Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
You're willing to accept a far right nut who's competent because the way he would dismantle democracy and institute fascism wouldn't be so messy.
I think a lot of mean things about the Republicans and even I don't think the bulk of them want to dismantle democracy. They want to instill their own special version of it. It's an important distinction and yeah it's disgusting but you can't fix a house that's burned to cinders.
You don't even consider that competent fascists taking over state power would necessarily mean the country burning.
Being a religious bigot also doesn't automatically make one a fascist, and I could easily turn this sentence around and it would be just as hyperbolic.
That's why liberals are thought of as shallow.
They're thought of as shallow because it's the token line of the time uttered by parrots with no mind of their own.
They care more about form than they do substance.
Pithy comments that say little. Let's talk about substance. What positions would Pence advance that Trump wouldn't? There basically aren't any. Trump does everything the GOP wants on most issues and breaks from them only in areas where he's absolutely insane (trade wars, building a stupid border wall, and making a fool of himself regularly). The GOP doesn't need Trump to accomplish their domestic goals. it's probably why they haven't turned on him. He already backs them on most of the things they care about (Guns, abortion, LGBT bigotry, drugs, hard on crime, etc). Nevermind that Trump's ludicrous behavior is a perfect smoke screen, drawing all attention away from anything the GOP might be doing in Congress which isn't much to be fair. It''s hard to pass their nonsense when it plays poorly even among their own base and the party itself can't agree on a number of things like the shape of immigration reform.
So there's two immediate problems with your claim (both of which happen to be matters of substance). 1) Pence wouldn't push anything that Trump isn't already behind and 2) the idea that just getting Pence in the White House will automatically fix the bipolar behavior of Congressional Republicans is far fetched.
The difference between Trump and Pence isn't a matter of the country going a bad route (it's doing that regardless) it's a question of will there be anything left to salvage once it's over.
So yeah. Let's just make some pithy comment about substance and form and pretend that making it is somehow insightful commentary when you don't seem to understand the distinction.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/21 20:33:20
Pence is not the egomaniac that Trump is, would be better focused on what he personally wants to achieve (such as limiting the rights of gay people) and would cooperate more nicely with the rest of the Republican Party. He wouldn't have the same issues with acquiring and keeping people in the administration. He also likely would see more cooperation from the Democratic Party.
These things would make him more effective than Trump and therefore worse. Trump is going senile as we speak whereas Pence isn't. That's a world of difference.
I think a lot of mean things about the Republicans and even I don't think the bulk of them want to dismantle democracy. They want to instill their own special version of it. It's an important distinction and yeah it's disgusting but you can't fix a house that's burned to cinders.
"Their own special version", which is to say making sure that only the demographics most likely to vote Republican (IE middle class and up, particularly white men) gets to have their vote count. That's already a dismantled democracy. There is no need to specifically ban, say, black people from voting when all you need to do is institute rules that coincidentally make it harder for minorities to vote. That's the whole point of gerrymandering, voter ID and just plain demanding that people show up on a work day. And this is without the more fundamental problems of the two-party system or any of the security issues associated with the voting machines. If you're worried about what will be left to salvage after Trump then all I have to say to you is that: you ought to have worried for decades.
Frazzled wrote:Talking to? You act like Europe means something militarily. Quiet. Adults are playing big boy empire games.
By burning money through wars in Afghanistan and Iraq while killing innumerable civilians and ignoring that US soldiers are killing themselves in record numbers when they come back from there? Bravo, what a magnificent empire.
Rosebuddy wrote: Pence is not the egomaniac that Trump is, would be better focused on what he personally wants to achieve (such as limiting the rights of gay people) and would cooperate more nicely with the rest of the Republican Party. He wouldn't have the same issues with acquiring and keeping people in the administration. He also likely would see more cooperation from the Democratic Party.
Again, Trump is not refusing to cooperate with the rest of the republican party. He is not standing in the path of awful policies and preventing them from passing. His nonsense is in addition to giving the rest of the party whatever they want. The only places where there isn't cooperation are where Trump is so far off the deep end that even his own party won't back him. The ineffectiveness of the republican party is because congress is broken, after almost a decade of having no policy positions besides "OBAMA SUCKS" they're discovering that getting legislation done is hard and what little platform they have is wildly unpopular and/or unconstitutional. Trump is just a rubber stamp if/when the rest of his party gives him anything to sign. Pence might be the same rubber stamp for the republican party line, but at least wouldn't come with the rest of Trump's dumpster fire of an administration.
And yes, Pence would likely see less turnover and more cooperation. But that's because he'd probably hire people who are less awful in the first place, and push policies that are more reasonable and more likely to earn cooperation. I don't know why you think these things are negatives.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
We will just have to risk that the military Colossus that is Belgium does not help us.
That's.... pretty arrogant, actually Fraz (and this comes from me).
You mock them, but their close air support saved American lives in Afghanistan. When the US invoked article V, and called on Nato, they stepped up, did their part, and some gave their lives alongside American patriots.
Mario wrote: By burning money through wars in Afghanistan and Iraq while killing innumerable civilians and ignoring that US soldiers are killing themselves in record numbers when they come back from there? Bravo, what a magnificent empire.
It would seem poorly tailored men are aping my style. Hating on America is my shtick.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/07/22 00:39:05
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
Rosebuddy wrote: Pence is not the egomaniac that Trump is, would be better focused on what he personally wants to achieve (such as limiting the rights of gay people)
Something the party is already dedicated to doing, and the Court has already thrown a roadblock in that, and it's still something Trump is behind anyway. That the GOP hasn't already done it has nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with internal divisions.
He wouldn't have the same issues with acquiring and keeping people in the administration. He also likely would see more cooperation from the Democratic Party.
Doubt it. At best he'd get more cooperation from the rest of the Republican party, but the GOP would still be divided on a lot of the things he wants most and that wouldn't be much different.
These things would make him more effective than Trump and therefore worse.
He'd certainly be more effective but he'd still just be an Executive and Congress would still be disfunctional. Less turn over in the executive branches would be a wonderful thing right now. We're bleeding experienced and capable executive officers throughout several branches of government who are being replaced with brown nosers who will tell Trump exactly what he wants to hear. You worry about fascism in the US? Be concerned that the principal criteria of appointment is kissing Trump's ass rather than anything approaching experience or ability. Pence's politics might be abhorrent but he won't be so absurd as to allow men like Pruitt to remain in office for as long as he was.
"Their own special version", which is to say making sure that only the demographics most likely to vote Republican (IE middle class and up, particularly white men) gets to have their vote count. That's already a dismantled democracy. There is no need to specifically ban, say, black people from voting when all you need to do is institute rules that coincidentally make it harder for minorities to vote. That's the whole point of gerrymandering, voter ID and just plain demanding that people show up on a work day. And this is without the more fundamental problems of the two-party system or any of the security issues associated with the voting machines. If you're worried about what will be left to salvage after Trump then all I have to say to you is that: you ought to have worried for decades.
Do you see me praising it as a good thing? What you still seem to be missing is that the GOP and Trump are in the exact same place on that issue. Especially Trump who built his entire campaign strategy around suppressing the opposition's vote. The issue is the country can endure the Republicans being self-serving bigots but I don't know if it can survive Trump making a mockery of the country while being self-serving bigots. I haven't been alive for decades, and prior to the rise of the Tea Party the American right was stupid but not insane like it is now. Acting like we should have seen Trump coming 20 years ago is rather absurd. A big part of his winning was that it was absurd in 2016. Apathy is a powerful thing, but remaining apathetic because all your choices suck is the whole problem and how we got into this mess in the first place.
The earliest I remember thinking that the GOP would get this low eventually was the latter part of the Bush (Jr) administration, the 2005-2007 range. I was still pretty young then and not very well informed on politics so I'd be surprised if there weren't a good number of people who saw it earlier.
NinthMusketeer wrote: The earliest I remember thinking that the GOP would get this low eventually was the latter part of the Bush (Jr) administration, the 2005-2007 range. I was still pretty young then and not very well informed on politics so I'd be surprised if there weren't a good number of people who saw it earlier.
I miss Republicans like Ike. It bothers me ot see Conservatism dragged through the mud by self serving, self righteous demagogues,
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
A Town Called Malus wrote: And this could lead to a situation where, in the future, the US calls for help from those countries which used to be staunch allies and those countries do not respond.
We will just have to risk that the military Colossus that is Belgium does not help us.
It's not always about their might, they often have other qualities that are helpful. Like not being Americans in some cases - the US is nowhere near as despised and hated as US media likes to claim, but sometimes it is still political to send someone else into places you're not looked upon favorably. Belgium is probably the third (after Canada and Norway) least disliked NATO country worldwide, simply because people don't even know it exists.
NinthMusketeer wrote: The earliest I remember thinking that the GOP would get this low eventually was the latter part of the Bush (Jr) administration, the 2005-2007 range. I was still pretty young then and not very well informed on politics so I'd be surprised if there weren't a good number of people who saw it earlier.
I miss Republicans like Ike. It bothers me to see Conservatism dragged through the mud by self serving, self righteous demagogues,
It bothers me too. The GOP is still associated with Conservatism despite them having abandoned and betrayed it so thoroughly. It's an insult to say that the conservative platform is represented by the GOP, but it doesn't stop the comparison being made. They USED to be the conservative party, and they still CLAIM to be conservative, but that doesn't make it so.
It bothers me too. The GOP is still associated with Conservatism despite them having abandoned and betrayed it so thoroughly. It's an insult to say that the conservative platform is represented by the GOP, but it doesn't stop the comparison being made. They USED to be the conservative party, and they still CLAIM to be conservative, but that doesn't make it so.
LordofHats wrote: Acting like we should have seen Trump coming 20 years ago is rather absurd.
Forty years ago you already had Reagan, so it wasn't exactly unprecedented. In the nineties you got the Clintons talking about how black teens were super predators. The US was built on racism and various people have fought tooth and nail both to dismantle and to expand this system. Trump just happened to be the one to embody the logical conclusion to the right-wing's trajectory. So that he can't keep one thought straight from breakfast to breakfast is fortunate because if he could then he wouldn't care about a big ole concrete wall but would think of some more efficient, less flashy way of suppressing latinos. He would probably still use the rhetoric because of its symbolic value but would "reach across the aisle" and merely institute harsher deportation procedures, a more widespread denaturalisation task force, a better funded and more militarised ICE and the Democrats would eat it up, lick the plate clean and ask for more compromise.
Frazzled wrote: Talking to? You act like Europe means something militarily. Quiet. Adults are playing big boy empire games.
Hey Fraz, if we don't "matter", can we please have our 454 dead squaddies back?
Cheers ...
PS: just speaking for UK in AF there ...
I also believe we lost more men in Iraq to drugged up US pilots than to Iraq forces (1st Iraq war)
Your last point is especially laughable and comical, because not only the 7th ed Valkyrie shown dumber things (like being able to throw the troopers without parachutes out of its hatches, no harm done) - Irbis
Rosebuddy wrote: Forty years ago you already had Reagan, so it wasn't exactly unprecedented. In the nineties you got the Clintons talking about how black teens were super predators. The US was built on racism and various people have fought tooth and nail both to dismantle and to expand this system.
Weren't you babbling about form vs substance a moment ago? You seem to have gotten over the whole substance part and now you're just whining about form
Comparing Trump to Reagan or the Clintons is asinine. His presidency goes beyond America's racist tendencies and culture. American politics have shifted heavily since the 90s. In the 90s there was bipartisan support for gun control, anti-abortion, anti-LGBT, and exceptionally discriminatory hard on crime policies. The current political landscape is certainly in the trajectory of things we say when I was 10 but so were a dozen other outcomes.
And the GOP is already behind harsher deportation, except for their own internal divisions preventing it. The last bit there doesn't even make sense. ICE is already surprisingly militarized, and under Trump taking more extreme action than ever. It's unlikely Pence would ever have gone so far since outside of Trump the GOP seems to broadly recognize the precarious nature of the party's relationship with the Hispanic and Latino populations. Even the GOP breaks from Trump's stance, just not enough to turn because there's little reason to. They can curtail him on that front and distance themselves from the aftermath. Having Pence as president would probably improve that situation not worsen it and that's all about how Pence is an actual competent politician who recognizes a dead hand.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/22 13:27:40
LordofHats wrote: Acting like we should have seen Trump coming 20 years ago is rather absurd.
Forty years ago you already had Reagan, so it wasn't exactly unprecedented. In the nineties you got the Clintons talking about how black teens were super predators. The US was built on racism and various people have fought tooth and nail both to dismantle and to expand this system. Trump just happened to be the one to embody the logical conclusion to the right-wing's trajectory. So that he can't keep one thought straight from breakfast to breakfast is fortunate because if he could then he wouldn't care about a big ole concrete wall but would think of some more efficient, less flashy way of suppressing latinos. He would probably still use the rhetoric because of its symbolic value but would "reach across the aisle" and merely institute harsher deportation procedures, a more widespread denaturalisation task force, a better funded and more militarised ICE and the Democrats would eat it up, lick the plate clean and ask for more compromise.
Than you for showing that both sides have fault here. It gets tiring to see democrats compared to paragons of virtue while republicans are vilified as enemies to all mankind. Until more people clue into this, not much is ever really going to improve and it will be a continual case of the rascals out and the rogues in.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/22 14:08:05
Rosebuddy wrote: Forty years ago you already had Reagan, so it wasn't exactly unprecedented. In the nineties you got the Clintons talking about how black teens were super predators. The US was built on racism and various people have fought tooth and nail both to dismantle and to expand this system.
Weren't you babbling about form vs substance a moment ago? You seem to have gotten over the whole substance part and now you're just whining about form
Comparing Trump to Reagan or the Clintons is asinine. His presidency goes beyond America's racist tendencies and culture. American politics have shifted heavily since the 90s. In the 90s there was bipartisan support for gun control, anti-abortion, anti-LGBT, and exceptionally discriminatory hard on crime policies. The current political landscape is certainly in the trajectory of things we say when I was 10 but so were a dozen other outcomes.
And the GOP is already behind harsher deportation, except for their own internal divisions preventing it. The last bit there doesn't even make sense. ICE is already surprisingly militarized, and under Trump taking more extreme action than ever. It's unlikely Pence would ever have gone so far since outside of Trump the GOP seems to broadly recognize the precarious nature of the party's relationship with the Hispanic and Latino populations. Even the GOP breaks from Trump's stance, just not enough to turn because there's little reason to. They can curtail him on that front and distance themselves from the aftermath. Having Pence as president would probably improve that situation not worsen it and that's all about how Pence is an actual competent politician who recognizes a dead hand.
I think Pence knows it is a dead presidency, it would explain why he has gone pretty much radio silent.
LordofHats wrote: Acting like we should have seen Trump coming 20 years ago is rather absurd.
Forty years ago you already had Reagan, so it wasn't exactly unprecedented. In the nineties you got the Clintons talking about how black teens were super predators. The US was built on racism and various people have fought tooth and nail both to dismantle and to expand this system. Trump just happened to be the one to embody the logical conclusion to the right-wing's trajectory. So that he can't keep one thought straight from breakfast to breakfast is fortunate because if he could then he wouldn't care about a big ole concrete wall but would think of some more efficient, less flashy way of suppressing latinos. He would probably still use the rhetoric because of its symbolic value but would "reach across the aisle" and merely institute harsher deportation procedures, a more widespread denaturalisation task force, a better funded and more militarised ICE and the Democrats would eat it up, lick the plate clean and ask for more compromise.
Than you for showing that both sides have fault here. It gets tiring to see democrats compared to paragons of virtue while republicans are vilified as enemies to all mankind. Until more people clue into this, not much is ever really going to improve and it will be a continual case of the rascals out and the rogues in.
Sure both sides have fault somewhere on something, but who is it that is continuing and making worse those views?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/22 14:34:18
I think Pence knows it is a dead presidency, it would explain why he has gone pretty much radio silent.
Pence is hard to gauge. He's in a silly position because he's eternally tied to the Trump presidency. I don't think he expected to ever run for the office himself, cause I don't think he's that stupid. Maybe he was as delusional about who he was dealing with as the rest of the GoP "he doesn't mean a literal wall" party in 2016. Maybe he only ever intended to use the VP position to leverage his legislative agenda. He's weaker than some congressmen on supporting Trump, but he's also more consistent than most of congress in offering support. Whether that's because he's dealing with a bad situation for his political future, or simply feels obligated to support Trump because of position idk.
I wouldn't call it a dead presidency yet, which is just depressing. Trump's die hards have gone beyond having their heads in the sand at this point. The GoP finds him too advantageous (or is just too short sided to see any consequences). Democrats are a fickle bunch who will withdraw support for petty reasons. I dread 2020, because I don't think a second term is impossible for Trump anymore and what the feth does that say about America?
Tradition, stability and continuity. Duty and responsibility. Not spending more than your government makes.
I think you can see where Republicans have abandoned these.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Relapse wrote: while republicans are vilified as enemies to all mankind.
Well, in fairness, I got used to it, but they don't really help themselves with that when you have sights like this at 'Unite the Right'
Spoiler:
also, Reagan talking about trade. Seems a pretty different theory of trade than Trump has.
You missed entirely my point. I don’t deny there are problems on the conservative side, but many here seem blind to the fact that there are similar groups on the liberal side.
Relapse wrote:
Than you for showing that both sides have fault here. It gets tiring to see democrats compared to paragons of virtue while republicans are vilified as enemies to all mankind. Until more people clue into this, not much is ever really going to improve and it will be a continual case of the rascals out and the rogues in.
It's not that the democrats are paragons of virtue, far from it, it's that next to the republicans, they look like paragons of virtue. Not exactly the same thing...
Tradition, stability and continuity. Duty and responsibility. Not spending more than your government makes.
I think you can see where Republicans have abandoned these
Well, ok, tradition, I can understand that, but which traditions ?
As for stability and continuity, er... That's basically been a democrat trait for a while now. If anything, being seen as "the candidate of the status-quo" was a big issue for Hillary.
Once again, it's not that the democrats are really the good guys, it's more that, when you have a choice between a party that has nazi support rallies and candidates, and a party that doesn't, people tend to assume the latter isn't as bad as the former.
Tradition, stability and continuity. Duty and responsibility. Not spending more than your government makes.
I think you can see where Republicans have abandoned these.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Relapse wrote: while republicans are vilified as enemies to all mankind.
Well, in fairness, I got used to it, but they don't really help themselves with that when you have sights like this at 'Unite the Right'
Spoiler:
also, Reagan talking about trade. Seems a pretty different theory of trade than Trump has.
You missed entirely my point. I don’t deny there are problems on the conservative side, but many here seem blind to the fact that there are similar groups on the liberal side.
Can you point to one group on the left that is as bad as the neo-nazis, white supremacists, KKK etc? (in before antifa)
Also, when a Democratic candidate or politician comes out as a sexually abusive monster, the party returns their donations, stops supporting them, and generally says "We are not like that. We do not support or condone that."
When a Republican candidate or politician comes out the same... The party shrugs their shoulders and does nothing.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
JNAProductions wrote: Also, when a Democratic candidate or politician comes out as a sexually abusive monster, the party returns their donations, stops supporting them, and generally says "We are not like that. We do not support or condone that."
When a Republican candidate or politician comes out the same... The party shrugs their shoulders and does nothing.
Or in the case of the ULINE owners they keep donating to a child molester running for senate
JNAProductions wrote: Also, when a Democratic candidate or politician comes out as a sexually abusive monster, the party returns their donations, stops supporting them, and generally says "We are not like that. We do not support or condone that."
When a Republican candidate or politician comes out the same... The party shrugs their shoulders and does nothing.
More left wing blather in the Dakka echo chamber....The Democratic party handled serial abuser of women Bill Clinton really well, haven't they? Shamed him right out of public life, along with his wife that abetted and aided him in his career of taking advantage of women, they did....
JNAProductions wrote: Also, when a Democratic candidate or politician comes out as a sexually abusive monster, the party returns their donations, stops supporting them, and generally says "We are not like that. We do not support or condone that."
When a Republican candidate or politician comes out the same... The party shrugs their shoulders and does nothing.
More left wing blather in the Dakka echo chamber....The Democratic party handled serial abuser of women Bill Clinton really well, haven't they? Shamed him right out of public life, along with his wife that abetted and aided him in his career of taking advantage of women, they did....
Can you give an example that isn't 20 years old? I'll be waiting
Tradition, stability and continuity. Duty and responsibility. Not spending more than your government makes.
I think you can see where Republicans have abandoned these.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Relapse wrote: while republicans are vilified as enemies to all mankind.
Well, in fairness, I got used to it, but they don't really help themselves with that when you have sights like this at 'Unite the Right'
Spoiler:
also, Reagan talking about trade. Seems a pretty different theory of trade than Trump has.
You missed entirely my point. I don’t deny there are problems on the conservative side, but many here seem blind to the fact that there are similar groups on the liberal side.
Can you point to one group on the left that is as bad as the neo-nazis, white supremacists, KKK etc? (in before antifa)
I would hardly put neo nazis and white supremists in my definition of conservative any more than I would put terrorists who claim they kill in the name of Allah in as representative of Muslims.
18.000 
3.500 
8.200 
3.300 
2.400 
3.100 
5.500 
2.500 
3.200 
3.000
