|
Post by mike on Jul 7, 2020 18:42:04 GMT -5
IcarusFellOnce, think about this: do you really believe many people would approve of the things like the George Floyd incident? I don't think there are very many people whose viewpoints would extend to that. But consider this: things like that have been going on for decades, and most have gotten little or no attention. Why? because the media decided not to dwell on things like that, other than the occasional incident like Rodney King. My point being that the press isn't really interested in informing people, but rather amusing them & increasing their viewership. Whatever you do, don't upset the advertisers. When the occasional event is covered, most people do object, proportionate to the media coverage. When the uninformed politician says something reprehensible, whether or not the media brings attention to it is impacted by which party the politician belongs to. Many people would agree that the Republicans aren't living up to their responsibility, but that's nothing new. Did you notice that when the southern DEMOCRATS supported segregation, they were not vilified? (Most of us are too young to have personal memory of that), but the general notion is that it's the republicans who lean that way. Like the Vietnam war, the democrats (Kennedy) started it, and democrats (Johnson) who expanded it, while the republicans (Nixon) stopped it, but most people blamed the republicans for the war. Media distorts, and most people are influenced by that. My point is neither for or against any particular party, but I resent when the media distorts the picture. As far as racism, sure it's detestable, but it's also nothing new, and not the sole responsibility of either party. Like the recent rejection of civil war leaders. Those statues were always weird, but how many administrations of both parties did nothing, now suddenly it's the republicans that are being held responsible? To me the democrats want to micro-manage your business, and republicans want to micro-manage your private life. Personally I would like it if both would back-off. If I thought legislation would be fair, there's a lot they could do to improve things, but it's all pie-in-the-sky thinking, as long as there's money in politics, that won't happen. Every election cycle I have seen has followed a pattern: "We have these serious social problems, vote for me and I'll fix them." Then nothing happens. Oh, and of course we need more taxes for (schools, police, or some other socially appealing group), then after the taxes are increased the money is shifted away from whatever bill-of-goods we have been sold, and spent on other projects. The best example I can give is the bullet train for California. Do you know how much money they're spending? $100 million per mile! For hundreds of miles! How many people will be better served than driving or flying? We shortchange necessary programs like Medical (California's version of Medicaid), then spend Billions on things we don't need. Both parties play those games, then insist it's the other party that does unpopular things and of course, OUR party that does good things. They both consist of humans, therefore they are a mix of bad & good. Take a contentious issue such as abortion, if you asked 10 people their opinion, you would be lucky if you only got 27 different opinions. How can it be that all the democrats are for it, and all republicans are against it? That defies human nature, do you think perhaps someone is lying?
|
|
|
Post by IcarusFellOnce on Jul 7, 2020 18:59:27 GMT -5
IcarusFellOnce , think about this: do you really believe many people would approve of the things like the George Floyd incident? I don't think there are very many people whose viewpoints would extend to that. But consider this: things like that have been going on for decades, and most have gotten little or no attention. Why? because the media decided not to dwell on things like that, other than the occasional incident like Rodney King. My point being that the press isn't really interested in informing people, but rather amusing them & increasing their viewership. Whatever you do, don't upset the advertisers. When the occasional event is covered, most people do object, proportionate to the media coverage. When the uninformed politician says something reprehensible, whether or not the media brings attention to it is impacted by which party the politician belongs to. Many people would agree that the Republicans aren't living up to their responsibility, but that's nothing new. Did you notice that when the southern DEMOCRATS supported segregation, they were not vilified? (Most of us are too young to have personal memory of that), but the general notion is that it's the republicans who lean that way. Like the Vietnam war, the democrats (Kennedy) started it, and democrats (Johnson) who expanded it, while the republicans (Nixon) stopped it, but most people blamed the republicans for the war. Media distorts, and most people are influenced by that. My point is neither for or against any particular party, but I resent when the media distorts the picture. As far as racism, sure it's detestable, but it's also nothing new, and not the sole responsibility of either party. Like the recent rejection of civil war leaders. Those statues were always weird, but how many administrations of both parties did nothing, now suddenly it's the republicans that are being held responsible? To me the democrats want to micro-manage your business, and republicans want to micro-manage your private life. Personally I would like it if both would back-off. If I thought legislation would be fair, there's a lot they could do to improve things, but it's all pie-in-the-sky thinking, as long as there's money in politics, that won't happen. Every election cycle I have seen has followed a pattern: "We have these serious social problems, vote for me and I'll fix them." Then nothing happens. Oh, and of course we need more taxes for (schools, police, or some other socially appealing group), then after the taxes are increased the money is shifted away from whatever bill-of-goods we have been sold, and spent on other projects. The best example I can give is the bullet train for California. Do you know how much money they're spending? $100 million per mile! For hundreds of miles! How many people will be better served than driving or flying? We shortchange necessary programs like Medical (California's version of Medicaid), then spend Billions on things we don't need. Both parties play those games, then insist it's the other party that does unpopular things and of course, OUR party that does good things. They both consist of humans, therefore they are a mix of bad & good. Take a contentious issue such as abortion, if you asked 10 people their opinion, you would be lucky if you only got 27 different opinions. How can it be that all the democrats are for it, and all republicans are against it? That defies human nature, do you think perhaps someone is lying? Aware of the history of the parties... and that they switched platforms and supporter along the way. Aware that systemic racism has been going on for a while.. you can't not as first generation American whose mom is from Mexico. I also know police have been doing this all along... And yet.. I still don't blame the media entirely... it's a way to deflect truly where the blame lies... on all of us. They are chasing ratings.. if we really want it to change then we have to change the business of media and the way they do business on a fundamental level. The only thing that has changed is the fact that social media has taken a prominent place in our society.. and the fact we have these amazingly good quality of recording devices in our palms now in our cell phone. You have a right to a political party or no political party. I am KEENLY aware of the role money plays in politics.. honestly as a read through your statement I am not reading anything I am not aware of. NOR am I reading any real tangible solutions. I find it intellectually cowardly to also just point out how everyone and everything is terrible and equate both sides as being equally terrible... ESPECIALLY when not offering any tangible solution. My only question to you.. is what are you doing about it?
|
|
|
Post by someonerandom on Jul 7, 2020 19:19:40 GMT -5
Well I don’t identify as a “socialist” but I take it the video intends the term to be synonymous with people like me who think Trump and his supporters are trash, so I watched. A guy arguing against a letter that a socialist wrote. Cool. Good thing Biden isn’t a socialist. So now can you tell us why you support Trump, instead of posing arguments against what his opponent ISN’T? Really, what are you? I think Biden/whoever his running mate is are socialists, they may not admit it. Well, the main reason is that Trump is not a socialist, the economy was good (before the governors shut down the states) and unemployment was very low. I dont want to be like China or North Korea, where they tell you what to do and when to do it. I am afraid it will come to that. That's what all these young college kids want. I'm glad I'm older and dont have too many years left. I dont want to see it get bad. Since you answered my question I’ll answer yours: I consider myself a liberal. I believe that a society is at its healthiest when it takes elements of both socialism and libertarianism, and implements them to varying degrees in different areas of society, sometimes at the same time (example public education for all, with the option to pay for private school if you want). I think that our country is way too far down the libertarian/unfettered capitalism side of the spectrum. If you want to call me a socialist that’s fine, just as I think it’s fine to call you a racist fascist. As for the rest of it... I just can’t. El Cid is doing the dirty work right now which I’m thankful for, because I’m tired. Between you, steveo, and James, I’m starting to miss Manda. I still feel like I’m punching down when I insult her, but at least I don’t have to dislocate my damn shoulder in order to do it. So with that, I will leave you to go “jill off” to videos of Greg Abbott speeches, or whatever it is you do in between Fox News fever dreams and making pear salad for church.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2020 19:21:15 GMT -5
I grew up in a socialist democratic country and would take that any time over what is going on here in the US rn. I supported Bernie Sanders all the way and I am behind everything he stands for. I went to his rally up here in our state and it was amazing and it gave me hope that there was a chance for the US. Unfortunately Bernie dropped out and Americans don't have many choices left. This once great nation is in a very bad place rn and it makes me very sad. It's baffling to me how people equal socialism with communism... That is all I am going to put in here.
|
|
|
Post by devogirl on Jul 7, 2020 19:32:36 GMT -5
I dont want to be like China or North Korea, where they tell you what to do and when to do it.
Totally agree! I'm so glad the government has not wasted time and money trying to restrict abortion and gay/trans rights, or sent in the military to attack protesters. Freedom!
But seriously you are entitled to your opinions but if you post them on a public board others are entitled to point out where they disagree with you and why. If you (not just you but everyone here) don't want to fight about politics on a devotee site, please don't get into your political opinions here. There is literally the entire internet to argue about politics.
|
|
|
Post by IcarusFellOnce on Jul 7, 2020 19:46:09 GMT -5
I dont want to be like China or North Korea, where they tell you what to do and when to do it.
Totally agree! I'm so glad the government has not wasted time and money trying to restrict abortion and gay/trans rights, or sent in the military to attack protesters. Freedom!
But seriously you are entitled to your opinions but if you post them on a public board others are entitled to point out where they disagree with you and why. If you (not just you but everyone here) don't want to fight about politics on a devotee site, please don't get into your political opinions here. There is literally the entire internet to argue about politics.
Fair and a true point. There is literally the rest of the internet to talk about politics... we shouldn't shy from it here every once in a while.. BUT you make a fair point and are right.
|
|
|
Post by James on Jul 7, 2020 20:51:42 GMT -5
As for the rest of it... I just can’t. El Cid is doing the dirty work right now which I’m thankful for, because I’m tired. Between you, steveo, and James, I’m starting to miss Manda. I still feel like I’m punching down when I insult her, but at least I don’t have to dislocate my damn shoulder in order to do it. So with that, I will leave you to go “jill off” to videos of Greg Abbott speeches, or whatever it is you do in between Fox News fever dreams and making pear salad for church. I really feel for you dude. To know that you were superior intellectually, that your opinion is just and right and that there are people; stupid people like me who have a different viewpoint must be very tiring. I’m sure that once Manda realizes that you think she’s dumb, but not as dumb as me, Steve, and Pam she’ll come rushing back to make you feel better. Get well soon
|
|
|
Post by Manda2212 on Jul 7, 2020 21:00:55 GMT -5
IcarusFellOnce , think about this: do you really believe many people would approve of the things like the George Floyd incident? I don't think there are very many people whose viewpoints would extend to that. But consider this: things like that have been going on for decades, and most have gotten little or no attention. Why? because the media decided not to dwell on things like that, other than the occasional incident like Rodney King. My point being that the press isn't really interested in informing people, but rather amusing them & increasing their viewership. Whatever you do, don't upset the advertisers. When the occasional event is covered, most people do object, proportionate to the media coverage. When the uninformed politician says something reprehensible, whether or not the media brings attention to it is impacted by which party the politician belongs to. Many people would agree that the Republicans aren't living up to their responsibility, but that's nothing new. Did you notice that when the southern DEMOCRATS supported segregation, they were not vilified? (Most of us are too young to have personal memory of that), but the general notion is that it's the republicans who lean that way. Like the Vietnam war, the democrats (Kennedy) started it, and democrats (Johnson) who expanded it, while the republicans (Nixon) stopped it, but most people blamed the republicans for the war. Media distorts, and most people are influenced by that. My point is neither for or against any particular party, but I resent when the media distorts the picture. As far as racism, sure it's detestable, but it's also nothing new, and not the sole responsibility of either party. Like the recent rejection of civil war leaders. Those statues were always weird, but how many administrations of both parties did nothing, now suddenly it's the republicans that are being held responsible? To me the democrats want to micro-manage your business, and republicans want to micro-manage your private life. Personally I would like it if both would back-off. If I thought legislation would be fair, there's a lot they could do to improve things, but it's all pie-in-the-sky thinking, as long as there's money in politics, that won't happen. Every election cycle I have seen has followed a pattern: "We have these serious social problems, vote for me and I'll fix them." Then nothing happens. Oh, and of course we need more taxes for (schools, police, or some other socially appealing group), then after the taxes are increased the money is shifted away from whatever bill-of-goods we have been sold, and spent on other projects. The best example I can give is the bullet train for California. Do you know how much money they're spending? $100 million per mile! For hundreds of miles! How many people will be better served than driving or flying? We shortchange necessary programs like Medical (California's version of Medicaid), then spend Billions on things we don't need. Both parties play those games, then insist it's the other party that does unpopular things and of course, OUR party that does good things. They both consist of humans, therefore they are a mix of bad & good. Take a contentious issue such as abortion, if you asked 10 people their opinion, you would be lucky if you only got 27 different opinions. How can it be that all the democrats are for it, and all republicans are against it? That defies human nature, do you think perhaps someone is lying? Aware of the history of the parties... and that they switched platforms and supporter along the way. Aware that systemic racism has been going on for a while.. you can't not as first generation American whose mom is from Mexico. I also know police have been doing this all along... And yet.. I still don't blame the media entirely... it's a way to deflect truly where the blame lies... on all of us. They are chasing ratings.. if we really want it to change then we have to change the business of media and the way they do business on a fundamental level. The only thing that has changed is the fact that social media has taken a prominent place in our society.. and the fact we have these amazingly good quality of recording devices in our palms now in our cell phone. You have a right to a political party or no political party. I am KEENLY aware of the role money plays in politics.. honestly as a read through your statement I am not reading anything I am not aware of. NOR am I reading any real tangible solutions. I find it intellectually cowardly to also just point out how everyone and everything is terrible and equate both sides as being equally terrible... ESPECIALLY when not offering any tangible solution. My only question to you.. is what are you doing about it? Everyone loves to use this "Democrats switched platforms" business but no one can really say when. Can you? I'd love to know myself. When did this happen exactly? As I recall, as recently as the 1990's Joe Biden voted for extreme crime control laws that severely disproportionately incarcerated black and brown people. www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/06/25/us/joe-biden-crime-laws.amp.html And in the 80's he hung out with a lot of segregationists. This does not sound like someone who runs with a party that switched platforms, but I'm all ears! I highly encourage you to watch Uncle Tom, at UncleTom.com. It's about the history of the Democrat party and where they stand today. If you're willing to watch, I will even buy you the DVD!
|
|
|
Post by myrrh on Jul 7, 2020 21:41:49 GMT -5
Aware of the history of the parties... and that they switched platforms and supporter along the way. Aware that systemic racism has been going on for a while.. you can't not as first generation American whose mom is from Mexico. I also know police have been doing this all along... And yet.. I still don't blame the media entirely... it's a way to deflect truly where the blame lies... on all of us. They are chasing ratings.. if we really want it to change then we have to change the business of media and the way they do business on a fundamental level. The only thing that has changed is the fact that social media has taken a prominent place in our society.. and the fact we have these amazingly good quality of recording devices in our palms now in our cell phone. You have a right to a political party or no political party. I am KEENLY aware of the role money plays in politics.. honestly as a read through your statement I am not reading anything I am not aware of. NOR am I reading any real tangible solutions. I find it intellectually cowardly to also just point out how everyone and everything is terrible and equate both sides as being equally terrible... ESPECIALLY when not offering any tangible solution. My only question to you.. is what are you doing about it? Everyone loves to use this "Democrats switched platforms" business but no one can really say when. Can you? I'd love to know myself. When did this happen exactly? As I recall, as recently as the 1990's Joe Biden voted for extreme crime control laws that severely disproportionately incarcerated black and brown people. www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/06/25/us/joe-biden-crime-laws.amp.htmlAnd in the 80's he hung out with a lot of segregationists. This does not sound like someone who runs with a party that switched platforms, but I'm all ears! I highly encourage you to watch Uncle Tom, at UncleTom.com. It's about the history of the Democrat party and where they stand today. If you're willing to watch, I will even buy you the DVD! The people who wanted to keep slaves so bad they started a civil war were Democrats, yes. That was an evil thing they did. Is that what you're looking to hear? I think the pivot that you're looking for, the one that most people learn as the parties "swapping" places on racial justice, was the so-called Southern Strategy employed by Nixon and Friends in a calculated move to inflame and leverage racial tension to earn the white vote in the South. Democrats now tend to push for (or, in a more cynical sense, see political capital in) social programs and immigration policies that typically have a larger benefit for POC. Now, while Democrats can and do push policies that have disastrous effects on disadvantaged demographics, the Republican party is where you find people who are proud white nationalists. So since you asked for a date, it looks like the 1968 presidential election is when the Republican party made open racism part of their platform.
|
|
|
Post by Manda2212 on Jul 7, 2020 21:49:59 GMT -5
Everyone loves to use this "Democrats switched platforms" business but no one can really say when. Can you? I'd love to know myself. When did this happen exactly? As I recall, as recently as the 1990's Joe Biden voted for extreme crime control laws that severely disproportionately incarcerated black and brown people. www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/06/25/us/joe-biden-crime-laws.amp.htmlAnd in the 80's he hung out with a lot of segregationists. This does not sound like someone who runs with a party that switched platforms, but I'm all ears! I highly encourage you to watch Uncle Tom, at UncleTom.com. It's about the history of the Democrat party and where they stand today. If you're willing to watch, I will even buy you the DVD! The people who wanted to keep slaves so bad they started a civil war were Democrats, yes. That was an evil thing they did. Is that what you're looking to hear? I think the pivot that you're looking for, the one that most people learn as the parties "swapping" places on racial justice, was the so-called Southern Strategy employed by Nixon and Friends in a calculated move to inflame and leverage racial tension to earn the white vote in the South. Democrats now tend to push for (or, in a more cynical sense, see political capital in) social programs and immigration policies that typically have a larger benefit for POC. Now, while Democrats can and do push policies that have disastrous effects on disadvantaged demographics, the Republican party is where you find people who are proud white nationalists. So since you asked for a date, it looks like the 1968 presidential election is when the Republican party made open racism part of their platform. I was not looking to hear anything in particular and I was not being facetious. This is something that has interested me and perplexed me for some time so thanks for taking the time to answer. However, do you have anything more concrete than Wikipedia where I can do some reading? They aren't the most reliable source of information. Also, I'd be leery of naming an entire political party racist due to one dickhead of a president. Sounds a lot to me like you're generalizing. If republicans have to own neo-mazis, should Democrats not have to own antifa and other radical left wing groups?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2020 21:53:33 GMT -5
This guy needs to stay on Mars, lots of freedom there, no one will ever tell him what to do, and no worries about North Korea.
|
|
|
Post by mike on Jul 7, 2020 21:55:00 GMT -5
IcarusFellOnce where I disagree with you is where you claim that it's cowardly to not offer a solution. It is not cowardly, it's ignorant. In order to effect a solution it would first be necessary to agree upon the problem. As you can easily see, there are different viewpoints, some leaning towards socialism, some libertarian. To the socialists my reaction is "Because it worked so well for Venezuela?" As far as the media, the solution is on the horizon and you mentioned it. As more sources of information becomes available (cell phones, social media etc.) the mainstream media becomes increasingly irrelevant. When there are sufficient sources of information, the trend should be toward the truth. When both sides can see an issue from a common point, solutions can be easily developed. As long as we don't agree upon the problem, we will not agree on a solution. As far as me, I can't offer any solutions, not because I am afraid, but rather because I don't have a solution, just a view of the situation that looks at the overall picture rather than a single point. As far as republicans/democrats switching places, the only important part is the disconnect between what has actually transpired and most peoples "gut feeling".
|
|
|
Post by mike on Jul 7, 2020 21:59:55 GMT -5
Manda2212, here is a succinct reference I quickly found for you: In the early 20th century there began to develop a split on racial issues in the Democratic party. The Southern wing of the part remained dominated by racists until the 1960s at least. These people supported Jim Crow (although not, for the most part, the KKK which was seen as an extremist organization even by segregationists). In the 1950s and 60s the most ardent segregationists were Democrats. But outside the South the Democrats were becoming more liberal on civil rights. Many still attempted to preserve party comity by not pushing the issue, but they came to believe in more civil rights for African Americans. Particularly beginning with the desegregation of the armed forces in the wake of WWII the Democratic party nationally became more comfortable with civil rights, even as it still kept a place for arch segregationists in its ranks. By the 1960s the Democratic party was a bit of an odd big tent since it included the most virulently racist politicians in the country and also most of the African American politicians. It was in the 1960s, under Lyndon Johnson, that the Democrats really broke away from racism and became a party which was formally dedicated to racial equality. The racists in the party would either have to reform their ways (such as Robert Byrd did) or get the hell out (like Strom Thurmond did).
|
|
|
Post by myrrh on Jul 7, 2020 22:15:44 GMT -5
The people who wanted to keep slaves so bad they started a civil war were Democrats, yes. That was an evil thing they did. Is that what you're looking to hear? I think the pivot that you're looking for, the one that most people learn as the parties "swapping" places on racial justice, was the so-called Southern Strategy employed by Nixon and Friends in a calculated move to inflame and leverage racial tension to earn the white vote in the South. Democrats now tend to push for (or, in a more cynical sense, see political capital in) social programs and immigration policies that typically have a larger benefit for POC. Now, while Democrats can and do push policies that have disastrous effects on disadvantaged demographics, the Republican party is where you find people who are proud white nationalists. So since you asked for a date, it looks like the 1968 presidential election is when the Republican party made open racism part of their platform. I was not looking to hear anything in particular and I was not being facetious. This is something that has interested me and perplexed me for some time so thanks for taking the time to answer. However, do you have anything more concrete than Wikipedia where I can do some reading? They aren't the most reliable source of information. Also, I'd be leery of naming an entire political party racist due to one dickhead of a president. Sounds a lot to me like you're generalizing. If republicans have to own neo-mazis, should Democrats not have to own antifa and other radical left wing groups? Ugh Manda why did you edit, we were off to such a good start! Coming back to edit your post to include "yeah but if we have racists, you have to have bad people too" is tacky. It's ok to look critically at one group without getting caught up in whataboutism. I can give some anecdotes as someone who lives in a major West Coast city that's seen significant riots/protests over the last month. I've people who wear a lot of black and military surplus, have a hardon for communism, and think they're warriors against the classist evils of capitalism. These people are not Democrats, their hot take is that two party system is theater meant to keep us in-fighting so we don't rise up against our capitalist oppressors. I mean, I agree with that... But the whole anarchy thing, not so much. Again, this is coming from my years of frequenting shitty dive bars and shooting the shit with random skinny white kids over a Tecate.
|
|
|
Post by someonerandom on Jul 7, 2020 22:17:38 GMT -5
As for the rest of it... I just can’t. El Cid is doing the dirty work right now which I’m thankful for, because I’m tired. Between you, steveo, and James, I’m starting to miss Manda. I still feel like I’m punching down when I insult her, but at least I don’t have to dislocate my damn shoulder in order to do it. So with that, I will leave you to go “jill off” to videos of Greg Abbott speeches, or whatever it is you do in between Fox News fever dreams and making pear salad for church. I really feel for you dude. To know that you were superior intellectually, that your opinion is just and right and that there are people; stupid people like me who have a different viewpoint must be very tiring. I’m sure that once Manda realizes that you think she’s dumb, but not as dumb as me, Steve, and Pam she’ll come rushing back to make you feel better. Get well soon Muahahaha she’s been summoned! The thing is, if I don’t assume stupidity or ignorance then the only thing left is malice or greed. It seems that the economy under Trump is a big thing his supporters like to tout, but it’s going to come at a great cost. Obama’s administration helped us get out of a recession, but it was only a bandaid, a temporary fix on a gaping anal fissure. Nothing about the system was changed to prevent it from happening again. Trump’s administration continued the trend and managed to not fuck anything up (economically) for a few years, and also temporarily boosted the economy with (egregious) tax cuts and deregulation. But this is going to come at a great cost, and all these fucking boomers are going to be dead while the younger generation is still dealing with pollution and global warming, increasing wealth disparities, rent and expenses increasing faster than wages increase, and a deficit that is just terrifyingly ridiculous and has been for some time. And then we have Manda pointing out racism in the Democratic Party. Did the parties switch platforms in 1968? Yes. Do I view things like: Republican Party racist, Democratic Party not racist? Nah. I view Democratic Party as largely racist, and Republican Party as significantly more racist. Your leader started his political career with a racist “birther” conspiracy theory! And it just never stopped. So all this. The division, the overt racism, the weakened ties with long time allies, the sucking up to authoritarians who easily play Trump, the complete disregard and denial of global warming and the environment, the idiotic trade war with China (easy to win?), the egregious tax cuts, the sadistic immigration policies, harmful changes to HUD, constant lying and absolute disregard for the truth or facts, constantly attacking media that doesn’t agree with him, using national guard to attack peaceful protestors for a photo op, talking about taking away guns WITHOUT due process (isn’t that a thing with you freedom types?), the abysmal and completely irresponsible coronavirus response, and just generally being a menace on national television to anyone who isn’t part of his base. Also, what the fuck has he done about healthcare? Repeal and replace? Whatever. We don’t even have that piece of shit wall. So it’s all worth it? For a few judges and an economy that was doing well for a while but cannot be sustained with the way things are currently (even without coronavirus)? I don’t think Biden’s going to change anything, but my god we need to get this fucking monster out of office. Anyone who can’t see that he is too toxic and incompetent to lead, I do not think has an opinion I am willing to even consider.
|
|