this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2024
87 points (98.9% liked)

Chat

7500 readers
19 users here now

Relaxed section for discussion and debate that doesn't fit anywhere else. Whether it's advice, how your week is going, a link that's at the back of your mind, or something like that, it can likely go here.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Trump was a lying liar and Biden was a hoarse doddering old man who got lost mid sentence.

On MSNBC, Joy Reid pointed out that Americans want their president to be an avatar. They want a commander who looks strong and tough, and we saw that when the populace couldn't get behind Al Gore (who she credited as being a great mind) who acted more like a policy wank than Bush, who felt more like a (New England) cowboy.

Earlier in the week, I caught a bit of Steve Bannon's radio show where he railed about how we need to eliminate the deep state -- the Praetorian Guard -- that indicted Trump and props up Biden. At the time, I wondered who this Praetorian Guard was supposed to have assassinated, who was bribing them, and which combat actions they'd fought in. If nothing else, I think this debate proves there is no deep state/Praetorian Guard because they'd have assassinated Biden last week during his preparation rather than let him get on stage.

Look, in any large enough group, there are going to be some incompetent people and some competent bad actors. We have to vote for the people who will admit to that and get rid of them. The U.S. is going to have to choose between a leader who tries to install good people to run the government and one who intends to install people bent on dismantling the government and giving loyalty to the leader alone. Even IN the debate, Trump asked Biden, "Who did you fire?" -- that you have to fire bad people ... but this was in reference to firing the General who claimed to have heard Trump call veterans "suckers and losers". I can't prove Trump did or didn't say that, but I do remember Trump skipping the memorial ceremony.

Trump said Charlottesville never happened. I remember it. Trump said Nancy Pelosi admitted responsibility for January 6th. She did not. Trump said the ex-governor of Virginia was not just for late term abortion, but infanticide. He is not. His lies were too numerous to count.

Biden lost track of his thoughts early on and blurted out "We finally beat Medicare." Trump said, "He did beat Medicare and he beat it to death." Biden said Trump had sex with a porn star while (uh, uhm stumble) his wife was pregnant. Trump asserted he did not. Biden called Trump a criminal. Trump said Biden would be the criminal when his term was over (not exact words).

It wasn't good in any direction. It was ugly. Through it, though, Trump maintained his TV-personality persona while Biden generally looked infirm.

Personally, I want a deep state that does things like: build roads, enforce food labeling laws so that the box accurately reflects the food inside, eventually hires enough judges to have a fast turn-around time for family court and the like. It should be really hard to fire them when they are speaking the truth as the understand it and easy to fire them if they are distorting the truth. Alas, I worry that Joy Reid is correct and the U.S. will vote for the guy they think is most like John Wayne.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I think you're out of touch.

Fascism isn't unpopular. It's very popular when people are feeling desperate.

I keep hearing people say stuff like this: He can't win! He's so fascist! He can't win, Biden did such a good job if you actually look at the facts!

That's not how elections work. People vote based on what they think will satisfy their interests, and a lot voters don't see any reason to vote for Biden, and so they'll stay home. People don't need to vote for Trump for Trump to win. They just need to give in, and Biden is a "give in" machine. He's poison to voter hope or enthusiasm, and he's going to lose if he doesn't get off the ticket.

If we want to take the threat of Trump seriously, no more hiding our heads in the sand.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Sorry, I think I did misread your comment, apologies.

I do realize it's growing in popularity, I am not suggesting anyone hide their head in the sand, though.

I was trying to say that this narrative of "were doomed" and "theyre both bad choices" feeds into this problem. Its more false equivalency, and discourages voting. I realize you weren't saying this, and that this IS what people are saying. But I still find it gobsmacking that people are seriously saying it's hard to choose.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Not the person you were replying to, but the "doom" spouter here. I realize you are 100% right that my post might make people less inspired to vote. I'm sorry for that. I was very distressed at the time. My intent was to emphasize that: while a rational person might complain about either candidate, one is substantially worse and we MUST vote in favor of democracy when the other choice (and his advisors) are openly saying they want to dismantle the institutional expertise that understand how stuff works (which materials are suitable for building roads on various substructures, or where groundwater migrates and how to prevent contamination, and yes, how to figure out how a virus works). They call these people "the deep state", which minimizes the reason we want them to keep their apolitical jobs. Of course the experts -- like everyone --will likely have political opinions, but that doesn't mean they are partisan. As long as they look at data and derive truthful results regardless of their personal politics, it doesn't matter. Obviously we should fire those who can't do their job or hide/ignore/promote information such that their results are distorted to favor a personal agenda (also knowing that some data SHOULD be rejected if acquired by dubious means, isn't reproduced in other trials, etc.).

Anyway, I apologize for the negativity. Thank you for calling me out! :-)