who regret their decision not to vaccinate. And not many russian roulette players ever warn about the dangers of the game. One in six are speechless. The Christian Science Monitor is surprisingly centrist among those who think there's no conflict between theology and science.

You seem angry, Bronco. Pretty sure nothing I said there was particularly controversial and can easily be verified by other sources than my mouth. Did I take a dump on your favorite news source, Bronco? Are you a Young Turk?

Also, theology and science are easily reconciled. No matter how much we find out about what makes the universe tick, we'll never be able to prove it wasn't created. But the Christian Science Monitor is actually pretty famous for its quality, non-sensationalist news coverage, despite what you may think of them as a cult.
1353025

[blackchubby38]

Anyone who links the Biden Presidency to 'economic ruin' is not reading the news, as these two reports on good news shows. There is just a possibility that if the Infrastructure Act delivers jobs and much needed repairs to bridges, dams, roads, reservoirs, public buildings, etc, that by 2024 the public will take the view Biden has not done such a bad job after all -and if by 2024 there has been a significant decliine in cases and deaths from Covid, that is another plus. A lot thus depends on the extent to which the public will be persuaded that so-called 'cultural' issues around the school/education curriculum and the anxiety over the reality of Race in American History, and Gender Identity, will swing it for the party of Sleaze, Sedition and Lies -assuming they have not fallen apart because of Cry-Baby Trump's sabotage of freedom....

Economy picking up-
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/11/05/economy/jobs-report-pfizer-biden/index.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-05/biden-says-u-s-economic-recovery-is-faster-than-expected

Dim-witted supportes of Cry-Baby Trump in denial -as usual-
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/nearly-half-republicans-don-t-184420925.html

While the economy maybe picking up, there is still inflation and the supply chain issues that Biden has to deal with.

As for the Infrastructure Act, that should have been passed if not before the summer, when Congress returned from the summer break. But the moderate and progressive Democrats were too busy playing a game of mutually assured destruction with that act and the Social Spending one until it was too late to do anything before Election Day. Although I don't think it would have made a difference in Virginia's governor race.

As for Covid, until the experts decide what an acceptable and significant decline in deaths and hospitalizations are (not cases) Biden shouldn't be counting as that as plus for his reelection chances. That's if he decides to run again. But if he does, Covid can't be an issue in 2024. If it is, that means one of two things. The pandemic has gotten worse or leaders are still using it as an excuse to keep restrictions and mandates in place. Whatever the reason maybe, its not what I would call a winning an argument for Biden or whoever the Democratic nominee maybe.

Biden did wind up signing the Infrastructure Act and getting a much needed win. But with a possible Covid winter surge, rising gas prices, the aforementioned inflation and supply chain issues. Not to mention what the reaction to both the Rittenhouse and Arbery verdicts maybe I'm not sure if it was enough to consider his first year in office a success.

Then there was this from the past weekend:

Biden approval hits new low as economic discontent rises, Post-ABC poll finds

http:////www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/11/14/post-abc-poll-biden/

Exasperation and dysfunction: Inside Kamala Harris' frustrating start as vice president

http://www.cnn.com/2021/11/14/politics/kamala-harris-frustrating-start-vice-president/index.html

[Stavros]

Thank you, Blackchubby for your rational post. And right on cue, Robert Reich has offered a rational explanation for the rise in inflation, arguing that corporate power has been able to concentrate power and control over production and pricing, and that corporations are raising prices and taking inflation with them. He argues the anti-trust law that has been all but abandoned -there wasn't muchof it when he was in the Clinton administation either- needs to be looked at again, and for someone to bite that bullet.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/11/us-inflation-market-power-america-antitrust-robert-reich


The assumption, as you suggests must be that once the worst of the Covid Pandemic is over, there will be a 'return' to a more healthy economy, though because they are global, the dislocation in supply chains and a concern that 'Just-in-Time' production methods have become vulnerable, may yet be part of a re-structuring, so one wonders if 'normal' needs to be re-defined. But politics always intervenes in these issues, just as our supply chain problems in the UK have been made worse by Brexit, something the US is free from, at least until Senator Cruz leads Texas out of the Union.

The Conservative Party/Brexit supporting Telegraph here has decided Kamala Harris is the weak link in this Presidency, my assumption is that it is always diffiicult for a Vice-President to be assertive, and the issues she has been tasked with, for example, immigration and border control, are not media friendly. But I don't know if it is the case that she is no good at her job, doesn't manage her staff welll, etc, so in the absence of more reliable reportage I don't know what to make of her.

The main worry for the Biden administration, other than the antics of Democrats in Congress, must be the posibility that the economy, 'stupid', doesn't become the critical issue on which voters make their decisions, but 'cultural' issues do, such as the hysterical attacks on Critical Race Theory in partcular, and the frankly shocking denial of Race as a driver of human relations in American society. It seems to me that any claim his killers made, that they thought Ahmaud Arbery was running from the scene of a robbery, is plain daft unless he stashed his loot in his underpants. And what proportion of the attacks on Harris are based on her actual performance, and what proportion shaped by the colour of her skin, and what Tucker might refer to as 'her Legacy'?

And, while it might be an issue over which 'Republican' voters get hyped up, rather than Democrats, the re-districting process taking place in many States has been designed to reduce the impact Democrat voters have on the result -various reports in Liberal Humanist newspapers like The Guardian (which offered an analysis of boundary changes in North Carolina and Texas) showed that wherever there are large Democrat majorities, the boundaries change to move a chunk of those voters into nearby, mostly rural districts. I think the word to use might be 'rigged', or more likely the people involved could have had a pep talk from Bannon Deux Chemises whose perambulations through the history of European Fascism and Nationalism will have led him to the quote attributed to Stalin, which seems to form the basis of the electoral strategy of Cry-Baby Trump's party of Sleaze, Sedition and Lies: It's not the Votes that Count, but who Counts the Votes.

You could end up with a scenario in which the majority of Americans vote Democrat, and get a Trumpy admin. How ironic that Cruz argued that Texas seceding would be justified if the Americans kept voting Democats into office!

"Now, listen, if the Democrats end the filibuster, if they fundamentally destroy the country, if they pack the Supreme Court, if they make D.C. a state, if they federalize elections and massively expand voter fraud, there may come a point where it’s hopeless,” Cruz continued. “We’re not there yet. And if it comes [to] a point where it’s hopeless, then I think we take NASA, take the military, take the oil.”
https://newrepublic.com/article/164337/ted-cruz-secession-texas-texit


Robert Reich's article is here-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/11/us-inflation-market-power-america-antitrust-robert-reich

The article on re-districting is here-
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2021/nov/12/gerrymander-redistricting-map-republicans-democrats-visual

[Nick Danger]

Thank you, Blackchubby for your rational post. And right on cue, Robert Reich has offered a rational explanation for the rise in inflation, arguing that corporate power has been able to concentrate power and control over production and pricing, and that corporations are raising prices and taking inflation with them. He argues the anti-trust law that has been all but abandoned -there wasn't muchof it when he was in the Clinton administation either- needs to be looked at again, and for someone to bite that bullet.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/11/us-inflation-market-power-america-antitrust-robert-reich


The assumption, as you suggests must be that once the worst of the Covid Pandemic is over, there will be a 'return' to a more healthy economy, though because they are global, the dislocation in supply chains and a concern that 'Just-in-Time' production methods have become vulnerable, may yet be part of a re-structuring, so one wonders if 'normal' needs to be re-defined. But politics always intervenes in these issues, just as our supply chain problems in the UK have been made worse by Brexit, something the US is free from, at least until Senator Cruz leads Texas out of the Union.

The Conservative Party/Brexit supporting Telegraph here has decided Kamala Harris is the weak link in this Presidency, my assumption is that it is always diffiicult for a Vice-President to be assertive, and the issues she has been tasked with, for example, immigration and border control, are not media friendly. But I don't know if it is the case that she is no good at her job, doesn't manage her staff welll, etc, so in the absence of more reliable reportage I don't know what to make of her.

The main worry for the Biden administration, other than the antics of Democrats in Congress, must be the posibility that the economy, 'stupid', doesn't become the critical issue on which voters make their decisions, but 'cultural' issues do, such as the hysterical attacks on Critical Race Theory in partcular, and the frankly shocking denial of Race as a driver of human relations in American society. It seems to me that any claim his killers made, that they thought Ahmaud Arbery was running from the scene of a robbery, is plain daft unless he stashed his loot in his underpants. And what proportion of the attacks on Harris are based on her actual performance, and what proportion shaped by the colour of her skin, and what Tucker might refer to as 'her Legacy'?

And, while it might be an issue over which 'Republican' voters get hyped up, rather than Democrats, the re-districting process taking place in many States has been designed to reduce the impact Democrat voters have on the result -various reports in Liberal Humanist newspapers like The Guardian (which offered an analysis of boundary changes in North Carolina and Texas) showed that wherever there are large Democrat majorities, the boundaries change to move a chunk of those voters into nearby, mostly rural districts. I think the word to use might be 'rigged', or more likely the people involved could have had a pep talk from Bannon Deux Chemises whose perambulations through the history of European Fascism and Nationalism will have led him to the quote attributed to Stalin, which seems to form the basis of the electoral strategy of Cry-Baby Trump's party of Sleaze, Sedition and Lies: It's not the Votes that Count, but who Counts the Votes.

You could end up with a scenario in which the majority of Americans vote Democrat, and get a Trumpy admin. How ironic that Cruz argued that Texas seceding would be justified if the Americans kept voting Democats into office!

"Now, listen, if the Democrats end the filibuster, if they fundamentally destroy the country, if they pack the Supreme Court, if they make D.C. a state, if they federalize elections and massively expand voter fraud, there may come a point where it’s hopeless,” Cruz continued. “We’re not there yet. And if it comes [to] a point where it’s hopeless, then I think we take NASA, take the military, take the oil.”
https://newrepublic.com/article/164337/ted-cruz-secession-texas-texit


Robert Reich's article is here-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/11/us-inflation-market-power-america-antitrust-robert-reich

The article on re-districting is here-
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2021/nov/12/gerrymander-redistricting-map-republicans-democrats-visual

Really Stavros? You don't know what political "redistricting" is called? It's not called "rigged," it's called gerrymandering, and both parties do it to their own advantage at every available opportunity.

See that's the problem with the liberal echo chamber you live in. You only get the news in which the liberals are the heroes and the conservatives are the evil overlords. But gerrymandering, for which the Democrats are at least AS notorious as the Republicans, actually works like this - a political party gains control of a state, then immediately begins re-calculating districts based on complex formulae that vary state-by-state. The only federal requirement is that there be no more than 10% population difference between the most-populated and least-populated district. The party in power does whatever is possible to increase its chances in the next election while it's in power, as easily predicted by the true underlying principle of human behavior - realpolitik. Under-the-table money and back-room deals are undoubtedly involved in the gerrymandering process, but it's standard operating procedure in the USA. Open corruption if you will, and there's not anything anyone can (will) do about it.

[filghy2]

Pretty sure nothing I said there was particularly controversial and can easily be verified by other sources than my mouth.

Okay, what are those sources?

[filghy2]

And right on cue, Robert Reich has offered a rational explanation for the rise in inflation, arguing that corporate power has been able to concentrate power and control over production and pricing, and that corporations are raising prices and taking inflation with them.

I'm not sure I find that argument convincing. Until this recent upsurge we had very little inflation for a long time, and I don't think the market power of corporations was any less during that period. It would probably be better to have less market concentration, but if there are real supply constraints (and it seems to be a general phenomenon around the world at the moment) then competition couldn't magically offset that.

[Jericho]

Gladly field that for you, Jericho.


Thanks for that.

[Stavros]

I'm not sure I find that argument convincing. Until this recent upsurge we had very little inflation for a long time, and I don't think the market power of corporations was any less during that period. It would probably be better to have less market concentration, but if there are real supply constraints (and it seems to be a general phenomenon around the world at the moment) then competition couldn't magically offset that.

But would you agree that the difference has been the impact of the Pandemic? It has changed the parameters owing to the crisis in supply chains, the loss of so many jobs, the compensation to workers sacked or laid off, paid by the Federal Govt, and with the relaxation of restictions, a surge of demand for products and services so that there are shortages of labour pushing up some wages, and shortages of some goods, pushing up prics -? Hence my argument that the assumption must be that a 'return to normal' will stabilize the economy and reduce inflation. But does that have the same meaning it would have had five years ago? In addition, I wonder if Trump's tax cuts have also fed into the situation. It does seem that the Federal Govt hopes this is a temporary rise in inflation, and that as the economy improves then it will decline -'happy days are here again'?

I think it is the reason the New Wave Fascists are promoting a different agenda which they have created, in which their 'beloved Nation' is being undermined, dare one say, 'Stolen' by Democrats whom they ridicule as 'far left' which is a dog whistle for the ignorant who can't tell left from right, and have never known what the centre is. But now that pragmatic decision making is for fools, and compromise regarded as failure, I see little hope that US politics will 'return to normal' when one wonders now when it ever was, as the rigged electoral districting process shows. Or maybe that is what normal means, crooks and racists in charge, reaping the benefits of their contempt for the people.

[Nick Danger]

Okay, what are those sources?

Are you contending that the media isn't politically biased, Flighty, or are you just hoping I'll waste 3 minutes of my life typing "painfully obvious media bias" into a search engine and copy-pasting the results for you?

[Nick Danger]

...crooks and racists in charge...

I challenge you to give me one solid example of racism in the USA, Stavros. You talk about it in every post, you must be getting a lot of information that I'm not getting.

Before you start, no, the George Floyd homicide doesn't count as racist. Floyd was a criminal, Derek Chauvin was a cop. Could have been a white man on the receiving end of Chauvin's police brutality that day, we'll never know if it was a racist incident, or simple cop-on-robber brutality.

So go ahead, Stavros, enlighten me. Tell me about what we Americans are doing that's racist. Is it our welfare system that keeps poor blacks fed and housed whether they choose to join the work force or not? Is it our Affirmative Action programs that reward universities and corporations financially for educating and hiring blacks, and penalizes them financially for failing to do so? Is it our anti-discrimination laws that charge anyone who dares to treat a black person any differently than they would a white person with a hate crime? What is it that we're doing that offends your finer sensibilities about racism, Stavros? I long to hear it.

[filghy2]

Far left news feeds also come from Buzzfeed, Daily Beast, Bloomberg, Mother Jones, Slate, the New Yorker, Vox, the Guardian, the Economist, Politico, ProPublica, USA Today, the Atlantic, Huffpost, and NPR.


Pretty sure nothing I said there was particularly controversial and can easily be verified by other sources than my mouth.


Are you contending that the media isn't politically biased, Flighty, or are you just hoping I'll waste 3 minutes of my life typing "painfully obvious media bias" into a search engine and copy-pasting the results for you?

I'm asking for the "easily verifiable" sources that prove that these sites are "far left". Obviously there are none, and this is just your usual bluster and exaggeration.

The 3rd season of the Nick Danger show is already looking like a rehash of seasons 1 and 2.

[filghy2]

But would you agree that the difference has been the impact of the Pandemic?

Most likely, though we may also be seeing a waning of the China effect which has been pushing prices down over a long period. As this article suggests, we've developed a supply system that prioritises cost-minimisation but at the expense of resilience when something abnormal happens. I suspect the system will adjust eventually and some of this will be temporary, but who knows how long that will take.
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/us-supply-chain-coordination-problem-by-james-k-galbraith-2021-11

[Nick Danger]

I'm asking for the "easily verifiable" sources that prove that these sites are "far left". Obviously there are none, and this is just your usual bluster and exaggeration.

The 3rd season of the Nick Danger show is already looking like a rehash of seasons 1 and 2.

Did you not get the email Flighty? I've got you on my superfan mailing list. Look for it, "More Of The Same But Now It's Spanky Time" is the subject line, talks all about Season 3.

I find it a little hard to swallow that you are seriously going to pose a counterargument to the media being biased. But here's a graphic for you, probably simple enough for you to understand. I found it by searching "media bias graphic." It doesn't disagree much at all with my evaluation. You might try a similar search sometime, Flighty. It's just...possible...that your sources are...compromised.:kiss:

1354050

[Stavros]

Most likely, though we may also be seeing a waning of the China effect which has been pushing prices down over a long period. As this article suggests, we've developed a supply system that prioritises cost-minimisation but at the expense of resilience when something abnormal happens. I suspect the system will adjust eventually and some of this will be temporary, but who knows how long that will take.
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/us-supply-chain-coordination-problem-by-james-k-galbraith-2021-11

Thanks for the link to an interesting view on global supply chains. But your note about cost-minimisation suggests that the repatriation of jobs from Asia, for example, to the US would solve one element of the supply chain conundrum by relieving domestic demand from a dependence on foreign production and distribution. Similar arguments have been made in the UK in relation both to Brexit and the supply chain problems exposed by the Pandemic.

But it begs the question -can any repatriation of job from Asia to domestic inudstry in the US and the UK to take these two cases, succeed if the capital costs and wages so reduce the rate of return on capital as to not make it worthwhile -that the moneymen might decide to sit out the Pandemic in the hope that a 'return to normal' re-establishes the supply chains that choked, but with lessons learned? It is an even more potent issue here than in the US because of the 'Levelling Up' 'policy' of the current Government which claims that wages need to rise in order for the Levelling Up process to work. Whether or not this means an increase in the standard of living is the unanswered question, but not a surprising omission as much of what this government does is related to Headlines about stuff, rather than the stuff itself. Too much detail for Boris to worry about.

A revival of interest in Ricardo has thus led people to ponder his argument that attempts to raise the income of workers is doomed because wages will never rise far enough to liberate them from actual or relative subsistence, or poverty. It may be true that managers are having to increase wages at the moment to hire people -around the town where I live almost every retail establishment has signs in the window that say 'Staff Wanted' -I think it is the same in the US. So how this evolves over the next two to three years will lead us to some sort of conclusion.

As a naturally gloomy person, I think Ricardo probably got it right, because I wonder if, after all that has happened since Ricardo's effective war on unproductive landlords, from the various depressions through the 2008 crash, anything has fundamentally changed. The Biden Administration knows where it's money is coming from, hence the auction of drilling licences the other day, and it needs that money to pay for its interventionary policies -but doesn't this also mean that, as with Labour in the UK, there is in the US a bleak denial that Taxation must rise, across the board, and a tax in Assets as well as, if not more important than income- after all, Trump, de Vos, the Koch brother, Buffet, all sit on billions on assets most of which they could give back to the American people and not notice a difference in their life-style.

Is it going to happen? Probably not, hence the gloom...

[filghy2]

Did you not get the email Flighty? I've got you on my superfan mailing list. Look for it, "More Of The Same But Now It's Spanky Time" is the subject line, talks all about Season 3.

I find it a little hard to swallow that you are seriously going to pose a counterargument to the media being biased. But here's a graphic for you, probably simple enough for you to understand. I found it by searching "media bias graphic." It doesn't disagree much at all with my evaluation. You might try a similar search sometime, Flighty. It's just...possible...that your sources are...compromised.:kiss:

1354050

I've seen that site before and it seems reasonable, but your characterisation is up to your usual standards of accuracy. Of the 14 sources you nominated as ''far left", 3 are rated as "centre" and 5 as "leaning left". Only 6 are rated as clearly "left', which is not necessarily the same as "far left".

[filghy2]

Before you start, no, the George Floyd homicide doesn't count as racist. Floyd was a criminal, Derek Chauvin was a cop. Could have been a white man on the receiving end of Chauvin's police brutality that day, we'll never know if it was a racist incident, or simple cop-on-robber brutality.

But you told us before that Derek Chauvin did nothing wrong, he was following official procedures, and it was really George Floyd's fault that he died. You really need to keep better track of your various rationalisations.
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?110688-Political-violence-how-much-of-a-problem-and-who-s-responsible

[Nick Danger]

But you told us before that Derek Chauvin did nothing wrong, he was following official procedures, and it was really George Floyd's fault that he died. You really need to keep better track of your various rationalisations.
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?110688-Political-violence-how-much-of-a-problem-and-who-s-responsible

I respect the court system, Flighty. When I expressed that opinion it was before Derek Chauvin was found guilty of murder by a jury of his peers. So now it's a homicide and police brutality, and Chauvin was NOT acting within policy. Doesn't mean it's racism.

[Nick Danger]

I've seen that site before and it seems reasonable, but your characterisation is up to your usual standards of accuracy. Of the 14 sources you nominated as ''far left", 3 are rated as "centre" and 5 as "leaning left". Only 6 are rated as clearly "left', which is not necessarily the same as "far left".

Eh, I think my opinion is more valid than that graphic. That graphic is constituted from the opinions of online news consumers in 2019. A lot of shit has gone down since 2019. And as you so eloquently put it in another thread just a few short hours ago, "We know how this works. The more extreme the party you support becomes, the more you have to double down to try to convince yourself that the problems are really on the other side." No surprise that some of these outlets have moved even further to the left now that the left controls the nation's destiny.

[filghy2]

Or you can actually check the latest version and see what's changed since 2019. FFS!
https://www.allsides.com/blog/new-allsides-media-bias-chart-version-42
1354392

[Nick Danger]

Or you can actually check the latest version and see what's changed since 2019. FFS!
https://www.allsides.com/blog/new-allsides-media-bias-chart-version-42
1354392

I don't base my opinions on other people's opinions, Flighty, or at least I don't to the extent that's possible. You're the one who requested a cheat sheet. I don't disagree much with what your up-to-date graphic says there. NPR, though, is definitely far left - they're just much, much better at it than most of these other hacks. And seeing Newsweek in the center caused me to do a re-evaluation, and it looks like Newsweek is definitely moving in a rightward direction now. Probably saw a vacuum to fill for conservative weeklies and is moving to fill it. Doesn't matter, they're not big players anymore. The only ones who really matter now are the ones who are shoving disinfo down everyone's throats 24/7 - Fox News, New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, Washington Post - these are the primary sources dividing the country right now, the rest are just jockeying for a piece of the clickbait pie.

[Stavros]

But you told us before that Derek Chauvin did nothing wrong, he was following official procedures, and it was really George Floyd's fault that he died.


One wonders if Chauvin was following department orders - 'If someone in custody is in need of medical attention, do not give it, call for it, or hope for it'.

[filghy2]

I don't base my opinions on other people's opinions, Flighty, or at least I don't to the extent that's possible.

You've never heard of the wisdom of crowds? The average opinion of a large group of people is generally likely to be more accurate than the view of one individual.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Cro wds

[filghy2]

I'm not going to keep defending my ideas to you, Flighty, it's hilarious that you act as if I'm the one who has some explaining to do. How about if YOU explain why we voted in a Democratic President, a Democratic House, a Democratic Senate, and the country is almost immediately at its most-totally-fucked level of the last 50 years. God-mode: Don't blame the previous administration.

Really. Can you give us a list of measures which suddenly deterioriated to their worst levels in 50 years?

According to the latest data annual GDP growth was 4.9% and the unemployment rate was 3.9%, so that can't be it.
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/indicators

Murders have risen, but that started in 2020 and they are still well below levels of 30 years ago, so that can't be it.

Covid deaths are still lower than under Trump, and anyway you don't care about them, so that can't be it.

The only measure that might qualify seems to be the inflation rate, but that was higher in the 1980s.

The truly fucked-up thing is that two-thirds of Republicans refuse to accept the election result and want to purge anyone who disagrees, but that is something we can blame the ex-President for.

Are you going to put up, or just dodge and deflect in your usual chicken-shit way? Here's the rule: no question you put will be answered unless you provide the evidence for your assertion.

[I moved this from the covid thread because it's obviously off-topic.]

[Stavros]

A more general view must first accept that most of what has happened in Biden's first year is about next year and the years ahead. This is because every President inherits the policy commitments and the economic decisions of his predecessor, so much of the problem, with inflation, for example, is Trump's legacy, as is also true of his tax policy.

What stands out for me is the attempt Biden is making to be bold in his agenda for economic success via the Infrastructure Bill which intends to create jobs through the repair and regeneration of the USA's physical infrastructure. Most Americans will agree this is long overdue, yet such is the partisan war in Congress the Republicans seem determined to cripple it before it even gets a chance to get started. Who benefits from that?

Most worrying of all is the apparent problems Biden has in producing a comprehensive agreement on Voting, as this is emerging as one of the defining issues of Trump's legacy and is so saturated in America's problem of Race it is incredible that anyone can deny the existence of Institutional Racism in the USA.

For the key purpose behind the attempts in various States to 'reform' their voting system is simple: STOP BLACK PEOPLE VOTING. It is a matter of fact that the 1890 Act in Mississippi that first denied the vote to anyone convicted and imprisoned of a crime has been amended, but never repealed, and that in its origins, it was explicit in its attempt to STOP BLACK PEOPLE VOTING.

"The Mississippi (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/mississippi) officials met in the heat of summer with a singular goal in mind: stopping Black people from voting.
“We came here to exclude the Negro,” said the convention’s president. “Nothing short of this will answer.” " (My emphasis in Bold)
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/08/us-1890-law-black-americans-voting

In addition, the Trump-Inspired campaign against Democracy draws into its orbit other Minorities, for the simple reason that the Republican Party has given up trying to appeal to them, even though most immigrants are natural conservatives who don't want the benefit of Federal or State aid to get by, thus begging the question: Is the Republican Party a Conservative Party?

That the US in 2022 has so many States determined to take away the right to vote, while the Biden Presidency appears to be struggling to protect, even to extend it, underlines the Legitimacy Crisis that is threatening to break the Union. That prominent supporters of Trump simply refuse to appear before the House Committee investigating the attack on the US on Jan 6 2021 emphasis the cleavage that has opened up, with elected officials expressing nothing more than contempt for the political system they have sworn oaths to protect and defend.

That said, while Biden's domestic agenda is tame by my standards, I think it has long term benefits for the US, but only if it gets through, and the money is invested with the intention of making that Infrastructure plan actually do something, or it will be a permanent What If? And the bridges fall down.

As for the Debt, Covid, and foreign policy issues, it is too early to tell.

What I don't know as I don't live there, is what ending the Filibuster means -is it just a voting procedure that benefits the largest party in Congress, or does it have a deeper meaning?

[Nick Danger]

Really. Can you give us a list of measures which suddenly deterioriated to their worst levels in 50 years?

According to the latest data annual GDP growth was 4.9% and the unemployment rate was 3.9%, so that can't be it.
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/indicators

Murders have risen, but that started in 2020 and they are still well below levels of 30 years ago, so that can't be it.

Covid deaths are still lower than under Trump, and anyway you don't care about them, so that can't be it.

The only measure that might qualify seems to be the inflation rate, but that was higher in the 1980s.

The truly fucked-up thing is that two-thirds of Republicans refuse to accept the election result and want to purge anyone who disagrees, but that is something we can blame the ex-President for.

Are you going to put up, or just dodge and deflect in your usual chicken-shit way? Here's the rule: no question you put will be answered unless you provide the evidence for your assertion.

[I moved this from the covid thread because it's obviously off-topic.]

Your casual approach to inflation and murder is encouraging, Flighty. I've been thinking those were very serious issues but I guess it's no big deal, just depends on whether you speak about it in a laissez faire tone or put an exclamation point at the end of the sentence I suppose. Biden and Harris have both said that the problems aren't the problems themselves, but Americans' attitude toward the problems - i.e., how dare businesses keep their profit margins the same when they should be biting the bullet with their customers! And the murder rates are the same in places where murder has never been a problem!

We've got major cities that now serve as haven cities for property criminals. We've got supply chain issues that are so widespread, I can't buy strawberries at a store that's less than 10 miles from the self-proclaimed Strawberry Capitol of the World. Hell, I can't even get gravy on my biscuits anymore! IN TENNESSEE! The store I go to for coffee in the morning was closed yesterday because of staffing problems. Most of the restaurants in this town are closed permanently. But as Vice-President Harris so insightfully pointed out, the crux of the supply chain issue is really that spoiled people are angry about delays in their treadmill deliveries.

We have a President spoiling for war with Russia to bring his approval rating up to nominal - a President, BTW, whose new agenda, now that his old agenda has been laughed out of Congress, is to give the vote to mannequins. That's right, Flighty, he wants to let mannequins vote. Just because they aren't citizens, and aren't human, and aren't alive doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to vote! That's hyperbole BTW, Flighty, I wouldn't want you to spend too much of your time debunking that statement. It's close enough to the truth to be unfunny though. This is the big new important thing now - voting rights issues. We NEED voting from our illegal immigrants, who are now being illegally funneled across the border by the thousands to haven cities all around the country by the current administration. What's the point of even doing that if they can't vote? Wonder how they'll vote? Are they program voters you think?

I could go on, Flighty but I'm not going to. I didn't ask you any fucking questions I need an answer to anyway. Talk, don't talk, it's all the same nonsense.

Your people are in power, Flighty. The bright new day they promised didn't arrive with them. You, and they, have no defense. There are ZERO social programs even on Biden's agenda. Not that he could do shit now, anyway, he's conclusively demonstrated to the American public that he only cares about revenge on people who have "wronged" him, getting federal money to people who have funded him, and now trying to federally game the electoral system by acting (very poorly BTW) as if we are experiencing some kind of voting problem. He's the worst President in U.S. history and I really don't give a fuck what you have to say about him, or the problems of the USA, or anything. You're a dupe, Flighty, a self-propelled liberal mouthpiece. Every bit of information you have is from the liberal media, I seriously doubt you've ever even been to the USA.

[tslvr]

Why don't we just look at the Biden presidency for what it is at this point, an abject failure. That's not a left or right perspective, that's a correct perspective. He said he'd be a unifier, he hasn't. He said he would wipe out covid, he hasn't( he should have said he would learn how to treat covid, viruses don't go away if they can survive on an animal host.) Inflation is very real, prices are up everywhere. Borders are not protected, illegals coming by the thousands. Our nation has always been at it's best with a slightly left of center social agenda and leaning center right on the economic front. Dark money from unelected oligarchs and an out of control beauracracy is out of control both left and right.

[Nick Danger]

A more general view must first accept that most of what has happened in Biden's first year is about next year and the years ahead. This is because every President inherits the policy commitments and the economic decisions of his predecessor, so much of the problem, with inflation, for example, is Trump's legacy, as is also true of his tax policy.

Stavros, I'm aware that Presidents of the USA inherit messes from their predecessors, though I recall in this very forum that this is a taboo argument when it's made in favor of a Republican. Still, no President inherited a bigger mess than Barack Obama and look what he was able to accomplish. He came in right behind the biggest market crash in history and not only revitalized the economy, he simultaneously advanced his social agenda to an unprecedented degree as well. So let's not act as if it can't be done. It simply can't be done by Joe Biden and his congressional majority, because he's a dunce.


What stands out for me is the attempt Biden is making to be bold in his agenda for economic success via the Infrastructure Bill which intends to create jobs through the repair and regeneration of the USA's physical infrastructure. Most Americans will agree this is long overdue, yet such is the partisan war in Congress the Republicans seem determined to cripple it before it even gets a chance to get started. Who benefits from that?

I know you took the holidays off from posting and then the trip to Germany, Stavros, but this reads like it was written in October. The Infrastructure Bill passed, no one is trying to cripple it, no one can cripple it, it's the law of the land now. It's the Build Back Better Bill that got smashed when Biden couldn't marshal his razor-thin congressional majority into a cohesive voting bloc. A reflection, BTW, of his razor-thin mandate to bridge partisan gaps and give Americans a little peace from Trump's constant bluster; as opposed to doubling down on partisanship and trying to bridge the gap between capitalism and socialism. Thank God there are still moderate liberals who saw the BBB for what it was - a giant leap in the wrong direction.


Most worrying of all is the apparent problems Biden has in producing a comprehensive agreement on Voting, as this is emerging as one of the defining issues of Trump's legacy and is so saturated in America's problem of Race it is incredible that anyone can deny the existence of Institutional Racism in the USA.

For the key purpose behind the attempts in various States to 'reform' their voting system is simple: STOP BLACK PEOPLE VOTING. It is a matter of fact that the 1890 Act in Mississippi that first denied the vote to anyone convicted and imprisoned of a crime has been amended, but never repealed, and that in its origins, it was explicit in its attempt to STOP BLACK PEOPLE VOTING.

"The Mississippi (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/mississippi) officials met in the heat of summer with a singular goal in mind: stopping Black people from voting.
“We came here to exclude the Negro,” said the convention’s president. “Nothing short of this will answer.” " (My emphasis in Bold)
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/08/us-1890-law-black-americans-voting

In addition, the Trump-Inspired campaign against Democracy draws into its orbit other Minorities, for the simple reason that the Republican Party has given up trying to appeal to them, even though most immigrants are natural conservatives who don't want the benefit of Federal or State aid to get by, thus begging the question: Is the Republican Party a Conservative Party?

That the US in 2022 has so many States determined to take away the right to vote, while the Biden Presidency appears to be struggling to protect, even to extend it, underlines the Legitimacy Crisis that is threatening to break the Union. That prominent supporters of Trump simply refuse to appear before the House Committee investigating the attack on the US on Jan 6 2021 emphasis the cleavage that has opened up, with elected officials expressing nothing more than contempt for the political system they have sworn oaths to protect and defend.

That said, while Biden's domestic agenda is tame by my standards, I think it has long term benefits for the US, but only if it gets through, and the money is invested with the intention of making that Infrastructure plan actually do something, or it will be a permanent What If? And the bridges fall down.

As for the Debt, Covid, and foreign policy issues, it is too early to tell.

What I don't know as I don't live there, is what ending the Filibuster means -is it just a voting procedure that benefits the largest party in Congress, or does it have a deeper meaning?

You're right, Stavros, that in 1890 people were trying to stop blacks from voting. I'm not sure where you're going with that, that was less than 25 years after the abolition of slavery. No one is stopping blacks from voting now. If you're black and you want to vote NOW, the Democratic National Committee will show up at your house in a limousine and serve you caviar and champagne on the way to the polling booth. That's an exaggeration but it's not so far from the truth, Democrats do shuttle blacks to voting sites - mostly unnecessary since voting sites are set up in their own neighborhoods. Which is absolutely fine with everyone. Except the KKK I suppose. But I don't know any of those guys and I've spent a good part of my life in the American South. I don't think America is like you visualize it, Stavros.

There is no voting crisis here. Everyone knows they get to vote. Show me one person in the USA who says they are having problems voting and I'll show you a quadriplegic swamp dweller. It's a totally fabricated issue by the Democrats, their main agenda is getting the illegal immigrant vote passed, which makes about as much sense as a box of rocks. It's an attempt at an electoral crime. It won't succeed. If Krysten Sinema doesn't stop it, Joe Manchin will.

The filibuster thing is simply an effort by the Democrats to bypass legislative procedure. Normally they'd need a 60-40 majority to invoke what's called the Cloture Rule, which ends a filibuster - a long rambling speech which effectively delays a vote until the session is over so it cant be voted on. But by using what is commonly known as "The Nuclear Option," they can bypass a filibuster with a simply majority and force a vote. It's been done twice, once by the Democrats and once by the Republicans. It's not going to happen now, both Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema have already said they won't vote for it. Nonetheless the Democrats are acting as if this isn't a problem, then once it gets shot down they'll act all shocked and saddened that Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema actually meant what they said. It's America's version of political theater at this point. Joe Biden is a lame duck. Politicians follow power. Joe Biden has been emasculated. Democrats are starting to run away from him, he's poison now. Because he's a big fat liar who betrayed his mandate.

[thombergeron]

Democrats do shuttle blacks to voting sites - mostly unnecessary since voting sites are set up in their own neighborhoods.

Imagine having no idea whatsoever what's happening with voting rights in the United States in 2022 but still feeling compelled to shoot your mouth off about it in public.

Hey genius, were there more or less places to vote in 2020 as opposed to, say, 2012?

[filghy2]

Are you going to put up, or just dodge and deflect in your usual chicken-shit way? Here's the rule: no question you put will be answered unless you provide the evidence for your assertion.


Your casual approach to inflation and murder is encouraging, Flighty. I've been thinking those were very serious issues but I guess it's no big deal, just depends on whether you speak about it in a laissez faire tone or put an exclamation point at the end of the sentence I suppose. Biden and Harris have both said that the problems aren't the problems themselves, but Americans' attitude toward the problems - i.e., how dare businesses keep their profit margins the same when they should be biting the bullet with their customers! And the murder rates are the same in places where murder has never been a problem!

We've got major cities that now serve as haven cities for property criminals. We've got supply chain issues that are so widespread, I can't buy strawberries at a store that's less than 10 miles from the self-proclaimed Strawberry Capitol of the World. Hell, I can't even get gravy on my biscuits anymore! IN TENNESSEE! The store I go to for coffee in the morning was closed yesterday because of staffing problems. Most of the restaurants in this town are closed permanently. But as Vice-President Harris so insightfully pointed out, the crux of the supply chain issue is really that spoiled people are angry about delays in their treadmill deliveries.

We have a President spoiling for war with Russia to bring his approval rating up to nominal - a President, BTW, whose new agenda, now that his old agenda has been laughed out of Congress, is to give the vote to mannequins. That's right, Flighty, he wants to let mannequins vote. Just because they aren't citizens, and aren't human, and aren't alive doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to vote! That's hyperbole BTW, Flighty, I wouldn't want you to spend too much of your time debunking that statement. It's close enough to the truth to be unfunny though. This is the big new important thing now - voting rights issues. We NEED voting from our illegal immigrants, who are now being illegally funneled across the border by the thousands to haven cities all around the country by the current administration. What's the point of even doing that if they can't vote? Wonder how they'll vote? Are they program voters you think?

I could go on, Flighty but I'm not going to. I didn't ask you any fucking questions I need an answer to anyway. Talk, don't talk, it's all the same nonsense.

Your people are in power, Flighty. The bright new day they promised didn't arrive with them. You, and they, have no defense. There are ZERO social programs even on Biden's agenda. Not that he could do shit now, anyway, he's conclusively demonstrated to the American public that he only cares about revenge on people who have "wronged" him, getting federal money to people who have funded him, and now trying to federally game the electoral system by acting (very poorly BTW) as if we are experiencing some kind of voting problem. He's the worst President in U.S. history and I really don't give a fuck what you have to say about him, or the problems of the USA, or anything. You're a dupe, Flighty, a self-propelled liberal mouthpiece. Every bit of information you have is from the liberal media, I seriously doubt you've ever even been to the USA.

I don't see a single piece of evidence in that long-winded diatribe. I guess it's time.
1360272

[filghy2]

Imagine having no idea whatsoever what's happening with voting rights in the United States in 2022 but still feeling compelled to shoot your mouth off about it in public.

You've obviously never came across this guy before. Knowing nothing but still feeling compelled to shoot his mouth off is his raison d'etre.

[filghy2]

A more general view must first accept that most of what has happened in Biden's first year is about next year and the years ahead. This is because every President inherits the policy commitments and the economic decisions of his predecessor, so much of the problem, with inflation, for example, is Trump's legacy, as is also true of his tax policy.

To be fair, I don't think higher inflation can be blamed on Trump. Supply chain constraints are a world-wide problem at present, not a US problem caused by either Trump or Biden.

The only thing Biden could be blamed for is that the stimulus package might have been too large, contributing to excess demand as some people warned. However, that is a problem caused by the economy recovering too strongly, not a problem caused by a weak economy.

[filghy2]

He said he would wipe out covid, he hasn't( he should have said he would learn how to treat covid, viruses don't go away if they can survive on an animal host.)

That is not true. Lots of viruses have gone away; eg Spanish flu, SARS, MERS. That will happen if the reproduction rate falls below 1. The problem with Covid is that the virus has kept mutating because it has been allowed to spread freely, especially in developing countries where few vaccines have been available. As result, we've ended up with variants that are more contagious and more vaccine-resistant. That is hardly Biden's fault, especially as it has been mainly Republicans who resisted getting vaccinated or taking other precautions to limit the spread.

[filghy2]

What I don't know as I don't live there, is what ending the Filibuster means -is it just a voting procedure that benefits the largest party in Congress, or does it have a deeper meaning?

This might be a more reliable source. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate

The 60-vote rule in the Senate is not in the Constitution and really dates from the 1970s as a solution to the problem of too many filibusters. Numerous exemptions have been carved out, including for confirming nominations and budget reconciliation. It's hard to see what principle applies to the exemptions that doesn't apply to other bills.

I guess you could see it a sort of gentleman's agreement within the Senate to ensure that legislation has bipartisan support. Each party has been willing to give up some of their legislation in return for being able to block some of their opponent's legislation when their turn comes. But it could be seen as a relic of former times when there was more bipartisanship and Senators were willing to consider legislation on its merits rather than just blocking it on party lines.

[Nick Danger]

Imagine having no idea whatsoever what's happening with voting rights in the United States in 2022 but still feeling compelled to shoot your mouth off about it in public.

Hey genius, were there more or less places to vote in 2020 as opposed to, say, 2012?

Thanks Thomber! I haven’t had that good a laugh in several days. Yeah, this is about the number of polling sites.

[Nick Danger]

I don't see a single piece of evidence in that long-winded diatribe. I guess it's time.
1360272

Noted, Flighty. You simply don’t want to talk about the total liberal breakdown that’s happening. I understand, being wrong all the time would bother me too.

[filghy2]

Some folks here have very selective memories, especially when they claim to be non-partisan. Is Joe Biden the first president to promise more than he could deliver?

Here's a bunch of things Trump said he would achieve but didn't:
- Replace Obamacare with a system that delivered better health cover at lower cost
- A tax reform that would not favour the rich or blow out the budget
- A major infrastructure package
- Raise average GDP growth to 4 per cent
- Eliminate national debt in 8 years
- Control and eliminate Covid-19
- Reduce the US trade deficit
- Denuclearize North Korea

Here's a summary of what he actually achieved in his 4 years. https://www.factcheck.org/2021/10/trumps-final-numbers/

[Nick Danger]

Some folks here have very selective memories, especially when they claim to be non-partisan. Is Joe Biden the first president to promise more than he could deliver?

Here's a bunch of things Trump said he would achieve but didn't:
- Replace Obamacare with a system that delivered better health cover at lower cost
- A tax reform that would not favour the rich or blow out the budget
- A major infrastructure package
- Raise average GDP growth to 4 per cent
- Eliminate national debt in 8 years
- Control and eliminate Covid-19
- Reduce the US trade deficit
- Denuclearize North Korea

Here's a summary of what he actually achieved in his 4 years. https://www.factcheck.org/2021/10/trumps-final-numbers/

Sorry Flighty I thought this thread was about The Biden Presidency. That’s why I was trying to encourage you to get on-topic. Trump hasn’t been President for a while but we can revive some of those old threads if that’s what’s still on your mind.

[filghy2]

Here's what happened to the key economic data in the first year of the past 4 Presidents.
https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-gdp-growth-3306008#toc-gdp-growth-inflation-and-unemployment-by-year
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/indicators

GDP growth
Bush 1.0%
Obama -2.6%
Trump 2.3%
Biden 3.8% (first 3 quarters only)

Unemployment rate
Bush up from 3.9% to 5.7%
Obama up from 7.3% to 9.9%
Trump down from 4.7% to 4.1%
Biden down from 6.7% to 3.9%

Inflation rate
Bush 1.6%
Obama 2.7%
Trump 2.1%
Biden 6.7%

So is the angst about Biden really justified?

These are facts: don't be afraid of them. The truth shall set you free.

[Nick Danger]

Here's what happened to the key economic data in the first year of the past 4 Presidents.
https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-gdp-growth-3306008#toc-gdp-growth-inflation-and-unemployment-by-year
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/indicators

GDP growth
Bush 1.0%
Obama -2.6%
Trump 2.3%
Biden 3.8% (first 3 quarters only)

Unemployment rate
Bush up from 3.9% to 5.7%
Obama up from 7.3% to 9.9%
Trump down from 4.7% to 4.1%
Biden down from 6.7% to 3.9%

Inflation rate
Bush 1.6%
Obama 2.7%
Trump 2.1%
Biden 6.7%

So is the angst about Biden really justified?

These are facts: don't be afraid of them. The truth shall set you free.

Hmm, according to Stavros we should give Trump credit for those numbers but I won’t invoke Stavros on you.

So we’re doing great! I (and every other American) didn’t notice. What did Biden do to bring about all this unprecedented prosperity? All I’ve seen is every piece of garbage legislation he introduces getting curb-stomped by his own party. A mystery is afoot.

[filghy2]

Sigh; roll eyes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Rescue_Plan_Act_of_2021

[Nick Danger]

Sigh; roll eyes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Rescue_Plan_Act_of_2021

That explains the monstrous inflation all right, nice pull, Flighty.

[Stavros]

I am not surprised that some Americans comfort themselves by denying the existence of Institutional Racism when it is documented on an almost daily basis. Denial of the Truth has become the curse of Donald Trump, and it is embraced by men and women who ought to know better, but like lawless creatures in Hobbes's 'State of Nature', prefer Emotion to Reason, Anarchy to Govenment.

When the Republican Party shares the allegations of voter fraud made by Trump, is it accidental, coincidental or deliberate, that in all the Counties in which the election is alleged to have been stolen, the majority of the population is populated by either Black or Minority people, defined as 'Non-White'? Is it even conceivable that where fraud did take place, it was Trump voters rising from the dead, or Trump voter clubs pooling mail-in ballots, and so on?

Why is it that when polling stations are closed for 'health and safety' reasons so that voters must drive 100 miles to vote, it happens in the Southern State in counties where the majority of the population is Black?

The answer is that this is how the law on elections is processed in order to limit the number of Black people who vote, indeed, to limit the number of Black people elected into public office. From numerous Black members of the Georgia Senate in the era of 'Reconstruction', in the last quarter of the 19th century, by 1902 laws had been passed to STOP BLACK PEOPLE VOTING so not a single Black person held elected office.
https://www.nypl.org/events/exhibitions/georgia-my-mind-black-politicians-congress

And here we are, in 2022, the Institution of the Law being used to take away Rights from American citizens guaranteed by the US Constiitution, but not universally applied. For only a deluded fool would deny that the primary aim of the laws being processed across the South and States where Republicans have signed up to Trump's Cult, is to STOP BLACK PEOPLE VOTING.

It is based on the glib assumption -attacked by Black members here- that Black peope vote Democrat, and the political aim is to deny Democrats the vote. But why not make an appeal to a broader range of voters by offering policies that appeal to all Americans regardless of their appearance; why not adopt a language and a tone that does not ridicule minorities, accuse them of being resposible for crime, for undermining the Morals of America, for undoing everything that started with the community in Jamestown in 1607?

The Republican Party is retreating into a fantasy world, but using the Institution of the Law to build itself a wall to shut out people it sees as a threat -but to its own existence, rather than that of the USA.

Biden has been in office for just under a year. To make so sweeping a judgment of it as an 'abject failure' is dismissive without much evidence. Was the withdrawal from Afghanistan a mistake, or an inevitable decision someone had to make, knowing it would always look bad? Who is responsible for Inflation, is it always the Government? Passing new laws that cost eye-watering sums of money make look extravagant, even reckless, but the judgment of their success will be a long-time coming, and might not be observable for at least two years, which is why rushing to judgment is a disappointment.

We have the four years of chaos to review, at least give Biden another year before making grand assessments. He might not be the most charismatic, or eloquent of Presidents, and his attempt to build a bi-Partisan coalition of intersts looks quaint in an age of Sectarian conflict, but does it make him look so bad when it is venal hypocrites like Mitchell McConnell who are standing in the way of progress?

Time is on Biden side right now, but the clock is ticking, and the world is watching.

[filghy2]

Biden has been in office for just under a year. To make so sweeping a judgment of it as an 'abject failure' is dismissive without much evidence.

It's amusing that the guy is painted simultaneously as an ineffectual irrelevance yet responsible for everything bad that's happened over the past year. He's a failure when 1 or 2 members of his party won't support legislation, but he's also a failure when he does get legislation passed. He's a failure for not eliminating Covid, even though it's the other party who has resisted any measures. He's a failure for not uniting the nation, even though it's the other party who promotes the Big Lie that his election was illegitimate.

[broncofan]

People sometimes say one shouldn't defend his record by merely pointing out that he's better than the alternative. I say why not? Kudos to Biden for not doing any of the following things that his predecessor did do and would have done again.

Inflation is up? It is up globally. The previous guy told people during a pandemic that a completely ineffective treatment would save them, that the disease killing everyone was like the flu and that doctors were lying about mortality numbers to make him look bad. Anyhow I'm not saying this is all Biden should get credit for. I'm saying not doing these things is enough to already give him a better legacy than Trump.

Number of times Biden has fired the head of the FBI because he is investigating him: 0
Number of times Biden has used U.S. foreign aid money to try to induce a foreign country to investigate a political rival: 0
Number of times Biden has threatened to fire his attorney general because his AG properly recused himself from a case:0
Number of times Biden has tried to extort a State Attorney General into calling an election for him: 0
Number of times Biden has incited insurrection: 0
Number of twitter issued nuclear threats by Biden: 0
Number of times Biden suggested bleach as a covid treatment: 0

[broncofan]

So far, Biden has done what was expected of him-

-The US will re-commit to the Paris Climate Change Agreement.
-The US will halt its exit from the WHO and return to full membership (I assume with the same level of funding as before).
-The ban on Transgendered Americans serving in the Military will end.
-The anti-Abortion restrictions linked to Foreign Aid will be lifted.
-A permit for the Keystone Pipeline has been revoked, halting the completion of this project (again!).
These things are already enormous because they are a reversal of the previous administration's policies. The ban on transgendered Americans serving in the military was discriminatory as well as pointless and malicious. The exit from the WHO was repulsive and transparently a way to try to scapegoat this international body for Trump's notable failures.

There has been a restoration of rule of law in this country. Our President is not threatening private companies with anti-trust actions because he doesn't like what a news outlet they own said about him. He is not threatening to repeal laws because he is unhappy that social media companies are enforcing their terms of service and it inconveniences him (see section 230 of the CDA). Biden has not endorsed police brutality as Trump did on numerous occasions.

One time when I pointed out to Nick Danger that Trump is an absolute moron, he said something about how his style of bluster and false bravado is all we need. I disagree. If Biden is uninspiring or hasn't accomplished everything he set out to within a year, I think all we need is a normal human being who isn't motivated by self-interest, isn't entirely bereft of any sense of responsibility to others, and isn't willing to deliberately harm people (see transgender military ban above) because he thinks animosity towards one community will galvanize his supporters.

[Nick Danger]

There has been a restoration of rule of law in this country.

Really Bronco? Would you be prepared to testify to that in court? I suppose it is true that Democrats have stopped rioting for the time being. I guess they all got the shoes they wanted.

[Nick Danger]

First let me say that I'm so proud of all of you guys for staying in the game even though you've been dealt a handful of garbage. I'd be doing the same thing if I'd been unfortunate enough to be born a liberal. If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit. Fuckin A.


I am not surprised that some Americans comfort themselves by denying the existence of Institutional Racism when it is documented on an almost daily basis. Denial of the Truth has become the curse of Donald Trump, and it is embraced by men and women who ought to know better, but like lawless creatures in Hobbes's 'State of Nature', prefer Emotion to Reason, Anarchy to Govenment.

When the Republican Party shares the allegations of voter fraud made by Trump, is it accidental, coincidental or deliberate, that in all the Counties in which the election is alleged to have been stolen, the majority of the population is populated by either Black or Minority people, defined as 'Non-White'? Is it even conceivable that where fraud did take place, it was Trump voters rising from the dead, or Trump voter clubs pooling mail-in ballots, and so on?

Why is it that when polling stations are closed for 'health and safety' reasons so that voters must drive 100 miles to vote, it happens in the Southern State in counties where the majority of the population is Black?

The answer is that this is how the law on elections is processed in order to limit the number of Black people who vote, indeed, to limit the number of Black people elected into public office. From numerous Black members of the Georgia Senate in the era of 'Reconstruction', in the last quarter of the 19th century, by 1902 laws had been passed to STOP BLACK PEOPLE VOTING so not a single Black person held elected office.
https://www.nypl.org/events/exhibitions/georgia-my-mind-black-politicians-congress

And here we are, in 2022, the Institution of the Law being used to take away Rights from American citizens guaranteed by the US Constiitution, but not universally applied. For only a deluded fool would deny that the primary aim of the laws being processed across the South and States where Republicans have signed up to Trump's Cult, is to STOP BLACK PEOPLE VOTING.

It is based on the glib assumption -attacked by Black members here- that Black peope vote Democrat, and the political aim is to deny Democrats the vote. But why not make an appeal to a broader range of voters by offering policies that appeal to all Americans regardless of their appearance; why not adopt a language and a tone that does not ridicule minorities, accuse them of being resposible for crime, for undermining the Morals of America, for undoing everything that started with the community in Jamestown in 1607?

The Republican Party is retreating into a fantasy world, but using the Institution of the Law to build itself a wall to shut out people it sees as a threat -but to its own existence, rather than that of the USA.

Biden has been in office for just under a year. To make so sweeping a judgment of it as an 'abject failure' is dismissive without much evidence. Was the withdrawal from Afghanistan a mistake, or an inevitable decision someone had to make, knowing it would always look bad? Who is responsible for Inflation, is it always the Government? Passing new laws that cost eye-watering sums of money make look extravagant, even reckless, but the judgment of their success will be a long-time coming, and might not be observable for at least two years, which is why rushing to judgment is a disappointment.

We have the four years of chaos to review, at least give Biden another year before making grand assessments. He might not be the most charismatic, or eloquent of Presidents, and his attempt to build a bi-Partisan coalition of intersts looks quaint in an age of Sectarian conflict, but does it make him look so bad when it is venal hypocrites like Mitchell McConnell who are standing in the way of progress?

Time is on Biden side right now, but the clock is ticking, and the world is watching.

I would like you to do one thing for me, Stavros. Show me a single American who is having trouble voting. Hell, you might shock me and actually produce an example, and if you do, I want to know more. But I think what is going to happen is that if you take the time to really look into this so-called "issue," you're going to find out that we can all vote, that we all know where to go TO vote, that if we can't get there we can all request a mail-in ballot, and that we're all pretty much in agreement that you ought to be a citizen of this country in order to do it. I think you'll find even Democrats feel that way. Not Democratic POLITICIANS. Just Democrats. Hell, ask Bronco! He's an American citizen and a Democrat. Bronco, do you think illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote?

Also, Stavros, I find it a bit hypocritical of you that you are complaining that some polling sites closed for health and safety reasons during the pandemic. That sounds more like something I would complain about. I thought you were totally on-board with doing whatever is necessary to protect people from the Wu-Flu. Also, mail-in voting was perfectly acceptable in that election BECAUSE of the germs, so it didn't really matter how far people had to drive, all they needed in order to vote was the will to do it.

And one more thing. You're speaking as if Biden has 4 years to do...whatever it is he's going to do. Uh-uh. He's got about 10 more months. As soon as the Republicans re-take Congress in November, Biden becomes nothing but a rubber stamp in an adult diaper. Nothing whatsoever will get done for the last 2 years of his term, he will be contending with a Republican Congress and a conservative Supreme Court and they will be contending with him. It will be bad times all around, you can rely on that. Yet he doesn't seem to be in much of a hurry to push for progressive change right now, seems he's quite preoccupied with ensuring that non-citizens get to vote. Which is not going to happen. I'd think you'd be quite upset with the guy, he's trading the one chance liberals had to make some positive social change for a fat chance at a 100% fabricated voting rights agenda. NO ONE IS TRYING TO STOP BLACK PEOPLE FROM VOTING, STAVROS. If you lived here you'd know that.


It's amusing that the guy is painted simultaneously as an ineffectual irrelevance yet responsible for everything bad that's happened over the past year. He's a failure when 1 or 2 members of his party won't support legislation, but he's also a failure when he does get legislation passed. He's a failure for not eliminating Covid, even though it's the other party who has resisted any measures. He's a failure for not uniting the nation, even though it's the other party who promotes the Big Lie that his election was illegitimate.

Oh man, Flighty, you don't think...you don't think that I think that any of this is Joe Biden's agenda, do you? I can't tell you exactly who's agenda it is, but it is definitely not Joe Biden's. Sleepy Joe can barely walk and scowl at the same time. He's got handlers. Still, lacking names for the handlers we have no choice but to call the current corporate-sponsored Democratic-Socialist collective "Joe Biden." I think they jack him up on cocaine before his public appearances, probably through Hunter's guy or maybe directly from the FBI evidence vault. Have you seen how wide his eyes get when he's speaking? And it looks like his skull is going to burst right out of his crepe-paper skin any moment! Very concerned for his health. Even the liberal media are starting to back away from him now, they have to if they want to maintain the facade that they're journalists.


People sometimes say one shouldn't defend his record by merely pointing out that he's better than the alternative. I say why not? Kudos to Biden for not doing any of the following things that his predecessor did do and would have done again.

Inflation is up? It is up globally. The previous guy told people during a pandemic that a completely ineffective treatment would save them, that the disease killing everyone was like the flu and that doctors were lying about mortality numbers to make him look bad. Anyhow I'm not saying this is all Biden should get credit for. I'm saying not doing these things is enough to already give him a better legacy than Trump.

Number of times Biden has fired the head of the FBI because he is investigating him: 0
Number of times Biden has used U.S. foreign aid money to try to induce a foreign country to investigate a political rival: 0
Number of times Biden has threatened to fire his attorney general because his AG properly recused himself from a case:0
Number of times Biden has tried to extort a State Attorney General into calling an election for him: 0
Number of times Biden has incited insurrection: 0
Number of twitter issued nuclear threats by Biden: 0
Number of times Biden suggested bleach as a covid treatment: 0

This demonstrates excellent coping skills, Bronco. Keep your expectations this low and you PROBABLY won't be disappointed with the rest of Biden's term.

[broncofan]

This demonstrates excellent coping skills, Bronco. Keep your expectations this low and you PROBABLY won't be disappointed with the rest of Biden's term.
I don't blame you for making fun of my post in this way bc I would have done the same. I am going to read Stavros and Filghy's posts again and inform myself a bit more because a year is a long time to be tuned out.

I still feel that if one person takes a dump in the oval office and wipes his ass with the constitution then not doing it is a noteworthy advance. The Trump years were a giant step in the direction of authoritarianism that has been impeded and the exact policies one supports will never rate as high to me as fidelity to our founding principles and the avoidance of the kind of cheap bigotry Trump stood for. My hiatus from paying attention does sort of vindicate Bernie Bros. who think "centrists" would sell out their most ambitious policies for some normalcy, but we were held hostage by an idiot. I would support Bernie to get rid of Trump; and not Bernie Sanders but Bernie from a Weekend At Bernie's (don't make the obvious joke).

[thombergeron]

Thanks Thomber! I haven’t had that good a laugh in several days. Yeah, this is about the number of polling sites.

It's kind of cringy when people try to cover up their embarrassment with laughter.

Anyhoo...


Democrats do shuttle blacks to voting sites - mostly unnecessary since voting sites are set up in their own neighborhoods. Which is absolutely fine with everyone.

Since seem to have forgotten, this is where you acknowledge that it's easier to vote if there's a polling place in your neighborhood. Then you admit that you don't follow the news at all by saying that neighborhood polling places are "absolutely fine with everyone."

It's clearly not "absolutely fine" with Republican legislators and governors, who have eliminated over 1,000 polling places since Shelby v. Holder. Texas alone has eliminated over 750 polling places, and by an incredible coincidence, virtually all are in Latino and Black neighborhoods.

So by the standards you set out, the Republican Party is making it more difficult for minority citizens to vote. Making it more difficult to vote suppresses voter turnout. That's why we call these efforts "voter suppression."

Again, imagine having Very Strong Opinions about voting rights in the United States while simultaneously knowing nothing at all about voting rights in the United States.

[Nick Danger]

It's kind of cringy when people try to cover up their embarrassment with laughter.

Anyhoo...



Since seem to have forgotten, this is where you acknowledge that it's easier to vote if there's a polling place in your neighborhood. Then you admit that you don't follow the news at all by saying that neighborhood polling places are "absolutely fine with everyone."

It's clearly not "absolutely fine" with Republican legislators and governors, who have eliminated over 1,000 polling places since Shelby v. Holder. Texas alone has eliminated over 750 polling places, and by an incredible coincidence, virtually all are in Latino and Black neighborhoods.

So by the standards you set out, the Republican Party is making it more difficult for minority citizens to vote. Making it more difficult to vote suppresses voter turnout. That's why we call these efforts "voter suppression."

Again, imagine having Very Strong Opinions about voting rights in the United States while simultaneously knowing nothing at all about voting rights in the United States.

Sorry Thomber, all Shelby v. Holder did was eliminate an unconstitutional section of the Voting Rights Act. You, uh, do know about the U.S. Constitution right? The Supreme Court of 2013 was historically liberal as well, according to the Martin-Quinn score, so it seems unlikely they had a racist motive. And who was president then, I don't recall... Who was vice-president? Oh yeah, now I remember.

"Voter suppression" is a term invented by the corporate-owned media. Imagine living in a world where liberals took responsibility for their own decisions. And frankly, if someone can't be troubled to mail in a ballot, I'm not so sure their vote is going to be missed much. Or is there mail suppression as well?

[Nick Danger]

I don't blame you for making fun of my post in this way bc I would have done the same. I am going to read Stavros and Filghy's posts again and inform myself a bit more because a year is a long time to be tuned out.

I still feel that if one person takes a dump in the oval office and wipes his ass with the constitution then not doing it is a noteworthy advance. The Trump years were a giant step in the direction of authoritarianism that has been impeded and the exact policies one supports will never rate as high to me as fidelity to our founding principles and the avoidance of the kind of cheap bigotry Trump stood for. My hiatus from paying attention does sort of vindicate Bernie Bros. who think "centrists" would sell out their most ambitious policies for some normalcy, but we were held hostage by an idiot. I would support Bernie to get rid of Trump; and not Bernie Sanders but Bernie from a Weekend At Bernie's (don't make the obvious joke).

Is the obvious joke that Biden is a walking dead man or is that the subtle joke? I always try to go for the subtle joke when possible.

You'll get back with the program I'm sure, Bronco. If you want to inform yourself via THIS forum, though, I wouldn't consult Flighty and Stavros' posts. Take a cue from Thomber. He's throwing Supreme Court cases and quasi-factual data at me.

I'm well aware that the final goal here is to make me look stupid. Just remember though, that if you put it out there and it looks anything like a big pile of shit, I'll serve you back a steaming scoop of it. But you already knew this.

What I am trying to get you guys to address here should be right in your wheelhouse, Bronco. You DID get rid of Trump. He's out of the White House and even off of social media. Sooooo...now what?

[thombergeron]

Sorry Thomber, all Shelby v. Holder did was eliminate an unconstitutional section of the Voting Rights Act. You, uh, do know about the U.S. Constitution right? The Supreme Court of 2013 was historically liberal as well, according to the Martin-Quinn score, so it seems unlikely they had a racist motive. And who was president then, I don't recall... Who was vice-president? Oh yeah, now I remember.

"Voter suppression" is a term invented by the corporate-owned media. Imagine living in a world where liberals took responsibility for their own decisions. And frankly, if someone can't be troubled to mail in a ballot, I'm not so sure their vote is going to be missed much. Or is there mail suppression as well?

Unsurprising since you're just regurgitating shit you saw on TV, but this is non-responsive. Whether or not Section 5 was constitutional is a separate question from the effect of the ruling. The effect has been that jurisdictions with a prior history of racist voter suppression, now that they're freed from the preclearance requirement for new voting laws, have passed a slew of laws that make it more difficult to vote.

Nobody invented the term "voter suppression." In English, it's called a compound noun. That's how language works. As you pointed out previously, neighborhood-based polling places and van pools for voters make it easier to vote. If a jurisdiction removes polling places and imposes strict requirements on van pools for voters, as GOP-controlled states have done post-Shelby, then it becomes more difficult to vote. We know, again from evidence, that difficulty accessing polling places suppresses voter turnout. Therefore, thanks to English, we say that efforts to make it more difficult to vote are voter suppression.

You must be in California or Oregon if you think anybody can just mail in their ballot lickety split. Most places you have to apply beforehand, and you may have guessed that, yep, the Texas legislature is also making it more difficult for voters to access mail-in ballots. I wonder why. Do you have any idea why the GOP wants fewer people voting?

[thombergeron]

I'm well aware that the final goal here is to make me look stupid.

My guy, you did that all by your lonesome.

[Nick Danger]

Unsurprising since you're just regurgitating shit you saw on TV, but this is non-responsive. Whether or not Section 5 was constitutional is a separate question from the effect of the ruling. The effect has been that jurisdictions with a prior history of racist voter suppression, now that they're freed from the preclearance requirement for new voting laws, have passed a slew of laws that make it more difficult to vote.

Nobody invented the term "voter suppression." In English, it's called a compound noun. That's how language works. As you pointed out previously, neighborhood-based polling places and van pools for voters make it easier to vote. If a jurisdiction removes polling places and imposes strict requirements on van pools for voters, as GOP-controlled states have done post-Shelby, then it becomes more difficult to vote. We know, again from evidence, that difficulty accessing polling places suppresses voter turnout. Therefore, thanks to English, we say that efforts to make it more difficult to vote are voter suppression.

You must be in California or Oregon if you think anybody can just mail in their ballot lickety split. Most places you have to apply beforehand, and you may have guessed that, yep, the Texas legislature is also making it more difficult for voters to access mail-in ballots. I wonder why. Do you have any idea why the GOP wants fewer people voting?

I don't watch TV unless the Yankees are playing, Thomber. Ever. My mind is clean and pure as a falling snowflake.

The mail-in requirements vary state-to-state but there is no state where you cannot request and obtain a mail-in ballot for ANY VALID REASON WHATSOEVER. Gotta work that day? You can vote by mail. Car broke? You can vote by mail. Not going to be in town on Election Day? You can vote by mail. You're an in-home caregiver? You can vote by mail. INCARCERATED? You can vote by mail. In any state. And the vetting process is non-existent, you give the reason, they take your word for it.

The GOP doesn't want fewer people voting. It wants less election fraud. That's why they've tried to introduce Voter ID laws. You know, where you actually have to legally identify yourself in order to vote, so that they can know that you're not actually a dead or non-existent person. Pretty tough. Almost as hard as buying beer. Is there some kind of ID issue with Democrats, are there a bunch of Democratic voters who can't legally identify themselves? I don't see the problem there.

Also, your example is Texas. Let me tell you something about Texas. Texas will ALWAYS be a red state now. Since 1980 they've gotten redder, and redder, and redder. The Hispanic vote is undergoing a major shift toward conservative, because Hispanics are not the fools Democrats believe they are. So for purposes of the actual outcome of a presidential election, it doesn't matter if Texas shuts down a few polling sites in a few bad neighborhoods. If they are doing that, well, that's Texas, they do what they want and threaten to secede if we don't like it.

I don't have a polling site in my neighborhood, Thomber. I have to drive several miles to vote, in Utah or Tennessee. Again, almost as hard as buying beer.

Let me ask you a question. Do YOU think illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote?

[Nick Danger]

My guy, you did that all by your lonesome.

Hey, Thomber, I'm wide open, feel free to engage at any level that makes you comfortable. But I'd save the 4chan banter for your classmates, I'm not that sensitive.

[thombergeron]

The mail-in requirements vary state-to-state but there is no state where you cannot request and obtain a mail-in ballot for ANY VALID REASON WHATSOEVER. Gotta work that day? You can vote by mail. Car broke? You can vote by mail. Not going to be in town on Election Day? You can vote by mail. You're an in-home caregiver? You can vote by mail. INCARCERATED? You can vote by mail. In any state. And the vetting process is non-existent, you give the reason, they take your word for it.

For real true life my dude you do not know your ass from the road to China. Only 35 states offer no-excuse mail-in voting. Several of those (Arizona, Ohio, Missouri) are currently trying to get rid of it.

And HOLY SHIT YOU CANNOT VOTE IF YOU ARE INCARCERATED. Only two states even allow current prisoners to vote, and Vermont and Maine don't exactly bend over backwards to run those polls. Two states still PERMANENTLY DISENFRANCHISE ALL FELONS and seven others disenfranchise those with certain felony convictions. You cannot vote in friggin deep blue Washington state if you're on parole or probation. Read a book, man.[/QUOTE]



The GOP doesn't want fewer people voting. It wants less election fraud.

Bullshit. There's no election fraud in the United States. Everybody knows that, including the GOP. You all just lie about it because because it's to your political advantage to lie about it.


Also, your example is Texas. Let me tell you something about Texas. Texas will ALWAYS be a red state now. Since 1980 they've gotten redder, and redder, and redder. The Hispanic vote is undergoing a major shift toward conservative, because Hispanics are not the fools Democrats believe they are. So for purposes of the actual outcome of a presidential election, it doesn't matter if Texas shuts down a few polling sites in a few bad neighborhoods. If they are doing that, well, that's Texas, they do what they want and threaten to secede if we don't like it.

So you've gone from "There's no voter suppression" to "Voter suppression is absolutely necessary to keep Texas Texas." At least you're moving in the general direction of honesty.


Do YOU think illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote?

No I think you should have to be a U.S. citizen and a permanent resident of the jurisdiction in which you vote.

[Nick Danger]

For real true life my dude you do not know your ass from the road to China. Only 35 states offer no-excuse mail-in voting. Several of those (Arizona, Ohio, Missouri) are currently trying to get rid of it.

And HOLY SHIT YOU CANNOT VOTE IF YOU ARE INCARCERATED. Only two states even allow current prisoners to vote, and Vermont and Maine don't exactly bend over backwards to run those polls. Two states still PERMANENTLY DISENFRANCHISE ALL FELONS and seven others disenfranchise those with certain felony convictions. You cannot vote in friggin deep blue Washington state if you're on parole or probation. Read a book, man.

Bullshit. There's no election fraud in the United States. Everybody knows that, including the GOP. You all just lie about it because because it's to your political advantage to lie about it.

So you've gone from "There's no voter suppression" to "Voter suppression is absolutely necessary to keep Texas Texas." At least you're moving in the general direction of honesty.

No I think you should have to be a U.S. citizen and a permanent resident of the jurisdiction in which you vote.

Wow. It's funny when liberals spout off wildly about things they don't know, but it's even funnier when you can just post one link and discredit their entire world view.

https://www.vote.org/absentee-voting-rules/

Also, being incarcerated doesn't mean you are a felon. Also, most felons can vote if they apply for reinstatement of the privilege.

Done with this guy. NEXT!

[Nick Danger]

Bullshit. There's no election fraud in the United States. Everybody knows that, including the GOP. You all just lie about it because because it's to your political advantage to lie about it.

There is actually quite a lot of election fraud in the USA. There were 475 cases of documented election fraud in the most recent election cycle. And no, I don't think the Presidential election was rigged, I'm not that guy. But election fraud does happen and Republican efforts to create Voter ID laws are not "voter suppression," they are good-faith efforts to address a legitimate problem. Just maybe not as big of a problem as some Republicans would want you to believe.


No I think you should have to be a U.S. citizen and a permanent resident of the jurisdiction in which you vote.

I would like to add, Thomber, that we are in agreement here.

And I don't want to discourage you from arguing on our little containment board here, the more the merrier says me, and if liberals around here talk sense, I think most people would have to agree I'm fair with them. Flighty would never agree with that but Flighty is a very angry person. Still, we have our moments of mutual clarity here and a lot of fun ragging on each other. And I promise that if you don't treat me like I'm stupid, I won't dismiss you like you're 12.

Have a nice day.

[filghy2]

Here's another point that those rushing to write off this Presidency are overlooking. Reagan, Clinton and Obama all had periods in their first 2 years when their approval ratings nose-dived. All had poor mid-terms, especially Clinton and Obama, but recovered to win second terms.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating

There are some parallels with Clinton. He also struggled to pass legislation due to internal opposition, and his signature health reform went nowhere. Although the election count was not disputed, he was never really accepted as legitimate by the other side (Republican obstructionism dates from this time). There was even an inflation scare, which led the Federal Reserve to jack up interest rates in 1994.

Clinton was able to recover partly because the economy entered a long boom period, but also because the Republicans became too arrogant and overplayed their hand. The key turning point came when they shut down the government in 1995 and 1996 to try to force spending cuts.

This is not to say that history will repeat necessarily, but it's possible. It is certainly conceivable that the economy will further improve, inflation will abate, and that the other side will overplay their hand in some way.

[filghy2]

There is actually quite a lot of election fraud in the USA. There were 475 cases of documented election fraud in the most recent election cycle.

475 cases out of 158,383,403 votes cast equals 0.0003 per cent, or one in 333,000 votes. Huge problem.

[filghy2]

The argument that this is just about voter ID to prevent fraud is just plain disingenuous. There is a whole bunch of laws either passed or proposed in Republican-controlled states that are obviously designed to make voting harder, including by reducing voting times and locations, increasing bureaucratic hoops and purging voters from the rolls for dubious reasons.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-laws-roundup-december-2021

Perhaps the most sinister aspect is the number of states that are moving to allow partisan interference in vote-counting processes on flimsy pretexts. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/election-sabotage-scheme-and-how-congress-can-stop-it

If this was just about voter ID then why did no Republican support Joe Machin's compromise voting-rights bill, which would have allowed ID requirements, but with a wider range of acceptable ID? It's pretty clear that they do want fewer people voting.
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/01/mitt-romney-biden-vote-suppression-senate-trump-elections.html

[filghy2]

And I don't want to discourage you from arguing on our little containment board here, the more the merrier says me, and if liberals around here talk sense, I think most people would have to agree I'm fair with them.


You're a person for whom the distinction between fact and fiction no longer exists. There's no other explanation for your views. The only information you assimilate is that which supports your priors. Anything inconvenient is waved away or quickly forgotten.

Are you deplorable? Worse than that. You're boring and limited. You've decided to fear what you don't understand, which is a great deal, while telling yourself you're a big alpha predator. Your next debate is with your mirror.

If we didn't already know this man is pathologically delusional we might think he is sending himself up.

Sorry, bronco, I just love that quote of yours so much I have to keep citing it.

[filghy2]

One time when I pointed out to Nick Danger that Trump is an absolute moron, he said something about how his style of bluster and false bravado is all we need.

In fact, I think he has claimed that being dishonest, unscrupulous and amoral were ideal qualities in a leader. Strange that he now complains about Biden being allegedly a liar.

[Nick Danger]

If we didn't already know this man is pathologically delusional we might think he is sending himself up.

Sorry, bronco, I just love that quote of yours so much I have to keep citing it.

Oh Flighty, stop being so warm and fuzzy, goddammit, you're giving me feels.

You'd like it if I were delusional, wouldn't you. That would bring the whole picture into focus for you, all that misinfo and disinfo that comprises your political philosophy would suddenly coalesce into a cogent truth.

475 cases of election fraud isn't astronomical, but it's a lot. Many of those cases don't involve just one vote either, so your little homemade statistic there is well off the mark. There have only been 21 cases of Treason in all of U.S. history, does that mean we should just go ahead and legalize it, or stop taking measures to stop it?

But since you're being all sentimental and I've had a few beverages, let's just go ahead and say that yes, the Republicans would certainly PREFER if fewer blacks voted, and some of the electoral legislation they introduce is intentionally targeted toward that goal. Frankly, if you took the black vote out of the picture, there would not be a Democratic Party at all. I'm sure there would be something to oppose conservatism, but as the Buddhists say, if you remove the left, the right ceases to exist as well.

It's only politics. But NO ONE IS BEING DISENFRANCHISED via Republican efforts. The will to vote still gives you the right to vote no matter who or where you are. It actually is not at all unreasonable to insist that voters identify themselves, it's more than reasonable, and whatever the Republican motive might be for strongly supporting such legislation, preventing election fraud is an absolutely plausible reason to give the public. In fact, the only reason I can imagine for being opposed to such a measure is if your constituency consists of a large number of people who don't exist or shouldn't be voting. Is not being able to identify oneself even a thing in modern society? I'm sure it definitely is a thing among the masses of illegal immigrants currently being bused or flown under cover of night to undisclosed (but undoubtedly electorally strategic) locations all around the country by our own President. Now THAT defies plausible explanation. Which might clarify why no one in the administration is even making the slightest effort to try to explain it.

Your hopes for the future of the Biden administration are admirable and cute, Flighty. But it's over. He doesn't care about liberal issues. If he did, where's the legislation? If there's systemic racism and it's this big huge problem and we elected Biden to confront it, why has he never even said the words "systemic racism" as President? There's nothing pending, nothing under discussion, nothing, nothing, nothing. And his window of opportunity to address, well, anything at all that he was elected to address, is quickly closing. You're no dummy, Flighty, you know what's going to happen in November and you know what that means. If Biden is going to keep any of his promises he has to do it NOW. But he's not going to. Instead he's pushing for something no American wants - suffrage for illegals.

So you tell me, Flighty - what happens next?

[Stavros]

In fact, I think he has claimed that being dishonest, unscrupulous and amoral were ideal qualities in a leader. Strange that he now complains about Biden being allegedly a liar.

It is a pity that Machiavelli is so misunderstood. He did argue that a political leader, a 'Prince' in his pamphlet, should sometimes be 'dishonest, unscrupulous and amoral' -but only when such behaviour was deemed necessary either for personal survival or for 'reasons of State'. There have also been interpretations which argued Machiavelli was being satirical or at times sarcastic in his mos famous work. If more people read his other work, for example the Discourses, they might find some interesting, even important ideas about Citizenship, a concept, indeed a Practice that was important to both the Greeks and the Romans, but one which contemporary Capitalist Economies have undermined compared to a Moral Economy where the values are different, even when trade itself is not compromised.

It is rather extraordinary, is it not, that the Americans who rebel against the Federal Governent which it claims has become a 'Tyranny' -hence the Oathkeepers plans for January 6th which included the positioning of Quick Response Forces, armed, 'locked and loaded' at strategic points of Washington DC- that these same people who refuse to be Vaccinated because they don't want their Liberty 'taken away' by the snooping, prying, interfering 'Feds', insist at the same time that if you don't submit your personal information to the Fed or the State then you should not be able to Vote. The demands made in effect mean handing over all the information about you the 'Government' wants, bar DNA samples.

In 2020 approx 5.2 million or 2.3% of the Voting Public were denied the Vote in States where citizens with a conviction were not allowed to vote, even though more States have repealed such legislation. And is it any surprise that the most affected States are those in the former Confederacy where voting laws were created in the last quarter of the 19th century to deny the vote, and to remove Black Americans from elected office?



"One in 16 African Americans of voting age is disenfranchised, a rate 3.7 times greater than that of non-African Americans. Over 6.2 percent of the adult African American population is disenfranchised compared to 1.7 percent of the non-African American population.
African American disenfranchisement rates vary significantly by state. In seven states – Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wyoming – more than one in seven African Americans is disenfranchised, twice the national average for African Americans."

https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/locked-out-2020-estimates-of-people-denied-voting-rights-due-to-a-felony-conviction/

[broncofan]

475 cases of election fraud isn't astronomical, but it's a lot. Many of those cases don't involve just one vote either, so your little homemade statistic there is well off the mark.
A crime can be worth punishing even if its overall effects are a wash but I'm curious how many of these cases of voter fraud benefitted Republicans and how many benefitted Democrats.

The reason I say this is that institutional remedies should not exact a greater cost than they are trying to avoid. The cost of voter fraud is especially obvious if it can be done systematically and change the outcome of an election.

Nobody is saying that voter fraud should not be punished. It is a crime and when it's detected the people engaged in it are prosecuted.

What we are saying is that if the overall impact of voter fraud on elections is minor, we should not alter voting requirements in a way that suppresses thousands and thousands of votes. Unless of course your object is to fashion a "remedy" for something that does not hurt your chances of winning elections by instituting changes that make you more likely to win.

[Nick Danger]

It is a pity that Machiavelli is so misunderstood. He did argue that a political leader, a 'Prince' in his pamphlet, should sometimes be 'dishonest, unscrupulous and amoral' -but only when such behaviour was deemed necessary either for personal survival or for 'reasons of State'. There have also been interpretations which argued Machiavelli was being satirical or at times sarcastic in his mos famous work. If more people read his other work, for example the Discourses, they might find some interesting, even important ideas about Citizenship, a concept, indeed a Practice that was important to both the Greeks and the Romans, but one which contemporary Capitalist Economies have undermined compared to a Moral Economy where the values are different, even when trade itself is not compromised.

It is rather extraordinary, is it not, that the Americans who rebel against the Federal Governent which it claims has become a 'Tyranny' -hence the Oathkeepers plans for January 6th which included the positioning of Quick Response Forces, armed, 'locked and loaded' at strategic points of Washington DC- that these same people who refuse to be Vaccinated because they don't want their Liberty 'taken away' by the snooping, prying, interfering 'Feds', insist at the same time that if you don't submit your personal information to the Fed or the State then you should not be able to Vote. The demands made in effect mean handing over all the information about you the 'Government' wants, bar DNA samples.

In 2020 approx 5.2 million or 2.3% of the Voting Public were denied the Vote in States where citizens with a conviction were not allowed to vote, even though more States have repealed such legislation. And is it any surprise that the most affected States are those in the former Confederacy where voting laws were created in the last quarter of the 19th century to deny the vote, and to remove Black Americans from elected office?



"One in 16 African Americans of voting age is disenfranchised, a rate 3.7 times greater than that of non-African Americans. Over 6.2 percent of the adult African American population is disenfranchised compared to 1.7 percent of the non-African American population.
African American disenfranchisement rates vary significantly by state. In seven states – Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wyoming – more than one in seven African Americans is disenfranchised, twice the national average for African Americans."

https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/locked-out-2020-estimates-of-people-denied-voting-rights-due-to-a-felony-conviction/


Stavros, you speak as if we're just randomly disenfranchising blacks. The ones who have been disenfranchised have done it to themselves, they're criminals. Evil men. Felons. And plenty of whites and Hispanics fall into that category too, but unfortunately, blacks commit a lot more crimes per capita than the other groups, so more of them lose the right to vote. They can get it back. There's an application process.

If you ask me do I want felons voting I'd say no, because I know how most of them would vote, they'd be program (Democratic) voters because it's difficult for them to find a job. Also, I don't think disenfranchisement of felons is at all unreasonable, if we valued their opinions we wouldn't be keeping them in a 6'x9' cell. Yet we have indeed given them a path to re-enfranchisement, which, great, I don't know how that process works but I'd imagine it involves a waiting period and a certain number of years gone by without re-offending. My guess is that very few of America's felons actually give a shit about voting anyway.

Your logic doesn't stand. Disenfranchised blacks have not been disenfranchised because they're black, they've been disenfranchised because they've lost the public's trust.

[Nick Danger]

A crime can be worth punishing even if its overall effects are a wash but I'm curious how many of these cases of voter fraud benefitted Republicans and how many benefitted Democrats.

The reason I say this is that institutional remedies should not exact a greater cost than they are trying to avoid. The cost of voter fraud is especially obvious if it can be done systematically and change the outcome of an election.

Nobody is saying that voter fraud should not be punished. It is a crime and when it's detected the people engaged in it are prosecuted.

What we are saying is that if the overall impact of voter fraud on elections is minor, we should not alter voting requirements in a way that suppresses thousands and thousands of votes. Unless of course your object is to fashion a "remedy" for something that does not hurt your chances of winning elections by instituting changes that make you more likely to win.

I just have to ask, Bronco, how it is that the simple act of requiring legal identification to vote is problematic or disenfranchising to black people? I don't know a LOT of black people, but I'm pretty sure all the ones I do know can easily identify themselves when it's required of them, just as I can, and just as every other citizen of this country is required to do for one reason or another from time to time. This is not a rigorous demand.

Let's say you are a black person, and an election is coming up. To vote, you have to register, like everyone else. Then you have to go to the polling site. Then you vote. Are you telling me there are black people who will refuse to participate in that process if we add the simple matter of showing ID when you show up at the polling site to the process? I'll tell you right now, if there actually are people that moronic, or defiant, or whatever ridiculous form of protestation that type of action represents, I don't want them voting, yes, disenfranchise that utter retard. And I don't even say that from a Republican perspective, the retard vote could go either way.

Also, I'm asking you this question directly, Bronco - do you think illegal immigrants should have the right to vote?

[filghy2]

I know I have no real answer to the evidence you posted, but if I respond with some long-winded, evidence-free bluster that dodges the issue I may be able to divert attention from that and still tell myself I'm the winner (which is the only thing that really matters).

Bullshit and bluster. Dodge and deflect. Rinse and repeat. Boring and limited.

I'm still puzzling over the identity of the majority here who find you fair-minded and reasonable. Are there posters here that I can't see for some reason? Are people sending you PMs saying "I don't usually post here, but I just wanted to say that I admire how fair-minded and reasonable you are"?

[filghy2]

I'm bemused by the people complaining that Biden has not been a unifier; has not been sufficiently bipartisan. Are these people suggesting that he should have tried to legislate only things that a bunch of Republican moderates would be willing to support? That would not allow him to do much. Even on the infrastructure deal, which is popular with voters on both sides, only 32 Republicans voted for it in either house, and they've faced threats from their own side for doing so.

Are they suggesting he should turn the other cheek and remain silent when most Republicans continue to support the Big Lie and paper over what happened on January 6, while Republican-controlled states enact measures to manipulate future election results?

Where were these people when Bush and Trump made no attempt at bipartisanship? When the last Republican Congress rammed through tax cuts to benefit predominantly the wealthy and failed by only one vote to repeal Obamacare and leave millions without health cover? Where were they when Republicans obstructed everything Obama tried to do? When they stacked the Supreme Court by blocking Obama's nominee on a made-up pretext and then ramming through their own on the eve of an election?

[filghy2]

A crime can be worth punishing even if its overall effects are a wash but I'm curious how many of these cases of voter fraud benefitted Republicans and how many benefitted Democrats.

Here's the source. It says there was a mixture of party affiliations, and they were all isolated cases. Most seem to have been just people trying to cast a second vote.
https://apnews.com/article/voter-fraud-election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-7fcb6f134e528fee8237c7601db3328f

[filghy2]

This looks like a good source on how voter suppression measures affect non-whites disproportionally. I haven't looked at the links closely, but I'm suspect they debunk much of the misinformation being presented here. As I said, voter ID is only one aspect of this.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/impact-voter-suppression-communities-color

[Nick Danger]

Bullshit and bluster. Dodge and deflect. Rinse and repeat. Boring and limited.

I'm still puzzling over the identity of the majority here who find you fair-minded and reasonable. Are there posters here that I can't see for some reason? Are people sending you PMs saying "I don't usually post here, but I just wanted to say that I admire how fair-minded and reasonable you are"?

I get dozens of PM's, Flighty. I'll share some excerpts with you.

User fuckmehardermommy: "Your posts are so fair-minded and reasonable that reading them has gradually straightened out my penis, which usually leans to the left. Thanks Nick."

User CockMcGlocklin: "I was watching Fox News today and they advertised that they were 'Fair and Balanced' and I immediately thought, 'Just like Nick Danger on that HA forum!'"

User Assmaster298: "It's as if the knowledge of the Easter Bunny and the wisdom of the Great Pumpkin are combined in one person. You are my hero, Nick, thanks for your courage and generosity."

User broncofan: "Hey Nick, just dropping a line to let you know that even though I do argue with you to maintain appearances in my liberal circles, I actually like you much better than I like that douchenozzle Flighty."


I'm bemused by the people complaining that Biden has not been a unifier; has not been sufficiently bipartisan. Are these people suggesting that he should have tried to legislate only things that a bunch of Republican moderates would be willing to support? That would not allow him to do much. Even on the infrastructure deal, which is popular with voters on both sides, only 32 Republicans voted for it in either house, and they've faced threats from their own side for doing so.

Are they suggesting he should turn the other cheek and remain silent when most Republicans continue to support the Big Lie and paper over what happened on January 6, while Republican-controlled states enact measures to manipulate future election results?

Where were these people when Bush and Trump made no attempt at bipartisanship? When the last Republican Congress rammed through tax cuts to benefit predominantly the wealthy and failed by only one vote to repeal Obamacare and leave millions without health cover? Where were they when Republicans obstructed everything Obama tried to do? When they stacked the Supreme Court by blocking Obama's nominee on a made-up pretext and then ramming through their own on the eve of an election?

It's called POLITICS, Flighty. And in politics you don't do what you can't do, you do what you can do. The BBB bill is a perfect example of the Biden administration's ineptitude. All along Joe Manchin was saying he wasn't going to vote for it. I believe the exact quote was, "I'm not going to vote for it!" The math is pretty simple, without Joe Manchin's vote it doesn't pass. So what does the Biden/Schumer/Pelosi Dream Team do? Make some changes? Put their dicks back in their pants and go back to the drawing board? Compromise? Nope, they ram it right through Congress as is, in the face of 100% certain failure, and now they'll whine about it forever. Because Democrats are children, Flighty, snotty-nosed, insider-trading children.

Republicans don't give a shit about bipartisanship. They don't run on that platform, so they don't have to coddle the children when they win. The Republican platform is, "We're going to win the White House, the Senate, and the HoR, then we're going to undo all the damage the shitheel Democrats have done, then we're going to lower taxes and de-regulate business, then we're going to twiddle our fingers under our chin and smile demonically like Mister Burns on The Simpsons."

Something for you to look forward to in 2024, Flighty.

What Biden should be looking for right now is some common ground, he should be begging for it. He's governing as if he's got a mandate to transition the USA to socialism. What he actually had a RAZOR-THIN mandate to do was to stop the Democrats from smashing all our windows. Windows are expensive.

[Stavros]

"In Texas, state Republicans last year enacted new voting laws that require absentee voters to include their driver’s license number, state ID number or the last four digits of their social security number on their applications. Counties then have to match this information with voter profiles to approve them for a mail-in ballot."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/15/texas-county-rejects-half-of-mail-in-ballot-applications-

So where are those 'Don't Tread one Me' Patriots when the State is imposing itself on the Citizen? Are they marching to Austin, 'locked and loaded'?

Coming next: DNA Samples, Voting in Public by a Show of Hands?

In the UK I fill out a form from the Electoral Registration Office, this puts me on the Register, and about a month or so before an election I get a notice with a card with my name on it. And then I vote. Simple.
https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote

[Nick Danger]

"In Texas, state Republicans last year enacted new voting laws that require absentee voters to include their driver’s license number, state ID number or the last four digits of their social security number on their applications. Counties then have to match this information with voter profiles to approve them for a mail-in ballot."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/15/texas-county-rejects-half-of-mail-in-ballot-applications-

So where are those 'Don't Tread one Me' Patriots when the State is imposing itself on the Citizen? Are they marching to Austin, 'locked and loaded'?

Coming next: DNA Samples, Voting in Public by a Show of Hands?

In the UK I fill out a form from the Electoral Registration Office, this puts me on the Register, and about a month or so before an election I get a notice with a card with my name on it. And then I vote. Simple.
https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote

Does it even matter, Stavros? The voting bills are not getting passed, period. Republicans are certainly not going to vote for them, which would normally still leave the Democrats a 51-50 majority. But Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin are real Americans with common sense, not progressive retards trying to get into Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez' pants. So they're sitting at 49-52 with 0 seconds left in the game.

Is this going to stop the Democrats from pushing this legislation anyway? No. They will push it through facing, again, a 100% chance of failure. I guess this is some new kind of political strategy - failing miserably and purposefully. At this point they could probably pass their family leave legislation, their clean energy subsidies, maybe even an expansion of Obamacare. Instead, they want the Big Prize - the right to vote for all the illegal immigrants they've just funneled secretly to strategic districts around the country, ensuring Democratic victories in key November elections. Not gonna happen. The ball is bigger than the hoop. They're going to walk away with empty pockets and a Chinese finger trap.

[Nick Danger]

And speaking of failing miserably and purposefully, say hello to your 2024 Democratic Presidential candidate:

1360847

[Nick Danger]

I'm gonna take it you guys are done arguing with me. I completely understand, it's one thing to spout off bullshit statistics and idealistic notions about the way you want things to be, but it's another to confront 24/7 news about a country spiraling out of control, especially when it's specifically because it's being governed by the people you support. I know you guys don't feel like dupes but you are. Woke Progressivism must and will be stopped. It might work where YOU live (or does it?), but it doesn't work in the USA.

Crime and inflation are spiking ad infinitum. Productive citizens are being hacked to death in the streets by low-lifes. The streets of our cities are filled with homeless people, garbage, and literal piles of shit, along with a few cigar butts flicked carelessly out the window by woke prosecutors driving by indifferently.

Don't worry though, we're gonna fix this lame rat-fuck. Americans aren't stupid, they're just easily frightened. The Democrats gained power because a portion of Independents and Republicans voted their way in 2020, behind hating Trump and just plain wanting the Democratic rioting to end. Now that the Democrats have produced their "results," expect the exact opposite in 2022 and 2024.

Soon enough we'll be putting the Democrats back to bed (for the loooooong sleep this time) and cleaning house. Observe and you might learn something. Meanwhile, I'm taking a break from this forum, there's no sense checking in here every day if no one's got anything stupid left to say about how fucking awesome liberalism is. Consider yourselves back on echo-chamber status, enjoy.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDYNVH0U3cs

[thombergeron]

Wow. It's funny when liberals spout off wildly about things they don't know, but it's even funnier when you can just post one link and discredit their entire world view.

https://www.vote.org/absentee-voting-rules/

Also, being incarcerated doesn't mean you are a felon. Also, most felons can vote if they apply for reinstatement of the privilege.

Done with this guy. NEXT!

Could you at least do everyone the courtesy of skimming the content that you link to you dumb bitch? It literally describes the hoops voters have to jump through to vote absentee. Did you already forget you tried to tell us that people who are incarcerated can vote absentee? If you are in jail or prison on a felony charge, you cannot vote PERIOD in 48 states.


475 cases of election fraud isn't astronomical, but it's a lot. Many of those cases don't involve just one vote either, so your little homemade statistic there is well off the mark.\

Literal LOL at “isn’t astronomical.” Three ten-thousandths (3/10000) is, by definition, not a lot. But since you seem to know a lot about those individual cases of voter fraud, why don’t you run down each of them, describe how many votes were fraudulently cast, and the statistical significance of each given the relevant voter pool.

By contrast, between 2014-2018, approximately 32 million voters were purged from the voter rolls, a huge increase when compared to the period prior to Shelby and primarily occurring in states that were previously subject to preclearance
Due to a history of racist voting laws.


Your logic doesn't stand. Disenfranchised blacks have not been disenfranchised because they're black, they've been disenfranchised because they've lost the public's trust.

Just to be totally clear, this is racism. Next time you’re getting all chuffed because someone called you a racist, try to keep in mind that it’s because you say racist shit like this.

[thombergeron]

Also, most felons can vote if they apply for reinstatement of the privilege.

This is so awesome I had to come back. First of all, in the United States of America, according the the Constitution, voting is a right, not a privilege.

To be sure, some proportion of felons can "apply for reinstatement." Curiously absent from this breezy assertion is the reality of what proportion of felons actually are able to re-assert their franchise under the burden of the "application" process. Why don't you describe for us the process of re-asserting one's voting rights following a felony conviction in, say, Mississippi or Virginia?

Oh and did you hear the one about how Florida voters repealed felony disenfranchisement, and then the Republican legislature tried to block it, and then the courts told them to fuck off, and then the legislature literally imposed a poll tax on felons in order to thwart the will of the voters? Good times.

[Nick Danger]

Just to be totally clear, this is racism. Next time you’re getting all chuffed because someone called you a racist, try to keep in mind that it’s because you say racist shit like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPw-3e_pzqU

Of course I'm racist, Thom. So are you. You do know there are black people right? And that there are differences in black and white people, right? So you're a racist. The difference in your racism and my racism is, I'm smart enough to know how to help black people become more prosperous and less destructive members of society, and you aren't. Being called a racist doesn't bother me in the slightest, the word has lost all meaning. I'm also a nazi and fascist right? And a white supremacist? And a terrorist? And a murderer?

Are we still talking about the fact that you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to voting rights? I think I pointed out quite a few fallacies in your BOLD statements about voting rights that you've utterly failed to acknowledge in your post. Like, do you still think incarcerated people can't vote? Do you still think it in ALL CAPS?

Also, you just called me a "dumb bitch," Thom. It says in your description there that you joined this forum in 2005, so you can't mathematically be a teenager. Maybe just slow.

[thombergeron]

I'm smart enough to know how to help black people become more prosperous and less destructive members of society, and you aren't.

Sweetheart, you are not smart by any stretch of the imagination. You are a dumb bigot who lacks the capacity for critical thought. You haven't said a single thing in this thread that 20,000 other mouthbreathers haven't drooled out before you.


Are we still talking about the fact that you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to voting rights? I think I pointed out quite a few fallacies in your BOLD statements about voting rights that you've utterly failed to acknowledge in your post.

LOL no you didn't you dumb bitch.

[thombergeron]

Imagine being so soft-headed that you actually buy this silly shit.

1361225

[Nick Danger]

Imagine being so soft-headed that you actually buy this silly shit.

Thom, I'm sorry, I severely over-estimated you. You're simply way too far under my level for me to enjoy humiliating you. Have a nice day. :confused:

[thombergeron]

Thom, I'm sorry, I severely over-estimated you. You're simply way too far under my level for me to enjoy humiliating you. Have a nice day. :confused:

Run bitch.

[thombergeron]

It's going to whip ass when the NRCC tries to win control of Congress by running on an agenda of doing absolutely nothing for two years.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/chris-sununu-explains-going-from-pretty-close-to-no-on-new-hampshire-senate-bid

[Stavros]

It's going to whip ass when the NRCC tries to win control of Congress by running on an agenda of doing absolutely nothing for two years.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/chris-sununu-explains-going-from-pretty-close-to-no-on-new-hampshire-senate-bid

I don't really know who Sununu is, but my question to you follows on from his pained complaint that his GOP colleagues in DC told him their aim is to do nothing for two years but object to whatever Biden and the Democrrats offer them.

What I don't understand is why the Republican Party seems to have turned its back on politics as policy, and become obsessed with Trump, and a list of complaints about CRT, the management of Covid and Trans issues, to name just three on which they are ignorant, misguided, and offensively wrong. It is as if they have circled the wagons and created an existential crisis that can only be resolved through the re-election of Trump and the 'completion' of 'unfinished business' even though the 'business' they did manage before led to their defeat in 2020.

There are not many exact comparison to make between the GOP and the Conservative Party here, but one of the reasons why the Conservatives have dominated British poiticis is due to their ablity to review and reform both the party organization and their policies, through which they win elections (though one must also admit Labour has the knack of losing them).
For a long time it was inconceivable that a Black or Asian MP would ever represent the Party in the House of Commons -when a Black man was selected to run for the Cheltenham consitutency in the 1990s (imposed by Central Office) he was all but disowned by his own party, who then lost the seat to the Liberal Democrats. Since then, and with Cameron's reforms, Black and Asian MPs are not only common, but have been and are occupying senior positions in Government as well as Junior positions, something that is unthinkable in the US under a Republican, with Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell the only prominent Black Republicans (and consider the typically nasty comments Trump made when Powell died) I can think of, if we agree Carson was an insignficant nobody, and a corrupt one.

Given that the Republicans fail to record a majority of votes but hold power as minorty parties, why have they failed to grow by offering a sufficiently broad package of policies to widen their apppeal to the voters? It seems strange to the point of being a form of self-harm that they insult and abuse minorities and immigrants in particular, many if not most of whom are more attracted to the low-tax, market-based individualism one associates with the GOP rather than the Democrats.

It may just be a phase, but with the Republicans now flirting with New Wave Fascism and repudiating the Constitution and the Separation of Powers, notably by treating Congress with contempt, the question is can people like Sununu, and Liz Cheney, save the Party from what appears to be its death-spiral-?

[thombergeron]

It's not a phase. The Republican Party is a fascist party, and it has been since the Reagan Administration. It can't broaden its appeal because it's pursued a white-grievance agenda for the past 45 years.

Chris Sununu is governor of the state of New Hampshire and the son of John Sununu, who was NH governor during the 1980s and then President George HW Bush's Chief of Staff. So he's very much a product of the institutional Republican Party, and while he says he's not interested in keeping a chair warm in the Senate, he does say that he's a "Trump guy through and through."

[Stavros]

It's not a phase. The Republican Party is a fascist party, and it has been since the Reagan Administration. It can't broaden its appeal because it's pursued a white-grievance agenda for the past 45 years.


And right on cue the Attorney General of Texas, responding to a Court of Appeals decision that stops him wasting tax-payers money investigating voter fraud that doesn't exist, has said

“We’re done in Texas if anybody can vote".
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/texas-gop-attorney-general-tells-202932177.html


Reminds me of Brecht's poem in which he notes that complaint of a party official in Berlin after the 1953 riots that the people had lost the confidence of the Government, concluding-

Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?

https://www.poemhunter.com/poem/the-solution/

[filghy2]

Given that the Republicans fail to record a majority of votes but hold power as minority parties, why have they failed to grow by offering a sufficiently broad package of policies to widen their appeal to the voters? It seems strange to the point of being a form of self-harm that they insult and abuse minorities and immigrants in particular, many if not most of whom are more attracted to the low-tax, market-based individualism one associates with the GOP rather than the Democrats.

The simple answer is that they can't do it because their base would hate it. After the 2012 election loss the party did a post-mortem which recommended that they do more to appeal to minorities and present a less intolerant and less pro-rich image.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/6-big-takeaways-from-the-rnc-s-incredible-2012-autopsy

It went nowhere because the reaction from their supporters was so negative. (For most politicians this is all that matters because they face far more risk of losing in a primary than in a general election.) Instead, they went big-time for a guy who did the opposite. And now they can't have a post-mortem on 2020 because nobody is allowed to admit that Trump lost. So they have left themselves with no choice but to double down on appealing to their existing base and relying on electoral manipulation to ensure minority rule.

[thombergeron]

Here again, Senate Minority Leader McConnell confirms that the contemporary GOP doesn't have an agenda that it can state publicly:

https://www.businessinsider.com/mitch-mcconnell-gop-midterm-agenda-congress-republicans-retake-scenario-comments-2022-1

These and other comments are echoes of the 2020 Republican Party Platform, which was, in its entirety, "Donald Trump should be President of the United States."

A lot of people interpret this lack of specifics as evidence that the Republican Party doesn't believe in anything. But this is too cute by half. Everybody knows what Donald Trump's vision for America is. He talks about it all the time. And it's a vision shared and endorsed by long-time establishment Republicans like Newt Gingrich and Pat Buchanan: Donald Trump should have complete and unquestioned authority over a state apparatus that ensures the privileges of white people over all others. Any Republicans who deviate at all from the party line are immediately ostracized from the party.

[filghy2]

A lot of people interpret this lack of specifics as evidence that the Republican Party doesn't believe in anything. But this is too cute by half. Everybody knows what Donald Trump's vision for America is. He talks about it all the time. And it's a vision shared and endorsed by long-time establishment Republicans like Newt Gingrich and Pat Buchanan: Donald Trump should have complete and unquestioned authority over a state apparatus that ensures the privileges of white people over all others.

Is that really the party's primary objective, or is white identity politics mainly a cynical device to get the white working class to vote for a party the prioritises the interests of the rich? The best clue seems to be what they focussed on when they controlled both both houses in Trump's first two years: tax cuts for the very rich, deregulation and cutting social programs (Obamacare). They don't want to talk about it because they know it's unpopular.

[thombergeron]

Is that really the party's primary objective, or is white identity politics mainly a cynical device to get the white working class to vote for a party the prioritises the interests of the rich? The best clue seems to be what they focussed on when they controlled both both houses in Trump's first two years: tax cuts for the very rich, deregulation and cutting social programs (Obamacare). They don't want to talk about it because they know it's unpopular.

It's not really clear what distinction you're trying to make here. A political party that pursues racist policies in order to appeal to the racism of its rank-and-file members is a racist party. That the GOP favors economic hierarchies doesn't obviate the fact that it also favors racial hierarchies.

[thombergeron]

In a nod to this thread's original topic, let's note that in the first year of Joe Biden's presidency, US GDP grew at 5.7%. The Q4 annualized rate was 6.9%, the strongest US economic performance since 1984.

This follows a 3.4% contraction during the final year of Trump's presidency, the worst decline since WWII

[broncofan]

It's not really clear what distinction you're trying to make here. A political party that pursues racist policies in order to appeal to the racism of its rank-and-file members is a racist party. That the GOP favors economic hierarchies doesn't obviate the fact that it also favors racial hierarchies.
I agree it's a racist party but I think filghy is talking about racism as marketing for policies that maintain economic hierarchies. For instance, a racist trope about Black welfare moms that is used to pass welfare reform is racism in furtherance of a policy that will keep poor people from ever rising above their stratum. It's often hard to separate the two because the language of demonization will also calcify existing racial hierarchies. And as you say they also favor racist policies and certainly oppose ameliorating any harm caused by racism.

[broncofan]

For instance, a racist trope about Black welfare moms that is used to pass welfare reform is racism in furtherance of a policy that will keep poor people from ever rising above their stratum.
And also from eating and having a roof above their heads (didn't want to give the impression that I think welfare reform laws only prevent economic mobility).

[Stavros]

In a nod to this thread's original topic, let's note that in the first year of Joe Biden's presidency, US GDP grew at 5.7%. The Q4 annualized rate was 6.9%, the strongest US economic performance since 1984.

This follows a 3.4% contraction during the final year of Trump's presidency, the worst decline since WWII

Yes, but was that decline caused by Trump's incompetence, or Covid, plus supply chain issues?

And is inflation a knock-on effect of years of government borrowing (and not just in the US) as well as people not spending in a lockdown going on shopping sprees after, flooding the market with money? Is it any wonder some analysts are predicting a crash either worse or similar to that of 2008? Trump may have added trillions to the public debt, here in the UK we have a Prime Minister who loves spending other people's money- personally, and as Prime Minister-and in spite of his reputation for fiscal prudence and market privilege, the Chancellor Rishi Sunak enabled, perhaps had to enable Govt borrowing to grow to bail out businesses, a generosity which we are told he wants to stop -and if he replaces Boris Johnson some time soon, the UK may be forced to endure another decade of Austerity, assuming the 'Conservatives' last that long in office.

The general point being that the Biden Presidency could be more successful than glass haf-empty people think, or Biden will be President when the capitalist system enters another crisis caused by staggering levels of as-yet unresolved debt, inflation and crises of production and supply.

The train is a comin' round the mountain....

[filghy2]

It's not really clear what distinction you're trying to make here. A political party that pursues racist policies in order to appeal to the racism of its rank-and-file members is a racist party. That the GOP favors economic hierarchies doesn't obviate the fact that it also favors racial hierarchies.

I never said it did. I was addressing your previous comment that the GOP's primary objective was to maintain white privilege. If you believe that racial/cultural objectives take precedence over economic objectives then what is your evidence?

To be clear, I'm talking about the objectives of the party leadership, not the rank and file. In know the evidence suggests Trump voters in 2016 were motivated more by racial concerns than by economic concerns, but that's a different issue.

[Nick Danger]

Christ you guys are lost without me, there's nothing worse than liberals arguing over the extent of their liberalness.

What I'm seeing in this thread is a bunch of people who OUGHT TO BE complaining about the current administration's absolute lack of an agenda, credibility, and integrity. I'm not pissed off about Biden, Biden is doing exactly what I expected him to do, he's an angry, senile, corrupt lackey. Obama said it best, "Don't underestimate Joe's ability to fuck things up." I didn't work for Joe Biden, I didn't speak for Joe Biden, I didn't vote for Joe Biden. But you guys did. For reasons, right?

I guess I just don't identify with the kind of attitude that you're going to try to justify and defend a guy you hung all your hopes on. I'm loving it, this laughably catastrophic Presidency is going to lock in 2022, 2024, and probably '26 and '28 for the Republicans, no questions asked. But you guys should be appalled by this ugliness.

I'll tell you guys a couple things that are happening right now that you don't seem to be noticing. First, Biden's done. Every Democrat with a survival instinct is going to keep him well at arm's length at this point, he's making a mockery of the office. Second, Manchin and Synema are going to defect; instead of negotiating with them, the childish Democrats are treating them like dirt, and the Republicans have opened their arms. I guarantee you there are talks behind the scenes about what the Republicans will do for their home-state agendas when they take Congressional power back in 2024, or maybe those negotiations have already happened before the BBB and voting rights bills - the very negotiations Team Biden couldn't or didn't bother with. Third, Kamala Harris is never going to be President. First and foremost because she's so closely associated with Biden, secondly because she's proven unlikable and unmarketable.

Unlike what Tomburger thinks, none of this has anything to do with non-existent racism and everything to do with shitty people doing a shitty job because they don't care about what they said they care about. Again, you guys should be the ones who are pissed.

I've got a week or so of down-time before my Germany trip if anyone wants to bark at me. Better bark now because I'm thinking I might stay abroad until the holidays, get out of the country altogether for the worst of this shit.;)

[Stavros]

The general point being that the Biden Presidency could be more successful than glass haf-empty people think, or Biden will be President when the capitalist system enters another crisis caused by staggering levels of as-yet unresolved debt, inflation and crises of production and supply.
The train is a comin' round the mountain....

Looks like the train has been and gone. When he announced his intention to run again in 2024, the groans could be heard across the wide Atlantic.

But, as the link below suggests, the Biden Presidency has both recognized the nature of the problems that have developed over the last 40 years, and decided there are means to change them. Instead of the Racist/Fascist slogan 'America First' (see British Academy link below for its ugly history), Biden's version has America negotiating a different structure to US Global Trade relations which have succeeded not so much in 'repatriating' jobs as Trump barked, but promoting investment in industry that to some extent is shaped by the Supply Chain fractures associated with Covid and China, but which goes beyond them to create a more responsible relationship, thus

"-the U.S. is looking not to create conflict but to “manage competition responsibly” and “work together on global challenges like climate, like macroeconomic stability, health security, and food security.” “But,” he said, “China has to be willing to play its part.”"

So rather than the Trump version in which countries like China lose out as America repatriated jobs, the Biden version has domestic investment linked to external competition, so neither 'America First' nor 'America Alone'. thus

-"Large-scale investment in semiconductor and clean energy production has jumped 20-fold since 2019, with private money following government seed money to mean about $3.5 trillion in public and private investment will flow into the economy in the next decade. Building domestic capacity will bring supply chains home and create jobs."
April 27, 2023 - by Heather Cox Richardson (substack.com) (https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/april-27-2023)

Doesn't mean problems of Debt and the juvenile tantrums of Congressional Republicans will make the transition smooth, but it does give Biden a record on which to stand in 2024, along with his robust position on Abortion -a vote-winner for Democrats, a vote loser for Republicans- and his defence of voting and Trans Rights.

A review of the term 'America First'
10-Minute Talks: America first and American fascism | The British Academy (https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/podcasts/10-minute-talks-america-first-and-american-fascism/)

[Luke Warm]

Lol, that Nick Danger post aged very poorly, I would say. It was off-target at the time, but sounds even more tone deaf now.

However, he was right about Synema, for whatever that is worth. Her career is basically over though… burned her bridges with Democrats, and Republicans don’t need her as a candidate when they’ll have “real” Republicans they can vote for.

[filghy2]

That's probably why Nick hasn't been back in over a year. The failure of the inevitable Republican triumph would be too embarassing, even for him. He made equally bold predictions in the past about Trump's inevitably triumphant presidency, but as least he had the pandemic as some kind of excuse.

[Fitzcarraldo]

It's baffling how little credit Biden has gotten for his accomplishments. First and foremost, he saved us from a second Trump term and full fascism. I realize he was far from a dream candidate for anyone, but he saved us from a second Trump term and full fascism. Second, he got an infrastructure bill passed! That is one of the most significant domestic political achievements in decades. He may not be exciting, but he's getting shit done, he's rebuilt our alliances (at least while he's in office), and he's taken steps to help the lower and middle classes and women. It's pathetic how these days people won't support someone in office who isn't constantly causing drama. I'm thrilled not to be cringing every day at the actions of the president.

[Stavros]

It's baffling how little credit Biden has gotten for his accomplishments. First and foremost, he saved us from a second Trump term and full fascism. I realize he was far from a dream candidate for anyone, but he saved us from a second Trump term and full fascism. Second, he got an infrastructure bill passed! That is one of the most significant domestic political achievements in decades. He may not be exciting, but he's getting shit done, he's rebuilt our alliances (at least while he's in office), and he's taken steps to help the lower and middle classes and women. It's pathetic how these days people won't support someone in office who isn't constantly causing drama. I'm thrilled not to be cringing every day at the actions of the president.

"He may not be exciting, but he's getting shit done" -over here Rishi Sunak constantly talks about 'delivering for the British people' which seems to mean those who earn in excess of several million a year. Delivery on the other hand is what people notice, and I think from what I have read that there is a significant core of American voters who have been energized by the Abortion restrictions that the Republicans are pushing, and this is now becoming a vote loser for the GOP. I don't know if he can harvest votes with his positions on Trans Rights, or Student Loan Debt, and I think the media can't handle a President who isn't constantly 'in your face' so he comes across as tepid at best, for some 'geriatric' which in both cases is unfair. But will he be judged on his record or, as some pundits put it, 'on the optics'?

My limited knowledge suggests Biden is a consummate politician, that he understands how the system works, and knows how to work it. When the Junior Donald Trump in 2020 alleged that Biden had done nothing in nearly 40 years in Congress, it was because he, like his dad doesn't know how the system works, and has probably never heard of the Congressional Record.. Biden piloted the Violence Against Women Act in the 1990s and recently held a poorly reported celebration of its anniversary and Re-Authorization. It was a bi-partisan Bill so Biden finds himself having to deal with a venomous hostility he did not know when he started out, so I am not sure his skills at the moment can breach some of the more contentious issues, such as the Debt Ceiling, but his tenure so far has been anything but a flop, the paralysis Mr Danger predicted has not happened.

None of Biden's practical skills makes headlines, it isn't intended to, so I assume when the time comes a lot of the so-called debate will be about the things that don't matter -after all, Jimmy Carter's record in 1980 wasn't that bad given the torrid time the US had in the 1970s, but he still lost to Reagan, admittedly a more charismatic speaker.

For those interested-
Remarks by President Biden Celebrating the Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act - The White House (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/03/16/remarks-by-president-biden-celebrating-the-reauthorization-of-the-violence-against-women-act/)

[KnightHawk 2.0]

It's baffling how little credit Biden has gotten for his accomplishments. First and foremost, he saved us from a second Trump term and full fascism. I realize he was far from a dream candidate for anyone, but he saved us from a second Trump term and full fascism. Second, he got an infrastructure bill passed! That is one of the most significant domestic political achievements in decades. He may not be exciting, but he's getting shit done, he's rebuilt our alliances (at least while he's in office), and he's taken steps to help the lower and middle classes and women. It's pathetic how these days people won't support someone in office who isn't constantly causing drama. I'm thrilled not to be cringing every day at the actions of the president.Completely agree 1000% with your post.

[Fitzcarraldo]

Dark Brandon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDZ1H4ABmiU

[KnightHawk 2.0]

President Joe Biden Zingers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRIPyGVNWws

[dirkmcgee]

It's baffling how little credit Biden has gotten for his accomplishments. First and foremost, he saved us from a second Trump term and full fascism. I realize he was far from a dream candidate for anyone, but he saved us from a second Trump term and full fascism. Second, he got an infrastructure bill passed! That is one of the most significant domestic political achievements in decades. He may not be exciting, but he's getting shit done, he's rebuilt our alliances (at least while he's in office), and he's taken steps to help the lower and middle classes and women. It's pathetic how these days people won't support someone in office who isn't constantly causing drama. I'm thrilled not to be cringing every day at the actions of the president.

Lmaoooooo DrUmPF iS a FaScIst.

Fucking brainlet take right there, but that'll happen when you're flailing for reasons as to why this absolute abortion of a term is a successful presidency.

[broncofan]

Lmaoooooo DrUmPF iS a FaScIst.

Fucking brainlet take right there, but that'll happen when you're flailing for reasons as to why this absolute abortion of a term is a successful presidency.
He hasn't told people to inject themselves with bleach, defended neo-nazis in Charlottesville, called covid a flu, asked the Georgia secretary of state to find votes for him, had dinner with a Neonazi named Nick Fuentes who used a baking cookies analogy to explain why he thinks the Holocaust couldn't have happened. His supporters who stormed the Capitol on January 6th included a man wearing a Camp Auschwitz shirt and someone waving a Confederate flag in our capitol (which is a painful and sad image that reminds us of the stupidity and bigotry he evoked). They also included a whole list of people who were part of the alt-right who have supported him since Charlottesville.

You should tell all of your Republican friends that you're attracted to transsexual women. I would support you if you wanted to speak about this at the next cpac conference. You can tell them that your anti-trans stance is really born of your passionate, sincere, and deeply felt feminism (and that just because you masturbate to images of transsexuals doesn't mean you think they should be allowed to endorse products). I'm sure some of the people who were saying stuff like "feminism is cancer" will be really receptive to your arguments. Maybe you can ask them to like some of your posts since nobody else seems to do it.

I also noticed you disliked a post saying that 4% inflation is not like the hyperinflation of 1920s Germany. You do like Nazi comparisons apparently, just not ones that object to the racism of Nazis.

[dirkmcgee]

He hasn't told people to inject themselves with bleach, defended neo-nazis in Charlottesville, called covid a flu, asked the Georgia secretary of state to find votes for him, had dinner with a Neonazi named Nick Fuentes who used a baking cookies analogy to explain why he thinks the Holocaust couldn't have happened. His supporters who stormed the Capitol on January 6th included a man wearing a Camp Auschwitz shirt and someone waving a Confederate flag in our capitol (which is a painful and sad image that reminds us of the stupidity and bigotry he evoked). They also included a whole list of people who were part of the alt-right who have supported him since Charlottesville.

You should tell all of your Republican friends that you're attracted to transsexual women. I would support you if you wanted to speak about this at the next cpac conference. You can tell them that your anti-trans stance is really born of your passionate, sincere, and deeply felt feminism (and that just because you masturbate to images of transsexuals doesn't mean you think they should be allowed to endorse products). I'm sure some of the people who were saying stuff like "feminism is cancer" will be really receptive to your arguments. Maybe you can ask them to like some of your posts since nobody else seems to do it.

I also noticed you disliked a post saying that 4% inflation is not like the hyperinflation of 1920s Germany. You do like Nazi comparisons apparently, just not ones that object to the racism of Nazis.

Literal fake news abound.

Never told people to inject themselves with bleach.

Never "defended Neo-Nazis" in Virginia.

Never encouraged anyone to "storm the capitol" (remember though, it's ok if State houses are stormed, or the senate building, at the actual behest of democrats).

The irony of your thinly veiled accusations of hypocrisy as you do nothing but project! No doubt you've referred to the likes of Blair White as a "traitor."

[broncofan]

The irony of your thinly veiled accusations of hypocrisy as you do nothing but project! No doubt you've referred to the likes of Blair White as a "traitor."
I don't know who she is. That you're bringing up a person I've never mentioned to accuse me of having a particular opinion about them just makes you look stupid. But please find me a post where I've mentioned "Blair White" or called her or anyone else a "traitor" for their political views.

[broncofan]

Never encouraged anyone to "storm the capitol" (remember though, it's ok if State houses are stormed, or the senate building, at the actual behest of democrats).


Where did I say it was okay if Democrats do it. Donald Trump did not concede an election he lost. He made frivolous and inconsistent accusations about voter fraud in Michigan and Pennsylvania. He called Raffensperger, the GA secretary of state, and asked him to find votes for him. He filed dozens of lawsuits, all of which were frivolous, and continued to insist that he really won the election even though there is no reality based theory on which he could make a good faith claim he did. If you don't see this as a catalyst for the actions of people who entered the capitol to try to hang Mike Pence and overturn the election, you're either willfully stupid or just stupid. What were they there for? They were there because they had been told by him that a grave injustice had taken place. None had. He continues to say the election was stolen from him. He has no theory on which to base this. Even while the votes were being counted he was demanding the counting be stopped and the election be called for him. Again, you can pretend otherwise, but I watched this human embodiment of corruption in action on twitter until his account was suspended.

Second: he asked a doctor on air whether injecting one's self with bleach could cure covid. This is one of the most idiotic things I've ever heard a person say. While he is so much of an egomaniac that he could not let medical experts talk about covid without his intervention, he could avoid sounding like someone who eats lead paint as a hobby. He also asked if sunlight entered into the body could cure covid. It probably won't surpise you that some Americans (his supporters) tried bleach as a treatment for covid. But I'm sure since he was just asking questions, ones that nobody with a brain would ask, it's okay. He also accused various universities of fabricating results about the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine as a covid treatment because they found it was ineffective and at one point he accused doctors of lying about covid deaths (ostensibly to make him look bad). You think that's fine maybe.

Third: the proud boys, Christopher Cantwell, and the entire alt-right thought Trump was the closest they've come to seeing their views mainstreamed. They were all at Charlottesville yelling "Jews will not replace us", yelling homophobic slurs, and also yelling fascist slogans. I can find you the interviews. Trump said he was sure there were good people on both sides. The problem is that one side was ideologically committed to hating every minority group in this country.

Finally, I never insist anyone of any particular background have particular views. There are some viewpoints I disagree with but I think they're wrong no matter who holds them. As a general matter one cannot defend something bigoted and then immunize the bigotry by finding one individual of the targeted group to offer a defense. If, for instance, a person says something antisemitic, like "Jews control every institution in the world" it doesn't become less so if you find one Jewish person to defend the statement. This should be obvious. If I then say, the statement is still antisemitic and that person is wrong, I am not calling the person who defended it a traitor. As an analogy all of this is lost on you I'm sure.

[broncofan]

That's probably why Nick hasn't been back in over a year. The failure of the inevitable Republican triumph would be too embarassing, even for him. He made equally bold predictions in the past about Trump's inevitably triumphant presidency, but as least he had the pandemic as some kind of excuse.
Nick was going to Germany the last time he posted and complaining about vaccine side effects (mandatory vaccination to enter). Maybe he went to Germany and found it's a much more liberal place with much better healthcare than the United States. In his head he doesn't admit that but it could be why he's stayed and is working his way towards citizenship. If so, he might not be here until October 2025 to weigh in on the German federal election as a supporter of the SPD.

[Luke Warm]

Trump said neo Nazis were “very fine people”. (spoiler alert: they are literally neo Nazis.) Some of Trump’s “very fine people” were people flying Nazi flags during the march (lots of pics online) and “very fine people” marched along side them and were fine with it. If I was at a march or a rally and someone was flying a Nazi flag, I would make them leave the march or I would leave the march. I would not march together with Nazis… “very fine people” would actually reject that shit, they do not tolerate hate groups.

Trump told people to walk down to the capitol building, and that people should “fight like hell” because otherwise “you’re not going to have a country left” if they don’t. The Proud Boys were just convicted at a trial, sentencing is later. But one of their defenses was that they were following the orders of Trump. They lost their case but if you don’t agree that Trump encouraged the attack on the capitol building, then you disagree with the people who actually attacked the capitol. Besides the Proud Boys, lots of defendants have argued this in court… that they were just doing what Trump told them to do.

This is not “fake news” - people are entitled to their opinions but they are not entitled to their own facts.


Literal fake news abound.

Never told people to inject themselves with bleach.

Never "defended Neo-Nazis" in Virginia.

Never encouraged anyone to "storm the capitol" (remember though, it's ok if State houses are stormed, or the senate building, at the actual behest of democrats).

The irony of your thinly veiled accusations of hypocrisy as you do nothing but project! No doubt you've referred to the likes of Blair White as a "traitor."

[Fitzcarraldo]

Biden accuser Tara Reade defects to Russia:
https://news.yahoo.com/biden-accuser-tara-reade-claims-195716504.html

[MrFanti]

Biden was cool in my book right up to the point where he thought he could judge and determine my Blackness....
Not cool anymore......

[Fitzcarraldo]

Biden was cool in my book right up to the point where he thought he could judge and determine my Blackness....
Not cool anymore......

I never thought he was cool. But I like how he hasn't staged any coups or even sucked up to dictators. Good luck with the Republicans and your Blackness, though.

[blackchubby38]

Biden was cool in my book right up to the point where he thought he could judge and determine my Blackness....
Not cool anymore......

Dude, that was 3 years ago, let it go already and I say that as someone who has never been fond of anyone deciding who/what is or isn't Black.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

President Joe Biden adding more jobs,and boosting the economy. Nice to have a president and administration working for the american people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uh0grctzjfg

[filghy2]

Nick was going to Germany the last time he posted and complaining about vaccine side effects (mandatory vaccination to enter). Maybe he went to Germany and found it's a much more liberal place with much better healthcare than the United States. In his head he doesn't admit that but it could be why he's stayed and is working his way towards citizenship. If so, he might not be here until October 2025 to weigh in on the German federal election as a supporter of the SPD.

I think he's probably gone off to some other forum to find new liberals to debate and tell himself he always wins because he refuses to accept any inconvenient facts.

Or maybe he invested all his retirement savings in Trump's social media company and can no longer afford internet. You may remember that one of his bold predictions was that Truth Social would be a great success.

Or maybe he just grew tired of being the turbo business owner from St George Utah and wanted to create a new online persona.

[holzz]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12190877/White-House-slams-trans-activist-Rose-Montoya-going-topless-says-WONT-invited-back.html

Dunno why he's getting heat for this. he's not responsible for her actions.

[holzz]

Doesn't DC have laws against public indecency? so then arrest her. simple. if it were a cis woman, would there be as much uproar? hardly.

[holzz]

https://twitter.com/therosemontoya/status/1668458605585235971?s=20

it's legal? i stand corrected.

[Stavros]

Who better to assess the Presidency of Joe Biden than Liz Truss. Who? Yes, the Prime Minister so bad they got rid of her before she trashed what is left of the UK. As she publishes her book -all Prime Ministers and Presidents publish books to justify their tenure, no matter how short, Truss lashes out at Biden revealing her predictable policy positions based on an ideology that in practice has Destruction with a Capital X marked on its forehead. Thus

"“There is no doubt in my mind that what Biden is doing is damaging the United States economy by pursuing huge subsidies, huge spending, raising taxes and now trying to impose this on the rest of the world through the OECD Minimum Tax Agreement,” Ms Truss said.“It’s not good enough for Biden just to have a socialist economic policy in the US, he also wants to export that socialist economic policy to Europe and to the United Kingdom,” she added."
Liz Truss attacks Joe Biden and Greta Thunberg as ‘left-wing orthodoxy’ (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/liz-truss-attacks-joe-biden-125805328.html)

It is hard to believe someone who grew up in the UK has no grasp of what Socialism is, let alone what it might be. These days, aping Trump, the word is recruited as a scare word for those who think it must be evil and wicked.

Now consider what would happen to American agriculture without those billions of dollars of subsidies. The tax-payer funded loans Trump used to construct his buildings with the assistance of Cosa Nostra. Imagine the US without Medicare, Medicaid, 'Obama Care'- well, without the Department of Education, the Environmental Protection Agency, the FBI, and you crawl close to the bonfire, void of vanity.

There is a reason why even Capitalist Governments subsidize agriculture, industry and social services, and Truss knows this, she just doesn't like it.

And failed to demonstrate that libertarian alternatives work better.

Socialism? Where is Biden's re-distribution of the wealth of America to the people who make it? Has a single US company been taken into public ownership? Do all schoolchildren in State Schools have free meals? Do college students have free education as we used to have in the UK?

Answers should be addressed to: The Right Honourable Elizabeth Truss MP, House of Commons, London SW1.

Don't expect a reply. Or a a signed copy of her book.

[Stavros]

"The paradox of Biden’s poll numbers among Democrats is that there is no complaint about how he runs the government.The further paradox is that there is no movement to supplant Biden. There is no faction of the party that seeks to remove him. There is no group within the Congress that seeks to topple him. There is no credible person running against him or contemplating a campaign against him. There is no king across the sea. There is no Bonnie Prince Charlie ready to invade. There are no pretenders to the throne. There is none of that. The poll numbers as a party matter are hollow."
Democrats need to realize that there is no alternative to Biden – and buck up (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/democrats-realize-no-alternative-biden-090705826.html)

A fair article, with one significant flaw- if he drops dead of a heart attack on Thanksgiving weekend, what happens next?

[Fitzcarraldo]

It's bizarre. Everyone complains that he's too old and they don't want to see him run again, but no one is stepping up. He's actually achieved some impressive things (infrastructure bill, CHIPS Act, and silly named "Inflation Reduction Act"), but doesn't even get credit from his own party.

Swing voters won't vote for an Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders. No one from the more moderate part of the party seems interested. California governor Gavin Newsom is Biden's biggest cheerleader, but doesn't admit to contemplating a run before 2028.

[filghy2]

The 'no alternative' argument is a bit circular because if Biden was put out of action by a health issue alternatives would emerge. I think the main reason they haven't is that nobody wants to risk being seen as the person who split the party and helped Trump to win again.

Every time a sitting President has faced a serious challenge in recent decades their party has lost the subsequent election. To be fair, however, they only faced a serious challenge because they were already in political difficulties so we can't be sure of the counterfactual.
https://www.vox.com/2023/9/12/23868230/biden-democratic-primary-challenge-polls

[filghy2]

It's puzzling that Biden's approval rating has fallen so low (currently 38%) when objective measures suggest that things have been improving. Violent crime seems to have fallen back to pre-pandemic levels. Inflation has fallen to just over 3% without a recession (ie the elusive soft landing seems close to being achieved).

Some people say that prices haven't come down, but that never happened in previous episodes either. That didn't stop Reagan from receiving the credit in the 1980s, even though there was a severe recession early in his Presidency.

One thing that's been highlighted in many discussions is that there's a wide gap between peoples' assessments of their own circumstances and their views on how the country is doing, which doesn't seem to make sense in aggregate. According to the poll shown below, 56% of Americans surveyed thought 2023 was a bad or terrible year for the country, but only 27% said is was bad or terrible for them personally. Not surprisingly, the gap is largest for Republicans, but it's also large for Independents.

1442962

Right-wing media and increased partisanship are obviously part of the story, but that doesn't explain the Independents. Maybe it's to do with the way mainstream media reports things; eg emphasising gloom and doom stories because they generate more clicks?

[Stavros]

There was Trump's sarcastic praise of Jimmy Carter the other day, saying he was a great President but only when compared to Biden. The basic position taken by Trump and his media mates, is that no evidence is required to dismiss the Biden Presidency as a 'disaster' or 'the worst in American history' etc etc. If you keep saying it then people might believe it, though I have also read that Biden is being encouraged to go on the attack more, particularly as this is an election year.

Yes, on several policy issues, Biden is doing well. But I suspect he and his team yearn for an end to Israel's demolition of Gaza, though what happens when the guns and bombs fall silent is still unknown, the fate of 2 million people yet to be decided; while the idiocy of the Houthi in Yemen may not last as their resources are not as strong as the ones Hamas built up over the last 20 odd years- but they can cause chaos in the Red Sea with attacks that threaten to have the same impact on shipping that Egypt's closure of the Suez Canal had in 1956 and 1967. More important for Yemen is that in such a divided and lawless country there does not appear to be a sufficiently well organized alternative to the Houthi, though it would not surprise me if the 'South' with Aden as its capital secedes again as it did in 1969. It also suggests Saudi Arabia will not be bringing its futile war there to an end, its lukewarm 'rapprochement' with Iran now looking colder and colder.

A turning point in Ukraine's favour doesn't seem to be happening there, so on the foreign policy front, Biden is besieged by negative stories in the media, and wars he cannot control. though the idea none of this would have happened had Trump been President is risible.

[Stavros]

I watched the State of the Union speech live, and thought it was a good performance for 'Smokin' Joe' Biden, given some feared he would forget the name of his wife, introduce Sweden's Prime Minister as the PM from Finland, and just stop talking for a few seconds while trying to remember where he is. It was noticeable that the Republican Speaker rarely stood up, was an object lesson in facial expressions, mostly negative, but gelled with the stark divisions in the Congress that merely consolidate how badly ruptured the American polity has become.

Will it help Joe's ratings? I think so, but maybe not as much as his supporters would like.

I did also watch some of Senator Kai Britt's response, which has occasioned much mocker. Sitting in a kitchen with all that heavy breathing was almost comical, until you realise she is a Senator, not a reject from Loose Women (UK version of The View). It must have been bad when her own party is in dismay over it. But then they are also in dismay with Trump, they just won't admit it.

‘What the Hell Am I Watching’: Republicans Torch Their Own SOTU Rebuttal (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/hell-am-watching-republicans-torch-053820399.html)

[KnightHawk 2.0]

I watched the State of the Union speech live, and thought it was a good performance for 'Smokin' Joe' Biden, given some feared he would forget the name of his wife, introduce Sweden's Prime Minister as the PM from Finland, and just stop talking for a few seconds while trying to remember where he is. It was noticeable that the Republican Speaker rarely stood up, was an object lesson in facial expressions, mostly negative, but gelled with the stark divisions in the Congress that merely consolidate how badly ruptured the American polity has become.

Will it help Joe's ratings? I think so, but maybe not as much as his supporters would like.

I did also watch some of Senator Kai Britt's response, which has occasioned much mocker. Sitting in a kitchen with all that heavy breathing was almost comical, until you realise she is a Senator, not a reject from Loose Women (UK version of The View). It must have been bad when her own party is in dismay over it. But then they are also in dismay with Trump, they just won't admit it.

‘What the Hell Am I Watching’: Republicans Torch Their Own SOTU Rebuttal (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/hell-am-watching-republicans-torch-053820399.html)I also watched the State Of The Union address last night,and thought that President Joe Biden did a phenomenal job of delivering the speech,and how he handled the immature heckling from the MAGA Caucus,and that childish stunt by Marjorie-Qanon Trollette-Taylor Greene,and all of them kept falling into his traps,because they know he's telling the truth about them. And the Speaker In Name Only MAGA Mike Johnson looked very uncomfortable,and didn't want to be there. Alabama Senator Kai Britt's response the SOTU was overscripted and fell completely flat. No they sure don't.

[Stavros]

I did also watch some of Senator Kai Britt's response, which has occasioned much mocker. Sitting in a kitchen with all that heavy breathing was almost comical, until you realise she is a Senator, not a reject from Loose Women (UK version of The View). It must have been bad when her own party is in dismay over it. But then they are also in dismay with Trump, they just won't admit it.

‘What the Hell Am I Watching’: Republicans Torch Their Own SOTU Rebuttal (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/hell-am-watching-republicans-torch-053820399.html)

The claim now is that Senator Britt is a liar -who'd a thunk it? Isn't it now de rigeur for the Party of Trump?

Journalist says Katie Britt’s story about child sex abuse ‘out-and-out lie’ | Republicans | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/09/journalist-accuses-katie-britt-child-sex-abuse-story)

[MrFanti]

I'm still waiting for Liberals to stay true to their word about supporting us POC and stepping down from their various positions in favor of POC...
I.E., "Walk your talk"....

[KnightHawk 2.0]

The claim now is that Senator Britt is a liar -who'd a thunk it? Isn't it now de rigeur for the Party of Trump?

Journalist says Katie Britt’s story about child sex abuse ‘out-and-out lie’ | Republicans | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/09/journalist-accuses-katie-britt-child-sex-abuse-story)Yes it is. Everything Katie Britt said the Republican Rebuttal was a lie.

[Stavros]

I'm still waiting for Liberals to stay true to their word about supporting us POC and stepping down from their various positions in favor of POC...
I.E., "Walk your talk"....

I think a bit more detail might help me understand your post/complaint.

[Luke Warm]

Double post, sorry

[Luke Warm]

I'm still waiting for Liberals to stay true to their word about supporting us POC and stepping down from their various positions in favor of POC...
I.E., "Walk your talk"....

I am not aware of any previous promises from liberals to step down from their positions in favor of POC. I’m not saying that this hasn’t occurred, just that I havent heard about this. Are these elected positions? Appointed positions? How would this even work? When someone resigns, they generally are not in charge of naming their replacement. What is an example of a situation where this might be able to happen? Link?

However, we could talk about what has Biden done so far… some things that help ‘everyone’, but in some cases, particularly boost the black community:

Dramatically lowered the price of insulin - should be kicking in around now. I believe blacks in the US are disproportionately affected by diabetes, statistically.

Student loan debt relief, which disproportionately affects minorities. Student debt is a racial justice issue because wealth is generational (a vast amount of wealth is inherited, and blacks were obviously set back in this regard, historically). When Dad can’t pay for your college, you take out loans.

Appointment of the first black woman to the Supreme Court. Representation matters.

The lowest black unemployment rate on record. Black wealth up 60% compared to pre-Covid stats. There are a ton of economic accomplishments at the link, probable none of them are exclusive to blacks, none of them have the word black in their title, but nonetheless many these policies disproportionately affect blacks in a positive way:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/02/06/fact-sheet-the-biden-%E2%81%A0harris-administration-advances-equity-and-opportunity-for-black-americans-and-communities-across-the-country-2/

[filghy2]

I'm still waiting for Liberals to stay true to their word about supporting us POC and stepping down from their various positions in favor of POC...
I.E., "Walk your talk"....

Some facts for you.

25% of the current Congress identifies as non-white, compared to 41% of the population. It is mainly Hispanics who are under-represented: Blacks have about the same share as in the general population.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/01/09/u-s-congress-continues-to-grow-in-racial-ethnic-diversity/

80% of the non-white representatives are Democrats and 20% Republican. So about 40% of Democrat reps are non-white, close to their share of the population, but only 10% of Republicans.

Do you still want to tell us the problem is liberals not practising what they preach?

[MrFanti]

I am not aware of any previous promises from liberals to step down from their positions in favor of POC. I’m not saying that this hasn’t occurred, just that I havent heard about this. Are these elected positions? Appointed positions? How would this even work? When someone resigns, they generally are not in charge of naming their replacement. What is an example of a situation where this might be able to happen? Link?

However, we could talk about what has Biden done so far… some things that help ‘everyone’, but in some cases, particularly boost the black community:

Dramatically lowered the price of insulin - should be kicking in around now. I believe blacks in the US are disproportionately affected by diabetes, statistically.

Student loan debt relief, which disproportionately affects minorities. Student debt is a racial justice issue because wealth is generational (a vast amount of wealth is inherited, and blacks were obviously set back in this regard, historically). When Dad can’t pay for your college, you take out loans.

Appointment of the first black woman to the Supreme Court. Representation matters.

The lowest black unemployment rate on record. Black wealth up 60% compared to pre-Covid stats. There are a ton of economic accomplishments at the link, probable none of them are exclusive to blacks, none of them have the word black in their title, but nonetheless many these policies disproportionately affect blacks in a positive way:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/02/06/fact-sheet-the-biden-%E2%81%A0harris-administration-advances-equity-and-opportunity-for-black-americans-and-communities-across-the-country-2/

Looks like my prior response to this was removed.
Oh well, your point is taken.....

[Stavros]

Looks like my prior response to this was removed.
Oh well, your point is taken.....

You may be aware that a technical problem erased posts within the last two weeks, so I believe the post you refer to was one of the casualties of that incident.

[Stavros]

Is it the case that the Media in the US is so obsessed with Trump, that it is failing to report on the evident successes of the Biden Presidency?

"One of the things these [poll] numbers suggest is that the journalists are not getting the truth across to citizens on some key points (or if they are, that truth is being ignored).The poll respondents claim that one of their big concerns is the economy. If that’s the case, they should be happy with Biden. Among the factors: low inflation, significant growth and low unemployment. Paul Krugman, the Nobel laureate economist, wrote (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/22/opinion/biden-economy.html) recently: “The economic news in 2023 was almost miraculously good.” (Even the cost of a classic Thanksgiving dinner, he notes, was down 4.5% last year.)
If the economy is that strong and that important to voters – and if Biden can take at least some of the credit – why isn’t it coming across? That’s something for the Biden campaign, primarily; but it’s also something for media people since journalists are supposed to be communicating information so that citizens can vote with knowledge. That should be a higher priority than generating profits, ratings and clicks, but one eventually despairs that it ever will be."
Polls show Trump winning key swing states. That’s partly a failure of the press | Margaret Sullivan | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/05/polls-trump-winning-swing-states-press-failure)

[Fitzcarraldo]

I think they ignore him because of the lack of drama. It's a public disservice, though. People think the economy is worse off than it is.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

Is it the case that the Media in the US is so obsessed with Trump, that it is failing to report on the evident successes of the Biden Presidency?

"One of the things these [poll] numbers suggest is that the journalists are not getting the truth across to citizens on some key points (or if they are, that truth is being ignored).The poll respondents claim that one of their big concerns is the economy. If that’s the case, they should be happy with Biden. Among the factors: low inflation, significant growth and low unemployment. Paul Krugman, the Nobel laureate economist, wrote (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/22/opinion/biden-economy.html) recently: “The economic news in 2023 was almost miraculously good.” (Even the cost of a classic Thanksgiving dinner, he notes, was down 4.5% last year.)
If the economy is that strong and that important to voters – and if Biden can take at least some of the credit – why isn’t it coming across? That’s something for the Biden campaign, primarily; but it’s also something for media people since journalists are supposed to be communicating information so that citizens can vote with knowledge. That should be a higher priority than generating profits, ratings and clicks, but one eventually despairs that it ever will be."
Polls show Trump winning key swing states. That’s partly a failure of the press | Margaret Sullivan | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/05/polls-trump-winning-swing-states-press-failure)The News Media in the US is failing to report on the successes of Biden Presidency,because they're too busy being distracted by Donald Trump and his drama,which is a disservice to the public.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

I think they ignore him because of the lack of drama. It's a public disservice, though. People think the economy is worse off than it is. And those same people forgot the economy was worse under Donald Trump.

[filghy2]

Is it the case that the Media in the US is so obsessed with Trump, that it is failing to report on the evident successes of the Biden Presidency?

Even though they give Trump a lot of attention, there's an argument that they still gloss over what he is saying. Apart from his supporters, not many people are being exposed to the full extent of his bizarre, incoherent, vindictive rants. Hopefully this will change over the next 7 months.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/06/donald-trump-speech-analysis

I had to laugh at this definition of intelligence from Trump.
“The fake news will say, ‘Oh, he goes from subject to subject.’ No, you have to be very smart to do that. You got to be very smart. You know what it is? It’s called spot-checking. You’re thinking about something when you’re talking about something else, and then you get back to the original. And they go, ‘Holy shit. Did you see what he did?’ It’s called intelligence.”

[broncofan]

“The fake news will say, ‘Oh, he goes from subject to subject.’ No, you have to be very smart to do that. You got to be very smart. You know what it is? It’s called spot-checking. You’re thinking about something when you’re talking about something else, and then you get back to the original. And they go, ‘Holy shit. Did you see what he did?’ It’s called intelligence.”
I practice a secular form of meditation that has been described as a means of training attention in order to avoid the kind of mind-wandering he is describing. There's a belief among some in the neuroscience community that the brain is every bit as active when a person is awake but not actively focusing their attention on a particular subject as when their brain is highly focused on something in particular. When one is not focusing, particular structures in the brain that are part of what is called the default mode network (or task negative network) are active and one's thoughts will oscillate from thoughts about the past, fruitless speculation about the future, and daydreams intended to fulfill wishes but which often lead to dissatisfaction. Some people who have difficulty focusing are not able to quiet this network and will find negative associations cropping up, for instance, when they attempt to train their attention on something.

Anyhow, what he describes is the disordered mind of someone who cannot maintain their attention on a single subject, and who constantly shifts to whatever self-centered thought that interests him most in a given moment. Finally, he never returns to the original idea as he claims, because he's usually lost track of what his purpose was when he began his series of non-sequiturs. Anyway, it's early here and although this isn't super relevant politically I thought if some people hadn't heard of the default mode network, it provides a useful way to think about what the mind will do on its own when we don't apply it to something outside ourselves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_mode_network

[filghy2]

That certainly rings true. True intelligence is the ability to focus on what matters most and identify the most pertinent pieces of information. As they say, If everything is important then nothing is. A mental map in which everything is connected to everything else, without any sense of which connections matter most, is just a confused mess in which people blindly follow their impulses.

Like any other skill, mental focussing is something that needs to be practised otherwise it will atrophy. I don't meditate, but I do make a conscious effort to spend time on focussed mental activities like reading on some issue or doing puzzles. I have a history of dementia in my family, which is something I've become more conscious of as I get older, and I know this is something that can help.

The default mode sounds like it's related to the tendency that social media platforms capitalise on to generate clicks and, in turn, exacerbate. I wonder if the amount of time spent online is contributing to a loss of these skills in the general population.